Major Themes- The Inheritance of Loss by Kiran Desai- A- Newsletter Guide
The most pervasive theme in The Inheritance of Loss is the enduring legacy of British colonialism in India and the psychological damage it inflicted on the colonised. Kiran Desai demonstrates that colonialism did not end with Indian independence in 1947; its effects continue to shape identities, relationships, and aspirations decades later. The novel explores what the postcolonial theorist Homi K. Bhabha called the “ambivalence” of colonial mimicry – the colonised subject who adopts the coloniser’s culture is never fully accepted by the coloniser and becomes alienated from his own people.
The character of Judge Jemubhai Patel is the primary vehicle for this theme. Jemubhai’s journey from a poor village boy in Gujarat to a Cambridge‑educated judge in the Indian Civil Service is a classic colonial trajectory. He internalises the English belief that Indian culture is inferior. He learns to speak English with a perfect accent, to wear Western clothes, to eat with a knife and fork, to keep a dog as a pet – all markers of Englishness. But he is never accepted by the English. In Cambridge, he is mocked for his skin colour and his smell. Landladies refuse to rent him rooms. Fellow students avoid him. He becomes a stranger to himself. The narrator describes his psychological disintegration - “Jemubhai’s mind had begun to warp; he grew stranger to himself than he was to those around him, found his own skin odd‑coloured, his own accent peculiar. He forgot how to laugh, could barely manage to lift his lips in a smile.” This is the horror of colonial mentality – the colonised subject comes to hate his own body, his own voice, his own people.
Jemubhai’s response to this rejection is to become a mimic man. He powders his face to lighten his dark skin. He adopts the mannerisms of an English gentleman. He cultivates a disdain for everything Indian. When he returns to India, he is a foreigner in his own country. He chooses to live in Cho Oyu, a house built by a Scotsman, because it makes him feel like he is in England. He refuses to learn the local language. He keeps a dog, Mutt, as his only companion, because he can no longer love human beings. His relationship with his wife, Nimi, is a study in transferred cruelty. Unable to retaliate against the English who humiliated him, he vents his rage on her. He renames her “Nimmi,” forces her to speak English, and abuses her until she commits suicide. Jemubhai’s colonial mentality is not just a personal tragedy; it is a political indictment of the way imperialism destroys the humanity of both coloniser and colonised.
The theme of colonial mentality is also explored through the character of the cook, though from a different angle. The cook has never been to England, but he has internalised the colonial hierarchy. He believes that serving white men is a mark of prestige. He is proud that his father served the British. He dreams of his son Biju becoming successful in America, the new centre of imperial power. The cook’s servility is not simply economic; it is psychological. He has inherited the loss of self‑respect that colonialism imposed on the lower classes. When the judge beats him, he does not resist; he begs for more punishment, saying, “I’m a bad man. Beat me, sahib.” This is the ultimate expression of colonial mentality – the oppressed accepting his own oppression as deserved.
Desai also shows how colonial mentality infects even those who resist it. Gyan, the Nepali tutor, hates the judge’s Anglophilia. He mocks the judge’s powdered face and his English manners. But Gyan himself is caught in a different kind of colonial trap – the desire for a separate Gorkhaland, which is itself a product of colonial borders and ethnic categorisation. The GNLF movement is a reaction against the marginalisation of Nepalis in India, but it reproduces the logic of nationalism and ethnic purity that colonialism itself fostered. There is no easy escape from the legacy of empire.
Race is inextricably linked to colonialism in the novel. Desai shows how skin colour determines social hierarchy, both in colonial India and in contemporary America. Jemubhai is tormented by his dark skin. In England, he is called “blackie” and treated as subhuman. In India, after his return, he is ridiculed for powdering his face. His obsession with whiteness is a form of self‑hatred. Similarly, Biju in New York experiences racism from white employers and customers. He is told to “go back to where you came from.” He is paid less, housed worse, and treated as invisible. The colour of his skin marks him as an outsider, no matter how hard he works. Desai’s point is that racism is not a relic of the colonial past; it is a living, breathing reality in the globalised present.
The novel also critiques the way colonialism has shaped Indian class relations. The judge’s contempt for the cook is not just class snobbery; it is a rehearsal of the colonial master‑slave relationship. The judge, who was humiliated by the English, now humiliates the cook. The cook, in turn, dreams of his son becoming a boss in America, so that he too can look down on others. The cycle of oppression continues. Desai suggests that true decolonisation requires not just political independence but a radical transformation of the psyche – a refusal to pass on the inheritance of loss.
Major Themes – Part Two - Globalization, the American Dream, and Immigration
The second major thematic cluster in The Inheritance of Loss concerns globalization, the American Dream, and the brutal realities of immigration. Desai offers a scathing critique of the idea that the West offers salvation to the poor of the Third World. Through the character of Biju, she shows that the American Dream is largely an illusion – a fantasy sustained by Bollywood movies, glossy magazines, and the desperate hopes of those left behind.
Biju’s journey to New York is motivated by economic necessity. His father, the cook, has invested all his hopes in his son’s success. The cook imagines Biju living a life of luxury, managing a restaurant, wearing nice clothes, sending money home. But the reality is very different. Biju works in the basement kitchens of restaurants, hidden from the customers above. He is an illegal immigrant, constantly afraid of being caught and deported. He changes jobs frequently, moving from one exploitative employer to another. He is paid below minimum wage, forced to work long hours, and denied basic safety protections. When he injures his knee, his employer refuses to send for a doctor. Biju realises that he is trapped - “Without us living like pigs,” he says, “what business would you have? This is how you make your money, paying us nothing because you know we can’t do anything.”
Desai uses the setting of restaurant kitchens to symbolise the hidden economy of globalization. Above ground, the restaurants offer “authentic” French, American, or colonial dining experiences. Below ground, workers from Mexico, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Zanzibar toil in cramped, unsafe conditions. The narrator notes the irony - “Above, the restaurant was French, but below in the kitchen it was Mexican and Indian. All American flag on top, all Guatemalan flag below.” This spatial division mirrors the global division of labour - the First World consumes the pleasures of multiculturalism while the Third World provides the cheap labour that makes it possible. The “authentic” experiences sold to wealthy customers are built on the backs of invisible, disposable workers.
Biju’s struggle to maintain his cultural identity in the face of globalization is another key aspect of the theme. He is confronted with foods and practices that violate his Hindu beliefs. He is shocked to see beef being served. He tries to rationalise - “The cow was not an Indian cow; therefore it was not holy.” But the rationalisation fails. He is also forced to work alongside Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, traditional enemies. His desire for a pure, authentic Indianness – a world without beef, without Muslims, without contamination – is shown to be impossible in the globalised city. The novel does not mock Biju’s desire for purity; it treats it with sympathy. But it also shows that purity is a luxury that the poor cannot afford. Biju’s only friend in New York is Saeed Saeed from Zanzibar, a Muslim who is pragmatic and adaptable. Saeed teaches Biju that survival requires flexibility. But Biju remains nostalgic for a homeland that exists only in memory.
The theme of the American Dream is also explored through the character of the cook. The cook has never been to America, but he has constructed an elaborate fantasy of his son’s life there. He tells the neighbours that Biju is a restaurant manager, that he is wealthy and successful. The cook’s pride is pathetic and touching. He has inherited the colonial belief that the West is superior, that success means leaving India behind. When Biju finally returns home, penniless and humiliated, the cook is not disappointed; he is simply overjoyed to have his son back. The novel suggests that the true inheritance of loss may be the realisation that home – however poor, however imperfect – is where one belongs.
Desai also contrasts the experience of illegal immigrants like Biju with that of wealthy, legal immigrants. The judge’s journey to England in the 1930s was different - he was a scholarship student, destined for the ICS. But even he experienced racism and rejection. The novel suggests that no amount of education or wealth can fully protect a brown body from the violence of the West. The difference between Jemubhai and Biju is one of degree, not kind. Both are wounded by their encounters with the West. Both inherit loss.
Globalization is also shown to have effects within India. The GNLF insurgency is partly a response to economic marginalisation. The young men of Kalimpong have few opportunities. They are angry, frustrated, and easily recruited into political violence. Gyan’s involvement in the movement is driven not just by ethnic pride but by a sense of powerlessness. He tells Sai that he wants to be part of something bigger than himself. The movement gives him a sense of belonging that his relationship with Sai cannot provide. But the movement also fails. The promised Gorkhaland never materialises. The insurgents become thugs, stealing from the poor. The cycle of violence and loss continues.
Desai’s critique of globalization is nuanced. She does not romanticise poverty or suggest that India is a paradise. The judge’s house is decaying; the cook lives in a bamboo hut; the young people have no jobs. But she also shows that the West is not a paradise either. The American Dream is a mirage. The novel ends with Biju returning to India, not because India is perfect, but because it is home. This is not a rejection of globalization; it is an insistence on the value of rootedness, of connection, of love that transcends economic calculation.
No comments:
Post a Comment