Interpreter of Maladies – Debatable Issues Page 1
Interpreter of Maladies
(1999), by Jhumpa Lahiri
Debatable Issues
These are debatable issues for use in a unit on Jhumpa Lahiri’s Pulitzer Prize winning collection of short stories,
Interpreter of Maladies (1999).
Is the collection’s depiction of Indian-Americans positive or critical and negative?
(1) According to the
Washington Post
, reviewers in India of Jhumpa Lahiri’s
Interpreter of Maladies
have been conflicted; many have praised the artistry with which Indian-American subjectivity is
depicted, but others have objected on the grounds that Lahiri does "not paint Indian-Americans in
a more positive light.” Setting aside any ethnic boosterism, do the detractors have a point? Do the
stories in
Interpreter of Maladies
cast Indian-Americans, especially second-generation Indian
immigrants to the United States, in a more critical and negative than affirming and positive (or
even neutral) light?
Are many of the stories’ endings actually ambiguous?
(2) Some readers of Lahiri’s stories note what they call her regular use of ambiguous endings. They
point, for example, to “A Temporary Matter,” “Sexy,” “Mrs. Sen’s,” and “This Blessed House.”
These stories, they say, end in ways that allow the reader to interpret them very differently; the
ambiguity of the endings affects the tone that can be discerned in the works, even differently
determining whether the story ends happily or sadly for different readers. But is this really true?
Does what takes place
prior
to the ending in these (and other potentially ambiguously-ended)
stories in
Interpreter of Maladies
actually strongly suggest a likely, tonally-fixed, thematically clear
ending, even if it is not made explicit or obvious?
