Introduction:
On perusal of the novel “The God of Small Things”, we trace many passages which lie outside the consciousness of either of the twins. This is a vital issue and shall have on effect on the message and the vision, sought to be communicated. Actually there should be clear distinction between, who has perceived and conceived and who has narrated the story.
 |
| Arundhati Roy’s Point of View and Consciousness in Her Novel The God of Small Things |
Third Person Narration in the Novel:
From the very first page of the novel it becomes clear that the story is being presented by a third person narrator: “It was raining when Rahel came back to Ayemenem.” This third person narrator is omniscient and is possessed of her / his own consciousness, which gives shape to the linguistic expression. The next page onwards the narrator begins to feed the background information: Rahel had come to see her brother Estha. We are told that Rahel and Estha were two egg twins.
In the text the italicized words bring into focus the consciousness of Rahel. She is aware of Estha and herself as two separate entities. She is now thirty one years old. The remaining part of the first chapter is presented by the narrator, the language and the extent of knowledge is clearly beyond the consciousness of the twins even when grown adult.
Point of View and Consciousness:
Ranga Rao in his article on “The God of Small Things” raises a question about the remark in the Booker citation, which says that Roy funnels the history of South India through the eyes of seven year old twins. According him though “the twins and their point of view occupy large spaces of the book” yet he quotes the undernoted passage, which is evidently not to be accountable in terms of the twins consciousness. It pertains to Ammu. Velutha love scene “He watched her. He took his time. Had he known that he was about to enter a tunnel whose only egress was his own annchilation, would he have turned away? Perhaps, perhaps not, who can tell? "
In “The God of Small Things”, the narrator often dives into the shared consciousness of the twins, but she rarely completely abandons her role as the controlling and organising agent.
Realistic Portrayal of the Consciousness of the Children:
The narrator of “The God of Small Things” practices a kind of pluralism, which means reverting to child's state of mind and expression. Pluralism in the “The God of Small Things” is distinguishable from identification with the twins’ consciousness. Chapter eight of the novel presents examples of both kind of consciousness. The passage wherein Rahel observes a column of ants and proceeds to kill them truly represents the consciousness of Rahel: “Rahel found a whole column of juicy ants …. The ants made a faint crunchy sound as life left them. Like an elf eating toast or a crisp biscuit.”
The remaining part printed in italics seeming to be a verbalization of Rahel's thinking is too ingenious and artful to be apparently assigned to the child. On the other hand the following two excerpts convincingly represent the consciousness of the children: (i) Sophie Mol died because she could not breathe. Her funeral killed her. On her tombstone it said a Sunbeam Lent to us too briefly. Ammu explained later that too briefly meant for Too Short a while.’ (ii) Rahel and Estha could not call him Cachen because.... he called him Chetan and Cheduthi. If they called him Ammaven he called them.... Ammai. If they called him Uncle he called them Aunty, which was embarrassing in Public. So they called him Chacko.”
The narrator here enters not only the consciousness of Rahel as a child but also Rahel as an experienced and adult person. After her return from America, her memories are couched in a different vocabulary.
Realistic Portrayal of the Consciousness of Ammu:
After the twins, the character of whose consciousness is appropriately captured by the narrator is their mother Ammu. Here is an illustration : “It was his smile that reminded Ammu of Velutha as a little boy … when she looked at him now , she could not help thinking that the man he had become bore so little resemblance to the boy he had seen . His smile was the only piece of baggage he had carried with him from boyhood into manhood.”
Although the experience in the above passage mostly belongs to the consciousness of Ammu, a close analysis of its features will reveal the mixture of the narrator's point of view and consciousness.
To comprehend the above process of dynamic mixing of consciousness, one might try out some of the linguistic devices that will push the experience deeper and deeper into Ammu's consciousness and her own point of view within the third person omniscient mode. Here are some of the ways of re-rendering the content of a part of the above - mentioned passage:
(i) It was his (Velutha’s) smile that reminded me of him as a child..... calling me Ammukutty.
(ii) It was your smile that reminded me of you as a little boy.... you calling me Ammukutty.
(iii) The same child smile..... counting for velly a Paapen his father.... Ammukutty.
The Content Presented in the Form of Free Indirect Discourses:
Apart from direct discourse most of the content of the novel is presented in the form of free indirect discourse, in which the consciousness of the character concerned, surfaces in the form of single words, phrases or sentences - and sometimes a short passage. That is where the narrator tries to assume a character's identity. It is significant to note that except in direct speech, the characters are indicated by third person reference, even where their own consciousness is being foregrounded. Thus the thoughts of characters do not assume the shape of stream of consciousness.
Ammu and Velutha the Twins Presented as Victims of History and of a Ruinous System:
On careful examination of the mode of presentation in The God of Small Things, we observe that Roy has forged the most appropriate instrument for the expression of her tragic vision. We should keep the fact in our mind that the aim and intentions of the author is not to utter clearly the consciousness of the twins for their own sake, but to present the twins, Ammu and Velutha as victims of history and of a ruinous system. As both these characters as we know them in the novel, are incapable of projecting the experience in the form of a tragedy with universal significance; the reins of the story of the novel are firmly held in the hands of the author - narrator. This complex interweaving of the point of view and consciousness of these characters with the intelligence of the author - narrator can be perceived in the following passages of the novel:
(i) Ammu grew tired of their proprietary handling of her. She wanted her body back. It was hers. She shrugged her children off the way a bitch shrugs off her pups when she's had enough of them.
(ii) The twins heard the lock - turning in Ammu's bathroom door. (iii) Click. (iv). Ammu looked at herself in the long mirror on the bathroom door and the spectre of her future appeared in it to mock her...... Withered breasts that hung like weighted socks. Dry as a bone between her legs, the hair feather white. As brittle as a pressed fern. (v) Skin that flacked and shed like snow. (vi) . Ammu shivered.
The first sentence is a piece of reporting from the third person point of view , but ' growing tired ' and ' proprietary handling ' admit partial encoding of Ammu's consciousness . The remaining sentences re - establish the third person point of view and the following single word ' click ' , thrusts forth the twin's consciousness , 1 the narrator's view point is submerged . Para (iv) again starts with reporting by the omniscient narrator. But the narrator soon disappears behind Ammu's vision of her future state. The discourse plunges into stream of consciousness style where the reader is entirely with Ammu watching the grue - some spectle. With ' Ammu Shivered ' we again rise from the depth of Ammu's mind and are helped to pick up the thread of the story.
Some Limitations and Minor Faults:
We observe some minor faults in handling point of view and discourse, which can perhaps be easily condoned. While on one hand child language is used in situations, which do not warrant it; on the other the narrative point of view transgresses its limit, when it imposes itself on the twins ' consciousness. On the one hand, the narrator often ' un - adults ' herself and on the other, assigns to the children, the depth and maturity that their minds cannot bear. There are some associations which appear to be pointless, unless subjected to psycho analysis. For example on page 223, there is a description of what Ammu looks in her body: “She looked a little critically at her round, heavy behind …. Not big per se (as Chacko of oxford would no doubt have put it). Big only because the rest of her body was so slender. Here there appears no point in mentioning Chacko's way of saying something. If it comes from narrator's mind on consciousness, it is an awkward intrusion; on the other hand if it emerges in Ammu's mind then it is apparently discordant because it implies: if Chacko had seen her body he would have expressed the disproportion by using the phrase per se.
Conclusion:
From the foregoing analysis of the point of view, it has become clean that an immature approach to the subject is in danger of missing the subtle emotional effects , inscribed in the narrative of The God of Small Things. Further, it would be a mistake to interpret the novel as an embodiment of the twin's consciousness without the admixture of a controlling agent. In fact the text of the novel The God of Small Things ' has a specific purpose; viz , it seeks to spell out the pathos and fear of the life of a family victimized by history and convention .