In her story “When Mr. Pirzada Came to Dine,” Jhumpa Lahiri takes a contrarian view of the community and one’s sense of identity. Through Lilia’s relationship with Mr. Pirzada, Lahiri suggests that communities founded on motivations like national identity divides people, while communities founded on personal bonds can unite people.
Lahiri’s story argues that nationality creates divisions amongst the characters and their worlds. As Lilia is becoming accustomed to Mr. Pirzada’s daily visits she does not understand the circumstances in which he has fled to America. Her father informs her, “‘More importantly, Mr. Pirzada is no longer considered Indian…Not since Partition. Our country was divided…’He seemed concerned that Mr. Pirzada might take …show more content…
Portraying Lahiri’s point that differences can not only distance one from another. Mr. Pirzada, who eats almost every day with Lilia’s family, shares many common traits, ones that Lilia is noticing. She is frazzled with the fact that such a great divide between the identity of a person, like nationality and culture, are possible even though many people share religion, language, and even eating habits. This reflection sparks Lilia’s desire to find out more about Mr. Pirzada’s origin and where his family currently is. Lilia takes time in her school library to research Pakistan and East Pakistan and to learn more about the divide. As she starts reading, her teacher, Ms. Kenyon, interrupts her asking “Is this book a part of your report’, Lilia then replies in a sheepish voice, ‘No, Ms. Kenyon’, responding to Lilia, Ms. Kenyon disrupts her research by saying, ‘Then I see no reason to consult it’” (Lahiri 33). As Ms. Kenyon finds that Lilia is not researching the selected topic for her book report, she immediately shuts down and gives her opinions on how she sees ‘no …show more content…
Pirzada Came to Dine”, Lahiri leaves room for interpretation and consideration. On one hand, Lahiri portrays the effects of nationality and the rifts it creates, separating similar people into two distinct groups. Lilia recalls, “…the three of them [her mother, father, and Mr. Pirzada] operating during that time as if they were a single person, sharing a single meal, a single body, a single silence, a single fear” during the war between East Pakistan (Bangladesh) and Pakistan (Lahiri 41). Although Lilia’s parents and Mr. Pirzada united during the war, these actions suggest that they were divided and had to put in the extra effort to come together and support the same cause. Describing, that since Lilia and her family were Indian, and Mr. Pirzada was from East Pakistan, there was a sense of divide and gap between core values and where each of their nationalism resides. However, on the other hand, using the same example Lahiri suggests that communities built and supported through connections and family, result in unity. Using the same line, Lilia recalls a key moment about her family during the war, “Most of all I remember the three of them operating during that time as if they were a single person, sharing a single meal, a single body, a single silence, a single fear” (Lahiri 41). This one memory of her parents and Mr. Pirzada, can be dual sided to prove that a sense of connection can lead people to uniting with each other, setting aside differences. The fact
Lahiri’s story argues that nationality creates divisions amongst the characters and their worlds. As Lilia is becoming accustomed to Mr. Pirzada’s daily visits she does not understand the circumstances in which he has fled to America. Her father informs her, “‘More importantly, Mr. Pirzada is no longer considered Indian…Not since Partition. Our country was divided…’He seemed concerned that Mr. Pirzada might take …show more content…
Portraying Lahiri’s point that differences can not only distance one from another. Mr. Pirzada, who eats almost every day with Lilia’s family, shares many common traits, ones that Lilia is noticing. She is frazzled with the fact that such a great divide between the identity of a person, like nationality and culture, are possible even though many people share religion, language, and even eating habits. This reflection sparks Lilia’s desire to find out more about Mr. Pirzada’s origin and where his family currently is. Lilia takes time in her school library to research Pakistan and East Pakistan and to learn more about the divide. As she starts reading, her teacher, Ms. Kenyon, interrupts her asking “Is this book a part of your report’, Lilia then replies in a sheepish voice, ‘No, Ms. Kenyon’, responding to Lilia, Ms. Kenyon disrupts her research by saying, ‘Then I see no reason to consult it’” (Lahiri 33). As Ms. Kenyon finds that Lilia is not researching the selected topic for her book report, she immediately shuts down and gives her opinions on how she sees ‘no …show more content…
Pirzada Came to Dine”, Lahiri leaves room for interpretation and consideration. On one hand, Lahiri portrays the effects of nationality and the rifts it creates, separating similar people into two distinct groups. Lilia recalls, “…the three of them [her mother, father, and Mr. Pirzada] operating during that time as if they were a single person, sharing a single meal, a single body, a single silence, a single fear” during the war between East Pakistan (Bangladesh) and Pakistan (Lahiri 41). Although Lilia’s parents and Mr. Pirzada united during the war, these actions suggest that they were divided and had to put in the extra effort to come together and support the same cause. Describing, that since Lilia and her family were Indian, and Mr. Pirzada was from East Pakistan, there was a sense of divide and gap between core values and where each of their nationalism resides. However, on the other hand, using the same example Lahiri suggests that communities built and supported through connections and family, result in unity. Using the same line, Lilia recalls a key moment about her family during the war, “Most of all I remember the three of them operating during that time as if they were a single person, sharing a single meal, a single body, a single silence, a single fear” (Lahiri 41). This one memory of her parents and Mr. Pirzada, can be dual sided to prove that a sense of connection can lead people to uniting with each other, setting aside differences. The fact