The God of Small Things: Winner of the Booker Prize

Written by Arundhati Roy

Narrated by Diana Quick

Winner of the 1997 Booker Prize. The richly exotic story of the childhood the twins Esthappen and Rahel craft for themselves amongst India’s vats of banana jam and mountains of peppercorns.

Here, perhaps, is the greatest Indian novel by a woman. Arundhati Roy’s ‘The God of Small Things’ is an astonishingly rich, fertile novel, teeming with life, colour, heart-stopping language, wry comedy and a hint of magical realism.

Set against a background of political turbulence in Kerala, Southern India, ‘The God of Small Things’ tells the story of twins Esthappen and Rahel. Amongst the vats of banana jam and heaps of peppercorns in their grandmother’s factory, they try to craft a childhood for themselves amidst what constitutes their family – their lonely, lovely mother, their beloved Uncle Chacko (pickle baron, radical Marxist and bottom-pincher) and their avowed enemy Baby Kochamma (ex-nun and incumbent grand-aunt).

• Language: English
• Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers
• Release date: Jun 7, 2012
• ISBN: 9780007489992

Arundhati Roy

Arundhati Roy is an award-winning film-maker and a trained architect. She is the author of ‘The God of Small Things’ which won the 1997 Booker prize.

Reviews for The God of Small Things

[jfballenger · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I came to this feast 20 years late, and it may take me twenty more to taste all that it has to offer. I don't know if at this point I have anything intelligent to say about the story - except that it seemed to me to capture as profoundly as anything I've read what it means to be human in all its horror and joy. Let me say a little about the experience of reading it. Several reviewers have said that as soon as they finished the book, they wanted immediately to read it through again. For me, that's not quite true. I may read it again, but the conclusion brought everything together so intensely that for now at least I don't feel the need or even desire to read it again. I feel that I want to, will have to, live with it for the rest of my life.

[mdshrk1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I really like this book. It starts slow but keeps building. Roy has a fantastic way with words.

[jddunn_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Wow. Achingly sad and beautiful, full of wonder even amid despair. Reminds me a lot of 100 Years of Solitude in those ways, but it’s definitely not derivative. For one thing, it’s much more overtly political and consciously postcolonial, but not often in an overbearing way. For another, it invents its own language, and uses repetition(which is usually cloying to me after awhile… see Vonnegut) very well to reinforce the sort of dreamworld disconnect(hopelessly adrift between warring loyalties in terms of culture, family, nation, politics, religion, class, race, sexuality, and on and on) that the protagonist twins are trapped, confused, and ultimately ruined by.

[miguelnunonave · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

Sad (melodramatic) and pretentious (starting by the very title) novel, confusing story-telling, no focus, no message. Really unpleasant to read. Even in terms of writing style, certainly not brilliant. Too much hype around nothing.

[johngrant1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Told largely through the eyes of the child Rahel, one of a pair of non-identical twins, this is primarily a portrait of how a single person's malevolent self-interest can poison so much around her; other virulent toxins -- notably the relics of the caste system -- play their part in the novel's slowly unfolding tragedy, but it's really the bitter, aging, totally self-serving spinster Baby Kochamma whose venom drives events.

The focus is a spell of a few days when the children Rahel and her brother Estha await the arrival of and then become friends with their half-English cousin Sophie Mol, the latter's tragic death, and the aftermath. Interwoven is the disaster of their mother Ammu's passionate relationship with a local lad, Velutha -- disastrous because Velutha is an Untouchable.

Although the adult Rahel appears somewhat sparingly in the book, as she a couple of decades later revisits her old home, the scene of so much pain, in a way she's a conduit through which we learn the tale. This, at least, is how I read the narrative's extraordinarily fanciful language, riddled with nonce-words and chantlike repetitions: we're being presented with a tale coloured by Rahel's recollections of her childhood self. For the most part that language is gloriously evocative, with occasional sentences I found myself wanting to reread just for the pleasure of the words (there's a sort of Alfred Besterish lust for linguistic games at work here); but all too often, alas, it dives into the irritatingly self-indulgent or twee. A few examples from many:

[:] It made him smile out loud.
[:] . . . she listened with her eyes.
[:] He hurried with his mind. [Roy liked this one so much she used it twice.:]
[:] Estha put his head in his [own:] lap. [A neat trick if you can do it.:]
[:] But she said it with her dimples . . .
[:] His face was neither lifted towards the rain, nor bent away from it.

As you'll have guessed, I ended up having very equivocal feelings about Roy's use of language. Was it really serving the tale, or was it just a pretentious lack of discipline? Such concerns were underscored by the unconscionable amount of time Roy takes over the telling of the earlier parts of her story: the narrative swirls around for long chapters during which there are all kinds of verbal pyrotechnics but little or no progress toward the nub of the tale. Finally, perhaps fifty or seventy pages from the end, a momentum does start to build up, so that eventually I was being carried along by an ever-swifter, ever-stronger current; the novel's climax is indeed traumatic, but I suspect quite a few readers, confronted by countless tiresomenesses in the first four-fifths of the book, won't have got that far.

Oh, and there's a scene in the book's concluding pages that should have (and for all I know may have) been nominated for the relevant year's Bad Sex Award. I have no quibble with the scene being there -- in fact, I'd say that for the novel's sake it's structurally necessary that it be so -- but I do have qualms over its execution.

All in all, then, I'm still very much in two minds about this novel. I do recognize its many strengths, I applaud Roy's courage in playing so roughly with the English language, I laughed in all (or at least most of) the right places, I near-wept over the events of the finale, and I 'd say the book was, because of its linguistic ambition if for no other reason, worthy of the Booker Prize it won; yet all at the same time so much about it was irritating me that I'm not sure it won't be the case that, in memory, it'll be the irritation that wins out.

[neal_-266394 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Well written but such a tedious story about such a tedious family. I didn't think that jumping backwards and forwards in time added anything to the reading pleasure and very little actually happened for at least the first half of the book. Expected much, ended up disappointed.

[skavlanj · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I read this as my Book by a Female Author, but I want to add a new category to my reading list: a book you're glad you read even though it depresses you. Thoroughly. At first difficult to follow (I started a family tree in the first chapter; it took multiple chapters and a couple circle-backs to get it correct), this is a straight-forward story told in a crooked line. A circular line, actually, as the narrative doubles back upon itself repeatedly, each time providing additional details about the tragedy we know from the start is coming. While some of the references are lost on readers unfamiliar with the history and culture of India (count me among those with no knowledge that India has a Communist past), the basic story has a very To Kill a Mockingbird vibe to it - forbidden love(s), characters that both repel you and elicit your sympathy, and childhood innocence tarnished by the adult world.There's a wealth of metaphors and literary references at work in the story, some I didn't quite grasp (although I know Conrad's Heart of Darkness, I'm not clear what purpose it serves in this story), some that work in a haunting, mysterious way (Rahel's toy watch, always set at ten to two, combining a sense that nothing can change with a childhood ignorance of the workings of the world). The most effective metaphor is blindness, which serves as a criticism of people's prejudices and their limited understanding of themselves. Vellya in his half-blindness accepts his caste as an Untouchable to his own and his sons' misfortune. Mammachi in her near blindness rages at Velutha for crossing the caste boundary, equally unaware that her tirade is misdirected and that she is manipulated by Baby Kochamma, as evil a character as the system she upholds.An intriguing book, from the dedication ("For LKC, who, like me, survived") to the last two chapters on the breaking of Love Laws. An effective statement in the tradition of The Jungle and Uncle Tom's Cabin, only with incredibly better prose.

[killerx-2 · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

It's not badly written, but not to my taste at all.

[bookomaniac-1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Ik had hier toch iets meer van verwacht, want ik herinner me nog de superlatieven waarmee het boek destijds gelanceerd werd. En ook de bekroning met een Bookerprize is toch niet niks. En toch…Ik denk dat het de compositie is: enkele essentiële elementen, zoals de relatie tussen Ammu en Velutha, worden tot op het einde opgespaard, zodat je heel lang op je honger blijft over wat nu eigenlijk de intrige is; het personage van Velutha zelf, verschijnt ook pas laat op het toneel, en dan nog in de achtergrond; intussen houdt Roy je zoet met voortdurend over en weer gespring tussen de andere personages en tussen de episodes in de tijd, met mysterieuze, maar spaarzame verwijzingen naar een ramp die zich voltrokken heeft. Ze vraagt dus heel wat van haar lezer, en beloont hem pas helemaal op het einde, wat toch wel doorzetting vraagt.Dit neemt niet weg dat dit boek tegelijk enkele van de mooiste en meest hallucinante pagina’s en fragmenten bevat die ik ooit gelezen heb. Vooral het hoofdstuk over de aankomst van Sophie Mol (ergens in het midden van het boek) is van een ongelofelijke, literaire kwaliteit: Roy registreert de aankomst op de luchthaven door de ogen van de kinderen Estha en Rahel, een twee-eiïge tweeling, die in een mengeling van zinnelijke fantasie en angst de wereld om hen heen observeren en ondergaan. En de slothoofdstukken, die kort zijn en elkaar in staccato-tempo opvolgen, beschrijven op hallucinante wijze tot wat voor onmenselijke dingen gewone mensen in een gegeven context in staat zijn. Roy heeft voor die hoogtepunten een vorm van literair expressionisme ontwikkeld dat in die passages een enorm effect geeft. Maar helaas, elders overdrijft ze geregeld, en mist het procedé zijn effect. Dit is een bijzonder rijk boek: het schetst niet alleen de individuele drama’s van de betrokken personages, maar het geeft ook een treffend beeld van de Indiase samenleving met haar hang naar de Engelse cultuur en haar gedweep met de moderniteit (in de vorm van een wel erg geïnstitutionaliseerd en hypocriet communistisch machtsapparaat, dat tegelijk niet loskomt van traditionele gegevenheden (de marginalisering van de Onaanraakbaren bijvoorbeeld). Ook hier overdrijft Roy af en toe, en vervalt ze soms in een nogal belerende, droge stijl die afbreuk doet aan het dramatisch effect.Kortom, een waardevol boek, zonder discussie, maar met toch wel wat tekortkomingen.

[margaretfield · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

young twins in India who grow up in a family that worships all things Anglo; especially The Sound of Music

[maxernst11 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Ik had hier toch iets meer van verwacht, want ik herinner me nog de superlatieven waarmee het boek destijds gelanceerd werd. En ook de bekroning met een Bookerprize is toch niet niks. En toch?Ik denk dat het de compositie is: enkele essenti?le elementen, zoals de relatie tussen Ammu en Velutha, worden tot op het einde opgespaard, zodat je heel lang op je honger blijft over wat nu eigenlijk de intrige is; het personage van Velutha zelf, verschijnt ook pas laat op het toneel, en dan nog in de achtergrond; intussen houdt Roy je zoet met voortdurend over en weer gespring tussen de andere personages en tussen de episodes in de tijd, met mysterieuze, maar spaarzame verwijzingen naar een ramp die zich voltrokken heeft. Ze vraagt dus heel wat van haar lezer, en beloont hem pas helemaal op het einde, wat toch wel doorzetting vraagt.Dit neemt niet weg dat dit boek tegelijk enkele van de mooiste en meest hallucinante pagina?s en fragmenten bevat die ik ooit gelezen heb. Vooral het hoofdstuk over de aankomst van Sophie Mol (ergens in het midden van het boek) is van een ongelofelijke, literaire kwaliteit: Roy registreert de aankomst op de luchthaven door de ogen van de kinderen Estha en Rahel, een twee-ei?ge tweeling, die in een mengeling van zinnelijke fantasie en angst de wereld om hen heen observeren en ondergaan. En de slothoofdstukken, die kort zijn en elkaar in staccato-tempo opvolgen, beschrijven op hallucinante wijze tot wat voor onmenselijke dingen gewone mensen in een gegeven context in staat zijn. Roy heeft voor die hoogtepunten een vorm van literair expressionisme ontwikkeld dat in die passages een enorm effect geeft. Maar helaas, elders overdrijft ze geregeld, en mist het proced? zijn effect. Dit is een bijzonder rijk boek: het schetst niet alleen de individuele drama?s van de betrokken personages, maar het geeft ook een treffend beeld van de Indiase samenleving met haar hang naar de Engelse cultuur en haar gedweep met de moderniteit (in de vorm van een wel erg ge?nstitutionaliseerd en hypocriet communistisch machtsapparaat, dat tegelijk niet loskomt van traditionele gegevenheden (de marginalisering van de Onaanraakbaren bijvoorbeeld). Ook hier overdrijft Roy af en toe, en vervalt ze soms in een nogal belerende, droge stijl die afbreuk doet aan het dramatisch effect.Kortom, een waardevol boek, zonder discussie, maar met toch wel wat tekortkomingen.

[sandra.pinkerton83 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Jumped around too much and was hard to follow.

[wickenden-285487 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

It's interesting that Roy said in an interview that she'd never read Rushdie when compared to him. In retrospect that makes sense. I'd been struggling with "The Moors Last Sigh" when a friend from India gave me this book. I didn't pick it up for a few months and then fell into it, doing little else for days while I read it. At first I found that hard to believe, because she plays with language in ways that I thought Rushdie did, but later I could see that the way he works language is radically different than how she did -- and I think I read a critique somewhere offering evidence of that that I can't remember now.

This was a gorgeous book. I wept for a long time after reading it. I find it interesting that Roy said she doubted she would write another novel. She's a fascinating person, dedicated to the sorts of thinking about the world that I only give lip service to. She's amazing. Still, I'd love a second book, but I don't think she will. She's moved on to something different.

[curious_squid · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Almost a 4 star book, but the disjointed time line was distracting and frankly confusing. Hard to figure out *when* things were happening and was this before or after the action we just read about.

[elkeursin · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This is the perfect novel. I just loved the mix of hope and love and dark and sad. A wonderful read that I recommend to anyone who loves life and recognizes that life is not always sunny.

[buoyread · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Have you ever had a dream in which everything was almost too real, you could not quite believe it when you have to wake up?That was exactly how I would describe this book. The narration is startlingly vivid, that I can almost say I was with Rahel and Estha the whole time, crossing the river with them, listening to them make plans in the pickle factory, carrying their boat above our heads. Albeit slow, the story builds up to paint a big picture from the seemingly small things that the twins and their family encounter. Every single event is explored, every minute detail a metaphor. The writing draws a fine line between the well-drawn and the verbose. It was like gossiping with housewives - telling you a story in a non-linear way with exhausting description, that you always end up asking them to hurry up already and get to the juicy parts, only realizing that to fully appreciate the punchline, every inch of the story has to be exposed.But unlike gossiping housewives, the author exhibits finesse and intelligence with the way she dealt with the story. Seen through the eyes of the young two-egg twins, their childish wisdom demonstrates an innocent, but not oversimplified, view of themselves, their family and their home. The author provides a credible portrait of two children amidst familial and social struggles that cause them to grow up unspeaking (Estha) and unfeeling (Rahel).Each character's personalities are also very well-accounted for, that one can empathize with Ammu's plight, laugh at Chacko's quirks, and loathe Baby Kochamma with alarming intensity. Aided with realistic imagery, not just once did I find myself touching my feet at the mention of Baby Kochamma's edematous ones, disgust at the OrangedrinkLemondrink man; I even found myself singing with Estha while inside the Abhilash Talkies. They were almost real I expected a crowd to shush me when I sang.From my point of view, this is a rediscovery of the trauma that the twins suffered while growing up, and they remembered it through the small things seemingly insignificant, but grew to be the cornerstone of their pain. The pain that in the self-centeredness of childhood, they claimed to be their doing, but with the passing time and the maturity of their minds, they understood that it was not their fault, and they were given their chance to grieve for their loss. Although some would object at the turn of events in the end, I myself could not complain, especially as I am not the one keeping the 'Love Laws,' "That lay down who should be loved. And how. And how much."

[chetankhullar · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Best book I've read till date with respect to the beautiful play of words by an author. In light of the number of words one can learn from this book, it would classify as a modern classic in my opinion. I heard the author's interview on a news talk show, and was saddened to hear about the controversy that this book sparked in India - in an ideal world, people should be open minded to receive this beautiful piece of literature. I am looking forward to reading Arundhati Roy's next novel.

[turtlesleap · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I suspect that this book would be more appreciated on a second reading but I will never know. Roy's work is more a dark lyric than a straightforward story, and it requires a little patience to quit obsessing about how it all "comes out" and focus on the unfolding of the experience. Her ability to convey the sights, sounds, smells and texture of India is remarkeable and her use of the language is always intriguing; often brilliant. Her ability to convey a sense of horror, as in the scene when Estha is sexually molested by the "orangedrink lemondrink man" is very compellilng. Perhaps my problem with the book stemmed from the fact that the bleakness seemed unredeemed by a single shaft of light. I put the book aside, after finishing the last page, with a sign of relief and a certainty that I would never read this one again. It was, in many ways, a brilliant work, but I would recommend it only with reservations.

[maloytsang · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The woman is a painter of words. The first chapter immerses the reader in a fetid, slow, jungle like scene. Smell the rotting fruit, the pickle factory and above all the heat. The end of the book has the moon dipping down to watch the lovers. Truly magical.

[manguni_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I often return to this book, and find myself as enchanted as the first time I read it. The complexity and fullness of the language in this novel is exquisite and stunning, as is Roy's ability to explore the darker side of human nature with an unflinching gaze. She manages to make us feel for characters without indulging in overly sentimental storytelling. One feels for the characters as achingly human, filled with contradictions as we all are. Her ability to accomplish this with language that teeters on the border of poetry is the mark of an exceptionally talented writer. I can still remember the sections of the book with clarity - they were that breathtaking.

[vivl_6 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

When I used to write (that's taken a back seat to other creative pursuits for many years now) a boyfriend of mine said I had a knack of describing horrible things, terrible situations in beautiful ways. I am quite certain I fell far short of Arundhati Roy in that capacity. Intelligent and luscious, with sensually evocative descriptions and superbly-drawn characters, I found this book utterly compelling once I had recovered from some initial discomfort at the fragmented sentences. At some point, I don't know when, they came to make complete sense. Paradoxically, the jerky rhythm of the words carried me along, in the same way that Ondaatje's The English Patient drew me steadily into its flow. The splintered histories of a tragic pair of separate-egg twins, their mercurial mother and their dreadfully flawed extended family drew me gasping in their wake, zigzagging backwards and forwards in time. I make a habit of selecting particularly moving, well-written or pithy passages as I read in order to draw on those in writing a review. In the case of this book I found myself rejoicing in gorgeous writing on practically every page. It reminded me of a trip long ago to the redwood forests of Northern California. Every aspect was ethereally beautiful, so much so that I barely took any photographs, bewildered by a surfeit of options. And so, although there are countless I could include, I will provide no favourite quotes in this review. To single out just a few as exceptional would be as difficult as choosing just a few favourite books. An impossible task.

[astrologerjenny · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

A book worth reading many times. The prose is staccato at places, flowing in other places, and it all fits together beautifully. It’s not only a pleasure to read, but it has a very strong plot and riveting characters.

The story begins with Rahel returning to the village where she spent her childhood, but most of the novel concerns her memories of a time when her family broke apart. The story of the past is intense and involving, couched in the sensual and magical awareness of a young girl. The writer spins it out slowly, so that we gradually see the outlines of the event. Only at the end do we understand how the individual people and the history of the place all intersect to make this happen.

[jwhenderson_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

The book is set in 1969. In the state of Kerala, on the southernmost tip of India, a skyblue Plymouth with chrome tailfins is stranded on the highway amid a Marxist workers' demonstration. Inside the car sit two-egg twins Rahel and Esthappen, and so begins their tale.... They fashion a childhood for themselves in the shade of the wreck that is their family - their lonely, lovely mother, Ammu (who loves by night the man her children love by day), their blind grandmother, Mammachi (who plays Handel on her violin), their beloved uncle Chacko (Rhodes scholar, pickle baron, radical Marxist, bottom-pincher), their enemy, Baby Kochamma (ex-nun and incumbent grandaunt), and the ghost of an imperial entomologist's moth (with unusually dense dorsal tufts). When their English cousin, Sophie Mol, and her mother, Margaret Kochamma, arrive on a Christmas visit, Esthappen and Rahel learn that Things Can Change in a Day. Their innocence fades as their lives morph into new, ugly shapes. What changes can even cease forever, beside their river "graygreen. I did not enjoy this book as much as most but nonetheless found it fascinating.

[xmaystarx · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This book is not for someone who likes a fast paced action filled book. It rolls along and opens up slowly. The writing is just beautiful, I sometimes re-read passages just to savor the words again. One of the things I found most interesting, besides the beautiful writing, is the way in which the story unfolds. We know from the beginning that something has happened but we don't know until the very end how and why and who surrounds this incident. I thought that this would bother me and that I would be itching to know the details but I really didn't. I was happy enough to let it unfold like the wings of pappichi's moth. Another thing I liked was at times the author would bring something up and I would think to myself "did I forget that event or miss it?" and then in the next few lines we would be filled in on the details and I realized that we hadn't been introduced to the event yet but that initial sentence sounded as if we could have. (Does that make sense?) I caught myself almost going back to search for what I might have missed but read on a little first to discover it all there. In summary, the story is not what this book is about, its about the writing and the descriptions surrounding the story. You really get a feel for the life styles and surroundings of these characters. Although I read a review in which the person felt they did not connect to the characters, I felt the opposite. Through the twins thoughts and actions I really understood their connection and family. Great read, just have to be in the right mood and ready to roll down the lazy river of words and let it take you where it may.

[amelish · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I loved this book in high school because it was dreamlike and amorphous/ambiguous and everything that happened had a fluid sense of morality about it (as did everyone to whom things happened) which was new in my reading experience. Obviously I wasn't particularly worldly or well-read at the time, but whatever.

[j0308936 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Dreamy, reflective, 3rd person prose that unfolds slowly. Great omniscent narrative style that swoops and soars. Author favors visual descriptions, enjoys colors is faily poetic.

[paintedfinches · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I've never read anything like The God of Small Things before. The words, the phrases, the structure - all fresh and alive. After reading such magnificent prose, I feel like my writing has changed. I feel like I'm no longer bound by the usual, common sense rules of writing. In this, Arundhati Roy is a genius.Paragraph by paragraph, the story is stunning and beautiful. I felt transformed into a child again, where words run together and ordinary things have extraordinary meanings. The composition of the novel was unlike anything I've encountered, or even imagined was possible.It's as if Arundhati Roy wrote the story chronologically on a deck of playing cards, then threw them in the air and constructed the book as she gethered the cards in her hands. The tale is out-of-order, and not in the usual way. While reading, I remained in awe of this new kind of storytelling. At the same time, though, I often managed to get lost and had to turn back a few pages to find my way again. What makes this story brilliant also makes it difficult and sometimes exhausting.Another interesting aspect of the writing is that you know the outline within the first chapter. There is no suspense for what is coming, but rather how it comes. The reader is taken back and back again to the same events, but is given more knowledge and detail with each revisit. I would almost say that this is a novel best read a second time.Rating this book is difficult. I feel like it should be read for the extraordinary language and unique construction rather than for pure leisure. It is a must-read if you're a writer or aspiring writer, but probably okay to skip if you aren't.

[emscape · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

“The God of Small Things” is Complex, Cryptic, and Artsy. It’s almost as if the author is trying too hard to be these things, at the detriment of her tale. Rahel and Estha are “two-egg” (fraternal) twins who live with their mother, uncle, grandmother and grand-aunt in Ayemanem, India. Their uncle, Chacko, has an ex-wife and daughter who live in England and come to Ayemanem to visit. At this same time, their mother, Ammu engages in some activity that threatens the way of life of everyone in their village. The story of this activity and the arrival and death of Rahel and Estha’s cousin Sophie Mol is revealed in bits and pieces, interspersed with accounts from the present day. None of the action is remotely chronological and is dribbled out to the reader in such a way that it is difficult to understand what any of these vignettes has to do with each other. Immediately upon finishing the book, I felt like I should go back and read the first few chapters again, just to see what it was they were talking about in the context of what all happened in the end of the book, but before these events chronologically. I didn’t, however, because the prospect of wading back through the cryptic descriptions and frequent dropping of Malayali words that are not ever translated was too daunting. It was beneficial to me to find a study guide for this book, written by some college professor, when doing a google search for Love-in-Tokyo which is an item frequently mentioned in the book, but never explained. You should know, if you ever plan to read this book, that a Love-in-Tokyo is a ponytail holding apparatus consisting of two beads attached to a rubber band. It figured prominently in a film that was apparently popular in India called “Love in Tokyo.” I was not able to find any reference to a Love-in-Tokyo as a hair band in anything besides commentary on this book. I can’t really tell if the plot or characterizations or descriptions of life in India in the 1960’s would be more valuable if the tale were told without all the cryptic crap, and in a chronological order, but I do know that I didn’t really enjoy reading this book. It might have been better if I had read it for a class and participated in discussions, but as a pleasure-book, it certainly was not at all pleasurable reading.

[squeakychu · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Rahel and Esthappen are dizygotic twins, born of two eggs but of one soul. In Kerala, India, the twins' mother Ammu is raising them with the help of the twins' grandmother Mammachi, their great-aunt Baby Kammachi, and their uncle Chako. At the beginning of the story, Chako's young daughter Sophie Mol was found dead. From her funeral, the story moves back and forth in time to reveal the circumstances of her death and how someone that the twins loved by day and Ammu loved by night tore the family apart.At first, The God of Small Things is impossible to absorb. Don't despair. Persist! Push forward until the story grabs you! The author's writing might seem fragmented and annoying at first. Later, when you figure out the action, the writing becomes lyrical. It has a beautiful rhythm and sound to it. This book might not be for everyone, though. My husband never made it past the first page! He kept repeating "It was just the language. I couldn't get through it. I couldn't read it." If you're willing to make it into the second chapter, I think you'll gladly make it through the whole story.

[whitewavedarling · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This is a beautifully written book, but in many ways, I think the writing overtakes the story. The author is rather heavy-handed in making themes known (and appreciated), and the characters and story-line often seem to play second string to the author's intentions because of this tendency. At times, the author's hand was far more believable than the characters or actions portrayed, and while this was rarely a problem, when it did come up it was clear that Roy was simply too intent on arguing a point or theme, as opposed to creating a work of art or imagination. Things, often, were simply pushed too far. Similarly, some 'minor' traumas were presented, apparently, simply as points of comparison beside larger ones, but character reactions to these lesser traumas ranged from being unbelievable to being unbelievably non-existent. Simply, the conception of the work was often too heavy-handed for my taste, and whil the writing was beautifuf and the execution graceful, the work as a whole left me fairly untouched because I wasn't ever able to forget the author's careful background manipulations. I recommend the book for it's writing (though I'd argue it would have been stronger if a hundred pages shorter), but it can't be called an escape in any respect.