The book is about the life of a family in India where has stricted caste system. Because of this caste system, there are lots of troubles and problems in India. The family in this book started as a high ranked family, but as times go on, people started to go into the lower rank. To top of the hierarchy to the bottom of the hierarchy, this is really impossible I think. However, as the author make this happen in the book so that she can bring readers' attention in to the book. I felt really fascnating as reading this book, only because of being white, the person is top of everyone else, and other low ranked people cannot do anything they want. Reading this book reminded me there is a severe caste system in India, and lots of people are having hard time becauase of it. Moreover, as the author using Analepsis and Prolepsis a lot, I could feel and read book well although it was hard to read at first. I've enjoyed this book!

In the God of small things we can find many themes. One of these, which was interesting to me, was discrimination in terms of social class. This story happens in India which has social hierarchy. It's called caste system and the people lowest class in that system are considered. In this book, Velutha, Vella Paapen, and Kuttappen belong to the untouchables. Arundhati Roy showed this cruel social discrimination by giving story of Velutha. "They woke Velutha with their boots. Esthappen and Rahel woke to the shout of sleep surprised by shattered kneecaps...They heard the thud of wood on flesh. Boot on bone...The gurgle of blood on a man's breath when his lung is torn by the jagged end of a broken rib. What Esthappen and Rahel witnessed that morning, though they didn't know it then, was a clinical demonstration in controlled conditions of human nature's pursuit of ascendancy. Structure. Order. Complete monopoly....at least biologically he was a fellow creature...No means of gauging how much or how permanently they had damaged him."(pg.292-293) This quote shows how cruel the caste system is.

Ammu drives to the riverbank and somehow she knows that Velutha will be there. Velutha also knows that ammu will be there. While Velutha was swimming at the river, Ammu arrives and Velutha swims toward her. They make love. Velutha is afaid of the consequences. He is afraid of getting caught making love with Ammu and he will lose everything. He'll lose his job, livelihood, everything. But as they start to make love, Velutha is not afraid anymore. His fears are gone as Velutha feels the love he has for Ammu. He is ready to give away everything for this love. This ending was very something. The two different class loving together, in a class structure society. The book was telling all the terrible tragics, and very lovely ending in the end. It is all those terrible tragics that makes this ending so beautiful and lovely. I enjoyed this book and I think it is very wonderful.

Dear Bloggers, I have to which I have no answer. As rather well cultured westerners with pretty decent ideas of the world outside of the U.S. is this book important? Have we really learned all that much, or have we just read digested and stored in the depths of our memory ignoring it for analytical purposes. Are books important? Novels, do they really even teach us all that much? Is it important, or is it all just part of a silly neverending search for material knowledge? Is this kind of material knowledge that is important? And maybe a smaller question than that, for the sake of the small things, are they important. The small things, the things that will undoubtably dissapear in time in life or in death? and is this book helpful at all? Do we feel smarter or more enlightened?

The character dynamics in the book really shape the attitude of it. You can tell that the relationship between Ammu and Baby is tense. This changes the relationship between the twins and Baby K. Also, there is an underlying something between Ammu and Chacko. Chacko feels like he is more superior, due to him being male. Mammachi and Ammu also have a strained relationship. This is probably due to the fact that Ammu married Baba and then they divorced. Ammu is kind of the odd one out of the family. This really reflects on the children. They are sort of put into a position where their whole family doesn't like them as much as they could. This really changes how the children feel about themselves as well i think.

Dear Bloggers, As promised a quick conversation on writing style. Sometimes when reading TGOST I feel a little like a dunce, the kind of dunce that takes the short bus to school and writes out the multiplication tables thirty or forty times, not because it's for punishment but because it is the only way I will remember it. Now I realize this is a little unfair because come to think of it I sometimes forget my multiplication tables and maybe writing them down would help. But I think the gist of what I'm saying is understood. The repetition of TGOST is infuriating, but yet it fits with the context of the book. The emphasis is all on the little things, things that if this were a novel from the sixties or seventies would hardly even be looked at would be dismissed as a piece of dialogue or a writers attempt at providing character background, but they would never be emphasized and repeated in the same way that they are in Ms. Roy's stellar modern novel. Often in novels from the post modern era, character were used as ways to look at the scene and agree with it or criticize it or critique it but there thoughts were in long continuous rants never repeating often contradicting their own thoughts. The little things, like rape and a mothers love, were rarely considered important or even dangerous topics. Authors were spellbound by vicious deaths, by penis-statues (Clockwork Orange) or apocalyptic scenarios where the world freezes leaving poets and journalists (cat's cradle) murder, mayhem, feck the scene man (One Hand Clapping) it's all scene. That's what was enthralling. The world obsessed with perfection or at least happiness (The Dharma Bums) what with the masses all reading Suzuki's books on Zen buddhism. It was all about the scene, not being a part of it, being on the train, the wagon, it was all the scene, no matter where you are in that scene. But it made sense the world was so close to being blown to pieces of course the whole thing would be happiness or death. But now, now, we're just confused lost with what we're supposed to do. We're no longer at the base of life, no longer fearing death now we're grasping for meaning and we have no idea where to look. So what do we do. We search in the corners and the crevases, looking for all the small things.

On page 299, when the children and Baby K are at the police station, and the children first see Baby, it says, "The sight of Baby Kochamma made them suddenly sober. The moth with the unusually dense dorsal tufts spread it's wings over both their hearts." Throughout the book the moth has popped up here and there. But after reading this line, I realized that the moth meant sadness, and a weight upon your heart. I feel as if this line ties alot of things together. The suffering of Pappachi, and sort of the end of their childhood innocence.

I find it very disturbing that sex and violence are a large part of this story, because it takes away from the true meaning of the story and creates and second story that people will argue about, which isn't really necessary and it also ruins the mood whenever something that involves abuse or harassment becomes a part of the story. In areas of the world were abuse, and sexual harassment are not addressed, it makes me wonder why there would even be a thought about why it would be okay for something so hurtful to go on in any country, city or even household. It may be that Roy wants us to realize how bad it really is or is she telling the readers to deal with it and that you can't change it no matter how hard you try.

If I were to read this book again, I would like to spend more time on it and not rush through it as much as I feel I have this semester. The book is such a work of art that I feel like I need time to digest it and process everything that happens. The prolepsis and analepsis is a wonderful way to write this book, but it is good to have time to comprehend everything, and put the pieces of the puzzle together.

"The God of Small Things" ends with a vivid, powerful description of one of many amorous encounters between Ammu and Velutha. I guess this is why the book "started in the end and ended in the middle". AT the very end, she recalls when Margaret Kochamma asked if "Indians do that to each other, too" referencing the 'sniffing' that she thought Indian men and women did. Though this previously insulted Ammu, at the end of the book, she finds it funny because she thinks, "Yes, Margaret, we do it to each other, too." (Roy 321).

My impressions of this book and what I thought would happen and how things really did turn out changed constantly. I originally thought that Sophie's death would be an adhesive for the troubled crumbling family and that it would reunite them over the loss of what was most precious to all of them. Unfortunately, it only made things worse.

It says that for thirteen more nights after the described one "they stuck to the small things". (Roy 320). In their own little world of Small Things, Ammu and Velutha could be who they wanted to be and do what they wanted to do. But when Sophie is introduced into the world of Small Things, everything goes horribly wrong, and it is a warning about what happens when these two worlds coincide. Pappachi's moth was a constant reminder of what was really going on.

Arundhati Roy's style of writing really floors me. She really thinks about everything that she writes. There isn't one word that is out of place. Her words flow together and create a graceful and beautiful story, that, if told any other way would be boring. Sometimes, when I read the book, I don't even realize that a tragedy has occured, because it is put so well. In the future, when I am writing a story, I hope to do the same as Roy does, and make every word important and necesary.

Dear Bloggers, I would like to talk about a quote on page 170, "littleangels were beach-colored and wore bell-bottoms. Little demons were mudbrown in Airport-Fairy frocks with fore-head bumps that might turn into horns. With Fountains in Love-in-Tokyos. And backwards-reading habits." For those of you who are far ahead of this page and have already forgotten the context I will help by saying that Sophie Mol has just arrived at the Ayemenem house and is being greeted by the blind Mammachi and the Hobbitish Kochu Maria, who of course refers to her as a little angel. Maybe I have become repetitive or if not me maybe I am only repeating, but I am fed up with these love laws. And the emphasis on race in this book. Maybe it justified, and I certainly agree that the concept of love laws is the most ridiculous dehumanizing thing I have ever heard of, yet I believe now Ms. Roy is beginning to lose my sympathy for the whole racial part of the book. I acknowledge it is part of the style, which the book is written in. Countless repetitions of phrases and concepts mulled over and digested by both the characters and the readers. Yet in this particular quote I begin to find her unbelievably frustrating. First of all, just because Sophie Mol is called a beautiful angel does not mean that Rahel is a demon. Second of all, can we all not agree that Rahel has been a little exasperating in the chapters before this? As if she's not a frustrating character in the first place. Perhpas that was the intent of Ms. Roy, and I speculate that it was. She is rather similar to Ammu. Who I also find to be an incredibly antagonizing character, however I do respect her spunk. Now to continue with the original topic of this post. Quite frankly as I get to know more of Margaret Kochamma, I can't help but feel that she is a rather unintelligent, insensitive, clueless white girl. Which is I'm sure how Arundhati meant her to be portrayed, but even that is a sense of racism. Sophie Mol is portrayed as a disinterested snobby lobster who sees little or no reason to be in India other than the reasons that Margaret has spoon fed her. Maybe I am the only one who feels that way, and maybe it is because as a white male I feel defensive and guilty about the atrocities committed in India, and all around the world. Because truly these problems are not unique to India. But earlier in this blog I talked about the repetition of the writing, I think that is a far more interesting topic and I plan on writing about it in another blog.

Arundhati Roy has a very interesting style of writing that is both intriguing but also has a sense of reality. She uses time very lightly in TGST, by skipping around the characters' lives making it hard to know where you are in the novel. Roy often uses elements of nature to correspond with the story along with elemental symbols like the moth or the river that runs through Ayemenem, and how it destroys and brings together the story at more times that one.

A few more thoughts on the end of the book-

What I noticed in the last chapter, the last page even, was that perhaps Ammu does actually love Velutha. For the longest time, I refused to believe that, choosing to think instead that she wanted a thrill, drama, ect.. But, as described it, Ammu, Rahel and Estha had "loved a man to death".

On another, slightly less important topic, the History House. The 'history-shaped hole in the universe". I found so much irony in the fact that Velutha was killed there, with the kids watching, unknowingly. The History House, their sanctuary, their safe haven, the one and only place, turned into the place their beloved friend was murdered innocently. One of the very few safe and good things in their lives was finally ruined, along with everything else in the book.

A little bit more on Baby K. -

First of all, the police station section. On one hand, I was astonished and absolutely sickened by what was happening, but at the same time, I was not completely surprised about Baby Kochamma's behavior. But all the same, it was so twisted of her to manipulate Estha and Rahel into telling the lie about Velutha. But then again, she was only doing what she had to do to protect her family, right? What would any of us do in her position? And, like she said, and like was true, Velutha didn't even make it through the night. But I still think she was wrong for hurting the twins by saying that they were murderers.

I think Baby Kochamma would be a really good character to do an analysis on.

For one thing, she's got a great back story.

Secondly, her motivations are never 100% clear, in almost everything she does. She seems to be just a bitter, mean old lady, especially towards the end of the book, but at the same time, you can tell there's something else behind it.

She doesn't develop very much as a character throughout the book, instead staying more or less the same, but judging by her past, she's changed immensely since her youth.

I was very intrigued by tracking Chacko's progress from his younger self to his older, educated self. One thing from that time period that I found really reflected his and Margaret's relationship was that she loved Chacko, but even more, she loved the self acceptance she gained through him. And I think it was a two way street.

Although that might not sound like the healthiest relationship, I think it actually is. I think that you should be with someone that not only do you love/care about, but also someone who makes you embrace yourself as fully as possible.

Arundhati Roy is a great writer. She gives some characters very minimal detail so that the reader can have their own imagination and that particular character. She also has symbols for different characters, she spells certain words based on the way they sound, and she gives the book a twist by putting flash backs and flash forwards. This is a book that you have to digest. You have to take this book slow and steady so you can have a better understanding.   

Ammu and Velutha I think would have been a good couple. Things would have worked out great. If the family was more open to acceptance. Even though he is not in the same system as she is, things would work out fine. 

"There is very little that anyone could say to clarify what happened next. Nothing that (in Mammachi's book) would separate Sex from Love. Or Needs from Feelings." (Roy 310). In the events that follow, Rahel and Estha make love after not having seen each other for 20 years. Clearly they have a very passionate relationship. I don't want to sound like I'm bashing these two kids who were victims of their own childhoods and grew up in a world where misdirection ran rampant, but I think they're a little too close. When all the memories and emotions of their tragic pasts, it becomes a little too much to handle, so I guess sex was the only way they could escape from that. I still think it's a little bit weird.

In the book, it talks about Margaret and Chacko's first encounter. I really liked how it sort of showed a comparison between the young Chacko and the old Chacko. He told Margaret the joke with so much vigor and laughter. You can tell that he has always been humorous. But you can also tell that through time, and a divorce, Chacko had become more reserved. Also, I think that when he came back to India, he thought he was top notch because he had studied at Oxford. I think that when he was in England he had a smaller ego, and took himself a lot less seriously.

Throughout their childhood, Estha and Rahel were two peas in a pod, basically the same person. When Rahel came back to Ayemenem, there was an awkwardness, a strange barrier. It makes sense, because the had not seen each other in such a long time. It still surprised me a little though, because I was imaging their reunion to immediately pull Estha out of his quietness, and for Estha and Rahel to just go back to normal, as they were before Estha left for school and Rahel went to America. I guess my perception had always been that nothing could really break their bond.

At the end of chapter 20, the last thing that Estha yells at his mother and sister before the train pulls away is "Feeling vomity!" Recall that this is the same claim he made when he was abused by the Orangedrinklemondrink Man. After the train pulled out, Rahel doubled over in emotional pain, so I would assume that Estha did the exact same thing at the exact same time. The same thing happened when Ammu died, and they both felt a mutual compulsion to see each other in the hotel after the events at the movie theater. I bet they had some serious demons in the twenty or so years between the departure and the reuniting after Ammu's death that Roy didn't tell us about. The departure was one of the most deeply impacting events in the book, even though it was so short.

Baby Kochamma's inexcusable behavior completely desecrated this family and the deep and abiding bonds that it shared. It's mostly her fault that Estha became a mute, and it's her fault Estha and Rahel were separated for the majority of their lives. I don't get it either. Why did Baby Kochamma care so much about the extra-caste bond between Ammu and Velutha? Was it because it wasn't traditional? Then why BK care about Father Mulligan so much? Does the whole affair have anything to do with the fact that Velutha is not your average Paravan? It just doesn't make any sense.

God of Small Things remains to me to be a mystery. Most people are confident that it is meant to be Velutha, and I agree, but I feel like there so many hints of 'small things' in this book that I am not sure which is the God of all the others. I want to read this book again, because maybe then I will pick up on things I haven't noticed, and will understand more of the woven plot. The small things are the bits of life that form the whole terrible mess.

When i first started reading about Ammu and Velutha by the river in the end of the book I wondered whether Roy had wanted us to leave the book with the image of Ammu and Velutha or was it that he was dead, so she dreamt of him, which showed how much she had loved him when he was alive. For me it was about the dream. Roy has done really well with the scene of them and I feel as though it brings the whole story together. For Ammu it must have been very nice to see his face about and feel his heart beat. Her Body once again felt that love, that passion.

At the end of the book, Arundhati Roy started to expand story slowly. The last part was the climax of the book, as Velutha banished from mamachi and going back to his house, the author described this scene really well. Velutha was tired of everything, he cannot stand anymore world's ugliness. Eventually, Velutha died of policemen's beating. At the last, the author described how Ammu and Velutha make a love really accurately. The end of this book is really fascinating to readers.

In Ammu's dream, she dreams of the man with one arm who left no footprints. In the dream, she was happy. It says, "She could have touched him with her fingers, but she didn't. They just stood together. Still. Skin to skin." That was when I began to think it was Velutha, because he is an Untouchable. I am still really confused as to what peole think about the man having only one arm. And no trace, like a mirage, almost like the dream knew that Velutha wasn't there forever, and he would be there with Ammu for just a little while.

Chapter starts as Rahel sits on a train. On his way to be sent to his father. Outside the train, his mother and sister, Ammu and Rahel talking over the window. They promise they will write to each other and will soon be together. As the train pulls out, Estha starts to cry. He is scared of their promise will never make it. After years, the twins realize that their mother, Ammu has been played in a tragedy. They see her crying and sadness. The twins now feel guilty that they are the cause of her sadness and should have pretected her. After years, the twins sit together lying comfortly, fealing the love they have for each other. I wish at the moment, Ammu was with them and have another lovely person to love them and love her back. It would be such a happy ending scene for the story and for the twins. But the tragic had taken their mother, Ammu away form them and their promise was not able to reach.

The children is now at the police station, including Velutha. Inspector Thomas Mathew, the same one who heard Baby Kochamma's accusation. After questioning the twins, Thomas realize that they had made a mistake. Velutha did not kidnapped them. Thomas explains Baby Kochama for the mistake. Baby Kochama still wants to charge for the rape, but it has to be charged to the actual victim, Ammu. Now the police has to act for the mistake they had made. Thomas says that Velutha is more likely to die from beating. They had beaten a innocent man almost to death. I can't imagine this situation. If this case was happened in nowadays, it would be broadcasted all over the world for the tragic accident. Even it was not an accident, police can't beat up people. They have the right to arrest them but not allowed to use any violence. The sentiments toward the police would be a disaster. People won't believe police and it would be tragic.

I've just finished the book, and I think it was marvelous. I really enjoyed how it ended with the actual intense description of Ammu's and Velutha's relationship, and with Estha leaving on the train. For me it made their love so much more real, and his departure so poignant. Roy has used her great writing skills to engage the reader to the end.

The river is the background for most of the events in this book. Flowing on and on, it has the feeling of agelessness, as it has been there since the beginning of time. Everything in their lives involves the river, including Sophie Mol's death and Ammu and Velutha's relationship. Amma tastes river on Velutha's skin. Estha and Rahel played and rowed on the river, and it is constantly present in their lives, as it is right near the History House and Mammachi's house. The river plays a big part in everyone's life.