Pulitzer Prize winning author Jhumpa Lahiri’s deeply observed portrait of an Indian-American family in "The Namesake" caught the imagination of readers worldwide.
The book was not only a bestseller but it was also chosen as Book of the Year on many
newspaper lists, including The New York Times.
Now, Lahiri’s novel is a major film being distributed worldwide by Fox Searchlight, and is being shown exclusively at Ayala Malls Cinemas (Glorietta 4 and Greenbelt 3) starting Nov. 28.
In the following interview, Lahiri talks about the film, lavishing the adaptation by Indian master director Mira Nair with praises, saying it has done justice to her book.
We have watched people moved by this film. We hear sobs during the screening, and we see people wiping tears as the lights come on. Did you cry while watching the film?
Lahiri: Not during the film. But as the film ended, I was overwhelmed. I hugged Mira. I felt this is the greatest gift Mira has given me. I cried then.
Why do you call it a gift?
Lahiri: When I write something I give it everything I can. And then it is over to me. I never go back to the book or short story unless I am at a reading. Even then I am not affected. I would rather read someone else’s work. But when I saw the film I was moved by the story Mira had told. It was a powerful feeling.
What would you tell people who have faithfully read your novel and are about to see the film?
Lahiri: My novel encompasses 30 years in the life of a family, and what Mira has made is a 110-minutelong film. You cannot have everything from a novel into a film unless it is a television serial. Books are earthbound entities, and we read them whenever we have time. A film, on the other hand, seems more ethereal, and should be able to old our attention from start to finish. The essence of my book remains very much in the film but it inhabits a different realm.
And what would you tell to those who haven’t read the book?
Lahiri: The film works on its own. It is compelling and it has many insights into immigrant lives. I hope they will find it a moving experience as I did.
You have said you cannot anymore think of "The Namesake" belonging just to you.
Lahiri: That is because what Mira has taken from my novel and turned into this film. I cannot think of anyone else who would have been able to internalize my novel, to take it’s essence, and transpose it the way she has done. Her dedication and enthusiasm were immense. I have watched her reinvent my novel. So, I am convinced this was a story both of us were meant to tell. Not everything from the novel is in the film. But none of it is a loss; it’s pure gain.
Didn’t you say that at some point you thought "The Namesake" could not be made into a film?
Lahiri: There is a lot of description and summary in the book, not to forget that its story is spread across three decades. But Mira and Sooni [Taraporevala, the screenwriter] had read the book so carefully that they were able to coax out the dialogue and action that is implicit, and choose parts of the book that convey the essence of the novel the best.
Would you have been able to write the screenplay?
Lahiri: I could never have been able to do what Mira and Sooni have done. And that is why I think what they have done is remarkable.
You have said the experience of immigrant children differs little from that of their parents.
Lahiri: In a sense, there is very little that distinguishes the two experiences. The question of identity is always a difficult one, but especially for those who are culturally displaced as immigrants are, or those who grow up in two worlds simultaneously, like the children of immigrants. In a way, it is easier on the older generation [to live in the new world]. They bond with fellow immigrants; they have ties to cultural organizations and to temples. But the children have to fend for themselves, in a sense. They too carry considerable amount of tension about their own identities.
What was your own experience like?
Lahiri: I have observed that the problem for the children of immigrants — those with strong ties to their country of origin — is that they felt neither one thing nor the other. In any case, this was my experience. Whenever people asked where I was from, I could not really answer. If I said I was from Rhode Island, people wanted me to say something more. I could not have said I was from India because that was not accurate, though I speak good Bengali and I have strong connections with my relatives in India. And then I also remember that I was born in London. Now, when people ask me the question, I am not bothered much. But it was a nagging question while growing up.
Do you consider yourself an American now?
I find it very hard to think to myself as an American, especially as I am very attached to my parents and their connection to India. And that is why I feel that while for the immigrants the challenges of exile, the loneliness and the constant sense of alienation are too explicit and distressing, there are many immigrant children who have their own distresses.
|
