There are so many things that we dont understand about Rahel and Estha. I was wondering if this was because Roy does not give us enough information, or if it was because we cant relate to them. They seem to make many strange choices and realizations but i cant seem to understand why?

This book is very central to love. There are mentions to loving more and loving less and loosing love and gaining love. People seem to be rated on how much they are loved, and the things that they do affect how much people love them. There may be a connection between the caste system and the way that people are rated with love.

The way the author writes words the way they sound is pretty cool. It makes the the readers get more interested in the book. It gets the readers closer to the characters in the book. Around the location where the family lives there are people whose english generally needs work and I find it fascinating that the Author tries to give that setting in this story.

Dear Bloggers, throughout the book Marxism and Socialism play a big role in the way people interact with eachother. It was the cause for strife between Pappachi and Chacko, it added an extra edge to the strange car ride to the "Sound of Music" in the chapter Pappachi's Moth, and it is a large underlying factor in Indian economy during the time period. However, of the main characters in the book the only self-proclaimed Marxist is Chacko. But Chacko is extremely priveleged compared to the rest of India. He has a car, a factory, as well as an Oxford education. Communism would dictate that he give up his car, and his factory and since it cannot truly strip him of his education it would not take that away but it would cause him to take a profession that maybe he was overqualified for. But to a man who has never had to live in poverty and has never been without food and a clean bed and water, a life of equality in equal poverty seems like a perfectly plausible ideal. But what about people who have spent their whole live without the same resources that Chacko, and ourselves, have had? Do you really think that they would be content to live in the same sort of poverty, with the only comfort being, "well at least nobody else is doing better."? I personally doubt that. In my mind communism is an idealistic fantasy for the rich. Only the priveleged have the ability to give up their already meagre possessions, and I know that as someone with possessions to give up it is really easy to look at poverty and social discremination and be like, "wouldn't it be really great if everybody was equal. Wouldn't it be nice if everybody had money, by getting rid of money all together?" Well of course the obvious answer is yes it would be. But quite frankly I believe that if I were born at the opposite end of the economic spectrum, and I mean African tribe end or poor in India poor, that I would be saying something very different. And most likely what I would be saying is how the hell do I get myself to the top. And without going into a really long explanation one of the biggest issues with communism is that is truly difficult to climb the economic ladder in socialism, because there is no ladder to climb.

As I read on in the book I can see more and more how the twins are connected in ways other than "blood". There is something more to their relationship, something very powerful between them. For example, pg.182, "A pair of actors trapped in a recondite play with no hint of plot or narrative. Stumbling through their parts, nursing someone else's sorrow. Grieving someone else's grief." I found this very interesting because Roy is describing the twins as actors, "stumbling" though life and feeling what each-other feel. I think that the word "actor" is significant because they forced to hide their true feelings. Estha is tortured by his experience with the orangedrink lemondrink man but to frighted to tell his mother in case she wont love him anymore. I was curious if anymore had any other opinions on Estha and Rahels relationship

this book is a very personal insight into the way of life of this family. writing like that doesnt come from no where. i was wondering if you guys think this is possibly some version of Arundhati Roy's life? what kind of connection happens between book and author? trivial or vital?  

i was just noticing the amount of jumping around the story does. in my opinion, it works very well. because the story is told through two different points of view, and the older version of the twins and family is explained by the younger version. but the younger version is not merely an explanation but a story of its own. which i think is more effective, its a less obvious way of tying the plot together while still making it wildly interesting. 

i was wondering what all of you thought about the incorporation of sensory language in the story. do you think it is specific to the author's writing style? or specific to the book? what role does it play, how does it enhance or alter the story? does it work? i was just wondering what you thought.  

'Little Girls Playing Sweet. One beach-colored. One brown. One Loved. One Loved a Little Less.' (P. 177, 11~16) So, as I expected when I was reading the beginning, racism showed up. 'One beach-colored' and 'One Loved' indicate Sophie Mol whose mother is British and has white skin. When she came back to home, all the people welcomed her very well even Baby Kochama wants to be close with Sophie. However, 'One brown' and 'One Loved a Little Less' indicate that Rahel is not getting any true love from other people. Moreover, Rahel was wondering how much her mother love Sophie when Ammu talked to Sophie. Rahel seems like she is afraid of losing loves from people. However, since she is 'Brown' so that she is 'One loved a Little Less'. Rahel will have more difficult time in the future becuase of her race.

What happened to Estha by "Orangedrink Lemondrink man" was terribly shocking. I can't even imagine a seven year old boy could experience that. However I thought Estha was smart and wise boy to be prepared, for a seven year boy. Also when Rahel goes to the temple she sees Kathakali. When Kathakali started their play or a sotry, Estha joins her throuth the story. They were not facing each other nor having a conversation, but they were together by the story and thinking of their mother and their childhood. This scene was extremely moving.

When Sophie Mol died there was a lot of confusion on what had happened to her and if she had simply drowned and there were no people involved in the drowning of Sophie Mol. If Estha had indeed had something to do with the death of Sophie Mol I feel as though there would have been some resolution. Im not sure if I believe that Estha had something to do with it, but I do realize how Margaret Kochamma could have thought Estha had caused her daughters death. On Another side Estha could have indeed done something, but is so scared that he cannot begin to fathom what would happen to him if he admitted that he had done a terrible deed.

"She persuaded herself that a trip to India would be just the thing for Sophie Mol... She was haunted by that decision for as long as she lived." (pg 238) The book is finally at its turning point. Where everything is coming together, pieces of the puzzles are making sense, and the tragedy is at the doorstep. Though the thing I want to talk about is how Roy uses ways to describe people as hole's in the universe. Like "The stern schoolteacher-shaped Hole in the Universe (who sometimes slapped)" (pg 237) Why does Roy use this way to describe people? What image does it create for you and what are your thoughts behind her using this?

"Bluegreyblue eyes snapped open.

A Wake.

A Live.

A Lert." (pg 226)

Roy deliberately broke up the words and capitalized them to give them a stronger meaning and the sense that Sophie Mol was there for that precise moment. She isn't dead yet, she is fully and 100% there in that moment. This is a key moment on the time line, highlighted by the capitalization of words, and shown with specific space of each phrase.

Another thing in the book that stuck out to me was when Rahel felt Estha's presence. "Something altered the air. And Rahel knew that Estha had come. She didn't turn her head, but a glow spread inside her. He's come. She thought. He's here. With me." (pg 222) This symbolized their connection. How close their bond is, and how strong their Siamese souls truly are. How does this seem to change as they get older? Does that glow stop within them? Or does something put it out?

I love the writer's technique when she put analepsis in her story. "She climbed down and walked out to the verandah...It was midmorning and about to tain again...where years ago, on the day that Sophie Mol came...Things can change in a day."(pg.156) This quote connects Chapter 7 and 8 so well. Also, it was really easy and clear to imagine the situation that Rahel is in and I even felt like I actually became Rahel and thought about the past.

In this story, I found many interesting "Grammatical Errors". Most significant one was capitalization. I'm pretty sure that there is a reason for that but it is really hard to figure out the purpose. "For a Breath of Fresh Air. To Pay for the Milk. To Let Out a Trapped Wasp."(pg.29) This was from the paragraph which the narrator explained Baby Kochamma's specific purposes of her window. I'm not sure but I think the author used it to emphasize the weirdness of Baby Kochamma's action.

The story is getting really messy and it seems it's starting to get ruined. When Rahel comes back from states, Baby Kochama pressures Rahel asking how long she will be staying and what she will do with Estha. Baby Kochama watches TV all day long. It will be very sad to live like this. Living in with someone wants you out, no money, and nowhere to go. Most of all, Estha does not have an opinion.

I really like the way this book has connections and bridges the past and future/present. I find Sophie Mol an especially interesting character. I love her and the twins' relationship. Sophie Mol had such a different upbringing and life than the twins, yet they are not uncomfortable with each other. Also, Moths are a continuous symbol throughout the story. Papacchi was an entomologist, and when Rachel is sad and lonely it is described as a moth on her heart. I think that the moth is a special and important symbol for the family, but I don't quite understand what it means yet.

"Littleangels were beach-colored and wore bell bottoms. Littledemons were mudbrown in the Airport-Fairy frocks with forhead bumps that might turn into horns." I thought this was a very interesting observation made by Rahel at such a young age. Already she has been convinced that the white race is superior to her own. I think that her being in a family of Anglofiles has a large influence on her life and the way she views Sophie mol.

Why does Ammu get so angry about Margaret asking if the men and woman sniff each others hands? It explains why Ammu gets so angry and likes to make arguments, but if she (like everybody else) is trying to be nice to the visitors why would she want to embarrass herself and her ex-sister in law?

"You're not the Sinners. You're the Sinned Against. You were only children. You had no control. You are the victims, not the perpetrators." (pg 182) The weight of the world has been pushed onto their shoulders at such a young age. It pained me when I read this, knowing the death of Sophie Mol impacted not just their lives, but their souls, and their relations. Life is so short, and for them to be grieving the whole time, pains me. It hurt Chacko, it hurt Ammu, Rahel, and Estha. The whole family was heart broken and shook up. This grief this suffering is torturing to them all, and it is something they will never get over. Its branded to their souls. The wings of each moth (each soul) is constantly fluttering, shaken by the grief, throbbing by the pain, hurting by the lose, and tortured by the death.

when reading page 172, it talks about Pappacchi and his relationship with ammu and mammachi. He was abusive to both of them and beat them both while Chacko was away at school. One particular event that the author describe is when pappacchi cuts up little ammus boots. to her those are precious and he takes them and in 10 mintues they are only scraps of what they use to be. He takes alot of things away from the family and hurts them, i can see a little bit more why pappacci broke up his own favorite rocking char like he cut up ammus favorite thing.

While reading the god of small things Ammus and Veluthas relationship is coming out more and more into the open. On page 167 when Ammu sees velutha playing with Rahel, she sees how close they interact and how Velutha is almost like a father to her. I think ammu and velutha should come out into the open about there relationship, because you can obviously see that they love each other. There love reminds me of romeo and juliete, because its forbidden but yet they still want it to work.

Another Part of Ammus passing that effected me was when Rahel knew her mother was dead but Estha had yet to find out. She was talking about writing him a letter but she says" rahel neer wrote to him there are things that you can't do- like writing letters to a part of your self. to your feet or hair. Or heart." I find this passage powerful because it really shows how after all this time Rahel and Esthas bond is unbreakable. By time and anything else that challenges them.

On page 154, it talks about how Ammu died, and a certin quote "she was thirty one. Not old not young, but a die-able age" This quote stuck out to me because i was wondering is there really an age thats okay to die at? Yes its tragic when children die but at any age death is horrible. I felt for ammu who died alone with so much of her life unwritten and not complete.