These aspects particularly reveal themselves with Moushumi’s nickname of “Mouse,” as her retreat into the past allows her to forget the present and her commitment to Gogol (Lahiri 263). Additionally, the constant referral to the adulterers only as “he” and “she” during the act reveals a connection to the foreshadowed unhappy ending from Moushumi’s book, and Moushumi calling Gogol only as “my husband” further emphasizes her disconnect with reality as she apathetically dismisses her union in marriage (Lahiri 263-264). Highlighting the detachment from the present, the dispassionate use of names allows the reader psychologically analyze Moushumi, creating a mood of disgust from the reader as one sympathizes for Gogol’s unknown suffering. However, the differing point of view serves to reveal that Moushumi also undergoes misery, as while she revels in sin, her comments about the cracked ceiling and her tears metaphorically suggest Moushumi’s guilt from her actions (Lahiri
These aspects particularly reveal themselves with Moushumi’s nickname of “Mouse,” as her retreat into the past allows her to forget the present and her commitment to Gogol (Lahiri 263). Additionally, the constant referral to the adulterers only as “he” and “she” during the act reveals a connection to the foreshadowed unhappy ending from Moushumi’s book, and Moushumi calling Gogol only as “my husband” further emphasizes her disconnect with reality as she apathetically dismisses her union in marriage (Lahiri 263-264). Highlighting the detachment from the present, the dispassionate use of names allows the reader psychologically analyze Moushumi, creating a mood of disgust from the reader as one sympathizes for Gogol’s unknown suffering. However, the differing point of view serves to reveal that Moushumi also undergoes misery, as while she revels in sin, her comments about the cracked ceiling and her tears metaphorically suggest Moushumi’s guilt from her actions (Lahiri