"Chimmoku" as a silence concept in Jhumpa Lahiri’s selected stories

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Pavlo Tychyna Uman State Pedagogical University Uman, Cherkasy region, Ukraine

“Chimmoku” as a silence concept in Jhumpa Lahiri's selected stories

Yalovenko Olha Viktorivna

Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor

Associate Professor of English and Methodology Department

Abstract

silence lexical content lagiri

The article deals with the lexical content of SILENCE concept in the cultural and individual style of Jhumpa Lahiri, an American writer of Bengali origin. It is mentioned that depending on the cultural belonging, such verbal “non-designation” leads to different interpretations of SILENCE, including distortion and misunderstanding of meanings. In Lahiri's works SILENCE concept is expanded due to the cultural component: immigrants are silent not because of anger or disagreement, but because of their cultural “otherness”, isolation (both physical and imaginary), and because of the language barrier. In this way SILENCE becomes a component of fictional communication with “ours”, and represents this “fictional” reality as literary phenomenon. SILENCE is an important item of the transcultural component of Lahiri's writing, where a woman usually plays the symbolic role of “invisible existence” and is associated with a maid who knows only how to cook dinner and wash socks. On the example of Lahiri's stories we notice that not only the woman considers herself speechless or “mute”. A man in his attitude towards a woman also a priori considers her to have no voice of her own, and therefore he does not need her answer. Therefore, the female characters' SILENCE is painful from their own powerlessness and from their habit of not arguing with a man because ab “answer” is hidden in SILENCE. In Lahiri's works SILENCE concept is peculiarly actualized both language images and non-verbal elements, aimed at alienation motif. In this way SILENCE concept is combined with “invisibility” of Bengali woman, in particular with clothes and its colors, because often in female characters' appearance one feels the inner desire to be alone, to disappear, and to be unnoticed. A home space imbued with SILENCE is associated with strangerness, rejection, and otherness. An interrupted time motif (then and now) which is also related to speechlessness appears. Lahiri's characters, being in the liminal space of their American apartments, are in entropy state, in cultural chaos, because they still feel a certain degree of uncertainty, and are “in between”. For Lahiri's characters SILENCE truly has the capacity to “change the world” and perhaps yet more than, impassioned speech. Many female characters do not need to use language in order to foster a sense of community with one another. This deliberate absence of language serves a means through which they can experience more. Some stories include transformation of SILENCE power. For many characters SILENCE is not defensive or willfully ignorant, it is “alive” and suffused with openness of its spirit. SILENCE does not strip characters of their identity, but creates “their” identity. Though SILENCE is connected with symbolic “sweetness” as well as “sadness,” this does not always mean that in SILENCE one remains rooted in suffering. Instead, “tasting the SILENCE” is a way of connecting across suffering, as well as finding “own” place in a new cultural environment.

Key words: non-verbal communication, loneliness motif, otherness, “Chimmoku” concept, the past.

«×³ììîêó» ÿê êîíöåïò ìîâ÷àííÿ ó âèáðàíèõ òâîðàõ Äæóìïè Ëàã³ð³

ßëîâåíêî Îëüãà ³êòîð³âíà, êàíäèäàò ô³ëîëîã³÷íèõ íàóê, äîöåíò, äîöåíò êàôåäðè àíãë³éñüêî¿ ìîâè òà ìåòîäèêè ¿¿ íàâ÷àííÿ Óìàíñüêîãî äåðæàâíîãî ïåäàãîã³÷íîãî óí³âåðñèòåòó ³ìåí³ Ïàâëà Òè÷èíè Óìàíü, ×åðêàñüêà îáëàñòü, Óêðà¿íà

Àíîòàö³ÿ

Ñòàòòþ ïðèñâÿ÷åíî âèâ÷åííþ ëåêñè÷íîãî íàïîâíåííÿ êîíöåïòó ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß ó êóëüòóðîëîã³÷íîìó òà â ³íäèâ³äóàëüíî-àâòîðñüêîìó ñòèë³ àìåðèêàíñüêî¿ ïèñüìåííèö³ áåíãàëüñüêîãî ïîõîäæåííÿ Äæóìïè Ëàã³ð³. Çàçíà÷åíî, ùî çàëåæíî â³ä êóëüòóðíî¿ ïðèíàëåæíîñò³, ïîä³áíå âåðáàëüíå «íåïîçíà÷åííÿ» ïðèçâîäèòü äî ð³çíîãî òëóìà÷åííÿ ôàêòó ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß, ó òîìó ÷èñë³ äî ñïîòâîðåííÿ òà íåïîðîçóì³ííÿ ñìèñë³â, çàêëàäåíèõ ó íüîìó. Ó òâîð÷îñò³ Ä. Ëàã³ð³ êîíöåïò ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß ðîçøèðþºòüñÿ çà ðàõóíîê êóëüòóðëîã³÷íî¿ ñêëàäîâî¿: ³ìì³ãðàíòè ìîâ÷àòü íå ÷åðåç ãí³â ÷è íåçãîäó ç ÷èìîñü, à ÷åðåç ñâîþ êóëüòóðíó «³íàêø³ñòü», ³çîëüîâàí³ñòü (ÿê ô³çè÷íó òàê ³ óÿâíó), òà ÷åðåç ìîâíèé áàð'ºð. Ó òàêèé ñïîñ³á ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß ñòຠêîìïîíåíòîì âèãàäàíîãî / óìîâíîãî ñï³ëêóâàííÿ ç³ «ñâî¿ìè», ³ ïðåäñòàâëÿº «ô³êö³îíàëüíó» ä³éñí³ñòü ÿê õóäîæíº ÿâèùå. ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß º âàæëèâèì êîìïîíåíòîì òðàíñêóëüòóðíî¿ ñêëàäîâî¿ òâîð÷îñò³ ïèñüìåííèö³. Ó òâîðàõ Ä. Ëàã³ð³ æ³íêà âèêîíóº ñèìâîë³÷íó ðîëü «íåâèäèìîãî ³ñíóâàííÿ» ³ àñîö³þºòüñÿ ç³ ñëóæíèöåþ, ÿêà â쳺 ëèøå ãîòóâàòè îá³ä òà ïðàòè øêàðïåòêè. Íà ïðèêëàä³ îêðåìèõ òâîð³â ïèñüìåííèö³ ïîì³÷àºìî, ùî íå ëèøå ñàìà æ³íêà ââàæຠñåáå áåçìîâíîþ, ÷è óìîâíî í³ìîþ. ×îëîâ³ê ó ñâîºìó ñòàâëåíí³ äî æ³íêè òàêîæ àïð³îð³ ââàæຠ¿¿ òàêîþ, ùî íå ìຠâëàñíîãî ãîëîñó, à îòæå â³í ³ íå ïîòðåáóº ¿¿ â³äïîâ³ä³. ³äòàê, ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß æ³íî÷èõ ïåðñîíàæ³â áîë³ñíå â³ä âëàñíîãî áåçñèëëÿ òà â³ä çâè÷êè íå ñïåðå÷àòèñÿ ç ÷îëîâ³êîì; ó ìîâ÷àíí³ ïðèõîâàíà ñèìâîë³÷íà «â³äïîâ³äü». Ó òâîð÷îñò³ Ä. Ëàã³ð³ êîíöåïò ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß ñâîºð³äíî àêòóàë³çóºòüñÿ íå ëèøå ìîâíèìè îáðàçàìè, àëå ³ íåâåðáàëüíèìè åëåìåíòàìè, ñïðÿìîâàíèìè íà ìîòèâ â³ä÷óæåííÿ. Ó òàêèé ñïîñ³á êîíöåïò ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß ïîºäíóºòüñÿ ç «íåâèäèì³ñòþ» áåíãàëüñüêî¿ æ³íêè, çîêðåìà ç îäÿãîì òà éîãî êîëüîðîâèì çàáàðâëåííÿì, àäæå ÷àñòî â ñàìîìó âèãëÿä³ æ³íî÷èõ ïåðñîíàæ³â â³ä÷óâàºòüñÿ âíóòð³øíº áàæàííÿ ïîáóòè ñàìîìó, çíèêíóòè, çàëèøèòèñÿ íåïîì³÷åíîþ. Ïðîéíÿòèé ìîâ÷àííÿì äîìàøí³é ïðîñò³ð àñîö³þºòüñÿ ç ÷óæ³ñòþ, íåïðèéíÿòòÿì, ³íàêø³ñòþ. Âèíèêຠìîòèâ ïåðåðâàíîñò³ ÷àñó (òîä³ ³ çàðàç), ÿêèé òàêîæ ïîâ'ÿçàíèé ç áåçìîâí³ñòþ. Ïåðñîíàæ³ Ëàã³ð³, ïåðåáóâàþ÷è ó ëàì³íàëüíîìó ïðîñòîð³ ñâî¿õ àìåðèêàíñüêèõ êâàðòèð, ïåðåáóâàþòü ó ñòàí³ åíòðîﳿ, ó êóëüòóðíîìó õàîñ³, àäæå äîñ³ â³ä÷óâàþòü ïåâíèé ñòóï³íü íåâèçíà÷åíîñò³, ïåðåáóâàþòü «ì³æ». Äëÿ ãåðî¿â Ëàã³ð³ ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß ñïðàâä³ çäàòíå «çì³íèòè ñâ³ò», ³ ìîæëèâî á³ëüøå, í³æ ìîâà. Áàãàòüîì æ³íî÷èì ïåðñîíàæàì íå ïîòð³áíî âèêîðèñòîâóâàòè ìîâó, ùîá ïîðîçóì³òèñÿ îäèí ç îäíèì, ³ öÿ íàâìèñíà â³äñóòí³ñòü ìîâè ñëóæèòü äëÿ íèõ çàñîáîì, çà äîïîìîãîþ ÿêîãî âîíè íàáóâàþòü á³ëüøîãî äîñâ³äó. Ó äåÿêèõ òâîðàõ â³äáóâàºòüñÿ òðàíñôîðìàö³ÿ ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß. Äëÿ áàãàòüîõ ãåðî¿â ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß íå º çàõèñòîì ÷è íàâìèñíèì ³ãíîðóâàííÿì, âîíî «æèâå» ³ ïðîñÿêíóòå â³äêðèò³ñòþ ñâîãî äóõó. ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß íå ïîçáàâëÿº ãåðî¿â ¿õíüî¿ ³äåíòè÷íîñò³, à ñòâîðþº «¿õíþ» ³äåíòè÷í³ñòü. Õî÷à ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß ïîâ'ÿçàíå ç ñèìâîë³÷íîþ «ìåëîä³éí³ñòþ», à òàêîæ «ñóìîì», öå íå çàâæäè îçíà÷àº, ùî â ìîâ÷àíí³ ëþäèíà ñòðàæäàº. Íàòîì³ñòü «äåãóñòàö³ÿ ÌÎÂ×ÀÍÍß» - öå ñïîñ³á îá'ºäíàòèñÿ ÷åðåç ñòðàæäàííÿ, à òàêîæ çíàéòè «ñâ ì³ñöå â íîâîìó êóëüòóðíîìó ñåðåäîâèù³.

Êëþ÷îâ³ ñëîâà: íåâåðáàëüíà êîìóí³êàö³ÿ, ìîòèâ ñàìîòíîñò³, ³íàêø³ñòü, êîíöåïò «÷³ììîêó», ìèíóëå.

Introduction

Nowadays we live under globalization umbrella that eliminated the boundaries between cultures and made the aspects of each culture relatively known to others. Cultures are different but alike as well. There are major similarities in “body language” (laughing, nodding, whispering, eye contact etc. as opposed to differences in shouting, crying, handshaking and greetings (which is due to cultural belonging). Language is not just a means of communication but has a number of functions to perform in society. People's interaction from different backgrounds has led societies to be multicultural ones.

Communication can be oral or written, and non-verbal (we mean “kinesics”, the so-called “body language”). Compared to oral or written communication, paralanguage is considered to be a difficult one. Non-verbal elements are bound up with culture.

The purpose of the article is to analyze the specificity of SILENCE concept in Jhumpa Lahiri's writing as a personification of Asian identity in the context of transcultural paradigm.

Analysis of recent research and publications

Despite the presence of scientific works of foreign critics (T. Bhalla (2012), K. Chatterjee (2016), S. Dasgupta (2011), N. Friedman (2008), R. Heinze (2007), F. Kral (2007), S. Lutzoni (2017), B.W. Noelle (2004), A. Rizzo (2012), A. Shankar Saha (2012) and others), Jhumpa Lahiri's writing is not fully investigated, which determines further theoretical studies in a transculture context.

Critics' main attention is reduced to the identity analysis, gastronomic issues, gender characteristics and immigrants' experiences in a new cultural environment. However, only a few foreign researchers addressed SILENCE issue in Lahiri's writing (but briefly): I. Ishrat “Translating the aching absence and screaming SILENCE: a study of diasporic experiences of the characters in the selected stories of Jhumpa Lahiri” (Ishrat, 2020), L. Neary “Political violence, uneasy SILENCE echo in Lahiri's “Lowland” (Neary, 2013), I. Phabha Pathak “SILENCE and the Need for Communication in the Short Stories of Jhumpa Lahiri” (Phabha, 2013). It all determines the article's relevance as SILENCE concept is also important, especially in the context of the basic transculture positions.

Investigation methods

In the article we used the following methods: cultural and historical (defining the role and place of Lahiri's writing in US literature of the twentieth century), historical and typological (determining the specifics of themes, motifs, images, story features of the writer's works), functional (clarifying the features of Lahiri's poetics), hermeneutic (interpretation of various aspects of the literary text), narratological analysis (specifics' analysis of Lahiri's narrative manner), biographical (revealing the reflection of author's personal experience in her writing), the principles of postcolonial and decolonial criticism (rethinking the problem of “otherness” in transculture discourse).

The presentation of the main material

SILENCE manifests itself in various spheres of human existence. It can be monologic, i.e. exist outside of dialogue, and dialogical as an important component in the communication process. What appears in SILENCE dialogue is inevitably has to be interpreted, so there should be no meaning gaps. Depending on the cultural affiliation, such verbal “non-designation” leads to different interpretations of SILENCE, including distortion and misunderstanding of meanings. SILENCE can express a large number of meanings, be a symbol of harmony or, on the contrary, disagreement; and the cultural component plays an important role here.

A peculiar reflection of SILENCE phenomenon is found in fiction, where SILENCE is presented in a dialogic fragment, and often in a monologue one. The study of SILENCE phenomenon makes it possible to consider the structuring mechanism of communication act between the characters in the literary work, to determine the regularities of characters' SLENCE, and to reveal SILENCE reasons.

In Jhumpa Lahiri's poetics (an American writer of Bengali origin) SILENCE concept is expanded due to the cultural component: immigrants are silent not because of anger or disagreement, but because of their cultural “otherness”, isolation (both physical and imaginary), and because of the language barrier. In this way SILENCE becomes a component of fictional communication with “ours”, and represents this “fictional” reality as literary phenomenon.

SILENCE is an important item of the transcultural component of Lahiri's writing, where a woman usually plays the symbolic role of “invisible existence” and is associated with a maid who knows only how to cook dinner and wash socks. A similar motif in seen in “Hema and Kaushik” (from “Unaccustomed Earth”, 2008): “Chitra hovered over my father and me and the girls, eating privately after we were done, the way our maids would in Bombay” (Lahiri, 2008, p. 183). By this SILENCE Chitra follows “her” cultural code, because like the food concept, SILENCE determines Asian woman's identity. Such submissiveness is a central female trait in China. The ability to cook, being focused on washing, do not like entertainments, deal with drinks and food, as well as serve to guests has to be a woman's work.

The “domestic” SILENCE paradigm for an Indian woman is presented in “Hell-Heaven” (from “Unaccustomed Earth”, 2008), where the main character Aparna hardly communicates with her husband: “My father was a lover of SILENCE and solitude. He had married my mother to placate his parents; they were willing to accept his desertion as long as he had a wife” (Lahiri, 2008, p. 49). In real her husband was “married” to his work and to his research. He existed in his own world, understood by him only (neither his wife nor his daughter had “access” there). Even any nonwork-related conversation was a real challenge for Shymail, and he didn't want to waste his precious time talking nonsense.

SILENCE does not satisfy Aparna from “Hell-Heaven”, because her existence is very limited: it is both by her gender as well as by the tense relationship with her husband. Like many other Bengali women, she has had an arranged marriage but in real the couple shares very few common interests. Most of the day she spends in the house cooking and cleaning.

While reading the text we notice that Aparna “never worked, and her life purpose was to serve her daughter and husband, who did not praise her for her delicious food and never used kind words addressing her” (Yalovenko, 2022, p. 162). This is proved in the episode during the meal, when only the sound of a knife and fork breaks the apartment's usual SILENCE: “As usual, my father said nothing in response to my mother's commentary, quietly and methodically working though his meal, his fork and knife occasionally squeaking against the surface of the china, because he was accustomed to eating with his hands” (Lahiri, 2008, p. 273). The woman feels inner loneliness, and this is clearly seen in her behavior, because the amenities of still foreign American apartment will never replace “her” space: “I would return from school and find my mother with her purse in her lap and her trench coat on, desperate to escape the apartment where she had spent the day alone” (Lahiri, 2008, p. 48).

From the very beginning we see Aparna in her emotional apathy, she is “locked” in her house and the only time she leaves the house is when Usha comes back from school. In this case we completely agree with S. Raj, who notes the following about women: “physically they are in America, but mentally in South Asia. They deal with loneliness and dislocation, cultural displacement, a sense of identity and belonging to Indian and American cultures, taking into account the small details” (Raj, 2016, p. 460).

A slightly different paradigm of SILENCE concept (which is also characterized with a cultural component) can be seen in K. Mori's works. The writer has repeatedly emphasized the women's depressed position in Japanese society, where she (a woman) is beautiful through silent suffering and self-effacement. In this way, SILENCE as an established “Chimmoku” concept is both an element of non-verbal communication and an important cultural code However, the gradual women participation in the use of language (we can compare it with “chimmoku” SILENCE concept) leads to the creation of codes' subsystem that is used specifically by women and is also oriented to their interest. Of course, this system is derived from the male one, but it is specific for the female audience in a number of individual features..

In “The Namesake” (2003) the limited space is identical to transitivity, border being, when you are no longer there, but not yet here: “Though they are home they are disconcerted by the space, by the uncompromising SILENCE that surrounds them. They still feel somehow in transit, still disconnected from their lives, bound up in an alternate schedule, an intimacy only the four of them share” (Lahiri, 2003, p. 61). It is Ashima who feels the most “her” transit state, which is also realized through SILENCE, sadness and depression: “On more than one occasion he has come home from the university to find her morose, in bed, rereading her parents' letters. Early mornings, when he senses that she is quietly crying, he puts an arm around her but can think of nothing to say, feeling that it is his fault, for marrying her, for bringing her here” (Lahiri, 2003, p. 26).

A similar motif associated with forced SILENCE is seen in “Mrs. Sen's” (from “Interpreter of Maladies”, 1999), where the main character Mrs. Sen is in limited space of her comfortable but in real “foreign” apartment. Mrs. Sen exists beyond time and just getting used to American life. Here she finds no laughing and gossiping of her near and dear ones while cooking or performing daily household chores. She wants to give a long loud scream, but there is no one to listen to what she wants to utter. Looking at a pine tree framed by the living room window of their apartment, Mrs. Sen murmurs. Again SILENCE concept is important here; this quiet place has silenced her inner cry and the absence of her own home in India throws her into a pool of extreme unhappiness.

We notice how skillfully Mrs. Sen's psychological portrait is painted. The extreme feelings of melancholy and wish to meet with her own people have deeply been exposed when Mrs. Sen mentions about her relatives living in India. She feels she is invariably distant from the life that goes on in India; she even cannot imagine herself as a stranger to her niece. The heroine shares her dejected position to Eliot, mentioning her sister who has a baby girl. Whenever time will come to meet her “she will be three years old. Her own aunt will be a stranger” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 122). Thus she opens up her mind to narrate her life similar to a doleful one, a life without hope. It is painful for Mrs. Sen to become a stranger to her own niece.

Both the cooking tools and a cassette recording with the voice of her relatives help Mrs. Sen to surrender to her happy past. The death news of her grandfather has made her absent minded. That is why the blade never appears from the cupboard, even getting a whole fish from the fish market does not interest Mrs. Sen (and these details are so important for her). She keeps her confined in the apartment and refuses to learn driving.

Moreover, it is Beethoven who fails to cheer her up. While listening to a tape which voices of her relatives, Mrs. Sen starts translating for Eliot what they say. In this case SILENCE concept is opposed to communication act: it is Mrs. Sen who became lingual mediator between so far India and close America. As the succession of voices begins to laugh, she identifies each speaker saying: “My third uncle, my cousin, my father, my grandfather” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 128). Actually Mrs. Sen never desires to detach herself from India, she still wails to roam in her imaginary homeland. By listening to those voices and hear the same story, Mrs. Sen posits her existence in the perpetual past.

We notice that Mrs. Sen contrasts America's loneliness with the community she had in Calcutta: “Here, in this place where Mrs. Sen has brought me, I cannot sometimes sleep in so much SILENCE” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 128). She describes Indian women preparing food together and talking late to the night.

At the same time, the heroine is disturbed by the sounds outside her apartment. We mean the image of a tree, which “interferes” in Mrs. Sen's SILENCE. Along with the fact that in America she can't sleep “in so much SILENCE” she finds it difficult to asleep as well; and in this context SILENCE is compared to outside noises. “It is impossible to fall asleep those nights, listening to their chatter. She paused to look at a pine tree framed by the living room window” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 128).

The heroine naively models a situation that is artificial for America, but familiar to her: what would happen if she went beyond the usual boundaries of American life and started making loud noise: “Eliot, if I began to scream right now at the top of my lungs, would someone come?” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 63). But the answer Mrs. Sen heard was as blurred as would be the possible behavior of Americans towards a stranger (by the way, involving one of the elements of non-verbal communication “to shrug”): “Eliot shrugged.

Maybe” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 63).

We notice that this unbearable SILENCE is completely strange for Mrs. Sen. She casually compares the usual bustle of Calcutta family and this absolute SILENCE in America: “At home that is all you have to do. Not everybody has a telephone. But just raise your voice a bit, or express grief or joy of any kind, and one whole neighborhood and half of another has come to share the news, to help with arrangements” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 63). Little Eliot gives his explanation, because excessive noise is not welcome in America: “They might call you”, Eliot said eventually to Mrs. Sen. “But they might complain that you were making too much noise” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 63). Such American SILENCE only increases Mrs. Sen's feeling of loneliness.

The repeated image of the window and that pine tree (as well as the image of her apartment) becomes a connecting element between the interior of the house and the natural world outside (where the usual life rhythm is raging), and also the apartment's threshold - a “border” that no one (except her husband and little Eliot) is allowed to cross.

Sometimes Mrs. Sen sits hours in SILENCE, which does not bother her at all. In this context SILENCE is the most beautiful symphony; air breathed in SILENCE is sweeter and sadder, it affords even the smallest gestures significance and grace. Often she realizes that SILENCE in her room is great, as well as usual roar and the dust outside. Her little room, her little circle, is a “depot”, a pause, for the weary traveler, but outside of her little world there is cultural dissonance, uncertainty, border and the travel she must do.

“Mrs. Sen's” depicts a relationship between two lonely and isolated people. Throughout the story, Lahiri emphasizes the characters' near-total isolation, which is directly close to SILENCE concept. We see that aside from each other, Eliot and Mrs. Sen are connected to almost nobody. Eliot has his mother, but she works long hours, and Mrs. Sen has Mr. Sen, who is likewise rarely at home. Both Mr. Sen and Eliot's mother seem emotionally distant from their dearest people.

The author repeatedly emphasizes how isolating the environment they live in is: the bus has few passengers, many stores are closed for winter, the tourist season is over, and the seaside town is mostly empty. Beyond their personal lives, Eliot and Mrs. Sen lack community where they live. This isolation is clearly seen when Mrs. Sen picks Eliot up from the bus stop. The boy always feels that “Mrs. Sen has been waiting for some time, as if eager to greet a person she hadn t seen in years” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 64).

Like most of Lahiri's female characters, Mrs. Sen is “locked” in her apartment for days. As a result, for Mrs. Sen's sensitive image, both the window and the apartment are a full-fledged barrier that ensures a conscious non-communication process. There is a “zero” speech act, which is occasionally interrupted by the presence of little Eliot (she looks after him when he returns from school). Eliot notices that Mrs. Sen is lonely and misses her home, but he doesn't talk about it with her, thereby increasing the SILENCE.

The boy's presence does not at all prevent Mrs. Sen from keeping SILENCE: “In SILENCE she prepared crackers with peanut butter for Eliot, then sat reading old aerograms from a shoebox” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 68); “In SILENCE Eliot and Mrs. Sen ate the last few clam cakes in the bag” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 71); “They drove in SILENCE, along the same roads that Eliot and his mother took back to the beach house each evening” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 68).

This “zero” speech act is conveyed by language means (SILENCE, pauses, internal thoughts and conversations) - “reading old aerograms” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 68) and fiction ones (it is seen with unfinished sentences in the text): “Eliot's mother nodded, too, looking around the room. “And that's all ... in India?” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 62). It cannot be said that there are no sounds or background noises in Mrs. Sen's room. The only sound of the door in the living space and the blade sound, which Mrs. Sen uses when cuts vegetables, is often inanimate and uncommunicative.

The heroine “immerses” in mechanically repeated actions, and it is this daily routine that causes a state of indifference to the world around. Mrs. Sen is in a liminal space impenetrable to others, in the so-called “muteness”, which makes it impossible to connect with the nature.

Little Eliot's voice does not become a final victory over SILENCE, the lyrical heroine faces its return when she is alone again. A comfortably furnished room immediately evokes an association with a symbolic “prison”, with forced standing facing the wall (we mean conditional conversation with herself). In fact, the world outside the window is alive (there are many people on the streets, and everyone is busy with his own affairs), but in contrast to the SILENCE imprisoned in everyday life, a much more tragic picture emerges, which is the final stage of the destructive processes began in Mrs. Sen's personal space.

Instead of a “step” to the window, the heroine stands in recollection, remaining in her silent room. The only place where SILENCE does not penetrate is the sleep space, where there are vague visions of the unreal. That is why Mrs. Sen reads and often re-reads letters from home, in order to bring closer some elements of “her”: “At home, you know, we have a driver ... Everything is there” (Lahiri, 1999, p. 62). Such a passive recollection, which does not become a word and is not realized in the present, is powerless and does not change anything (although the events are no longer relevant, they are still “alive” for the heroine).

For Jhumpa Lahiri SILENCE far from being empty, avoidant or submissive is an alternative means of expression, communication or storytelling, and also it is a way of symbolic “survival” in an oppressive world. SILENCE is a conscious choice, and a form of resistance through which it is easy to transcend usual. For Lahiri's characters, SILENCE truly has the capacity to “change the world” and perhaps yet more than, impassioned speech. Many female characters like Mrs. Sen do not need to use language in order to perform a sense of community with one another, and this deliberate absence of language serves a means through which they can experience more.

Another SILENCE paradigm is seen in “The Namesake”, when the main character grieves over the death of his father: “He spends a few minutes reading through the manual, comparing the features of the dashboard to the illustration in the book. He turns the wipers on and off and tests the headlights even though it's still daylight. He shuts off the radio, drives in SILENCE through the cold, bleak afternoon, through the flat, charmless town he will never visit again” (Lahiri, 2003, p. 118). In this way, the inner language is important, which has a huge interpretive potential and acts as a mean of conveying such states of the character: “He watches the sky whiten, listens as the perfect SILENCE is replaced by the faintest hum of distant traffic, until suddenly he succumbs, for a few hours, to the deepest sleep possible, his mind blank and undisturbed, his limbs motionless, weighted down” (Lahiri, 2003, p. 121).

Gogol's SILEnCe is not forced, but is accompanied by such non-verbal components as a pause and inner speech: “drives in SILENCE”; “listens as the perfect SILENCE is replaced by the faintest hum of distant traffic”, etc. It should be mentioned, that there are many such neutral lexemes in Lahiri's stories, but often they allow the reader to think about the reasons for the character's SILENCE.

Conclusions

As we can sure, SILENCE concept has a special place in Lahiri's dynamic poetics. It was influenced by the writer's state of mind, because the understanding of this concept is conditioned by despair, cultural difference and parting with “ours”. The characters' language is important of course, but what was not said for certain reasons, something which turned out to be hidden behind SILENCE, is no less important.

On the example of Lahiri's selected stories we notice that not only the woman considers herself speechless or “mute”. A man in his attitude towards a woman also a priori considers her to have no voice of her own, and therefore he does not need her answer. Therefore, the female characters' SILENCE is painful from their own powerlessness and from their habit of not arguing with a man; a symbolic “answer” is hidden in SILENCE. In this context, the symbolic woman's speechlessness was compared to “the voice without body” concept, which T Belyanina appeals to.

In Lahiri's works SILENCE concept is peculiarly actualized both language images and non-verbal elements, aimed at alienation motif. In this way SILENCE concept is combined with “invisibility” of Bengali woman, in particular with clothes and its colors, because often in female characters' appearance one feels the inner desire to be alone, to disappear, and to be unnoticed.

Culturally significant SILENCE concept is one of the key elements in Lahiri's poetics. SILENCE combines two distinct components: women invisibility / visibility (when a woman is being objectified). Another important subtext is also presented in her works, when perceived noncommunication moves into a qualitatively different paradigm, a transcultural one.

Have analyzed some Jhumpa Lahiri's stories, we clearly see that all of them include transformation of SILENCE power. For many female characters SILENCE is not defensive or willfully ignorant, it is “alive” and suffused with openness of its spirit.

SILENCE does not strip characters of their identity, but creates “their” identity. Though SILENCE is connected with symbolic “sweetness” as well as “sadness,” this does not always mean that in SILENCE one remains rooted in suffering. Instead, “tasting the SILENCE” is a way of connecting across suffering, as well as finding “own” place in a new cultural environment.

Bibliography

1. Bhalla T. Being (and Feeling) Gogol: Reading and Recognition in Jhumpa Lahiri's “The Namesake”. MELUS: Multi-Ethnic Literature of the U.S. 2012. ¹ 37 (1). Ð. 105-129.

2. Chatterjee K. Negotiating Homelessness through Culinary Imagination: the Metaphor of Food in Jhumpa Lahiri's “Interpreter of Maladies”. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities. 2016. ¹ 8 (3). Ð 197-205.

3. Dasgupta S. Jhumpa Lahri's “Namesake”: Reviewing the Russian Connection. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities. 2011. ¹ 3 (4). Ð. 530-544.

4. Friedman N. From Hybrids to Tourists: Children of Immigrants in Jhumpa Lahiri's “The Namesake”. Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction, 2008. ¹ 50 (1). Ð. 111-128.

5. Heinze R. A Diasporic overcoat? Naming and Affection in Jhumpa Lahiri's “The Namesake”. Journal of Postcolonial Writing. 2007. ¹ 43 (2). Ð. 191-202.

6. Ishrat I. Translating the aching absence and screaming SILENCE: a study of diasporic experiences of the characters in the selected stories of Jhumpa Lahiri. Ideas. Vol. 5. 2019-2020. P. 62-72.

7. Kral F. Shaky Ground and New Territorialities in Brick Lane by Monica Ali and The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri. Journal of Postcolonial Writing. 2007. ¹ 43 (1). Ð. 65-76.

8. Lahiri J. Interpreter of Maladies. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1999. 198 p.

9. Lahiri J. The Namesake. A Mariner Book, Houghton Miflin Company. Boston, New York. 2003. 195 p.

10. Lahiri J. Unaccustomed Earth. New York, Toronto: Manotosh Biswas, 2008. 331 p.

11. Lutzoni S. Jhumpa Lahiri and the Grammar of a Multi-Layered Identity. Journal of Intercultural Studies. 2017. ¹ 38 (1). Ð. 108-118.

12. Neary L. Political violence, uneasy SILENCE echo in Lahiri's “Lowland”. URL: https://www.npr.org/2013/09/23/224404507/political-violence-uneasy-silence-echo-in-lahiris-lowland (last accessed: November, 21, 2022).

13. Noelle B.W. Reading Jhumpa Lahiri's Interpreter of Maladies as a Short Story Cycle.MELUS. 2004. ¹ 29 (3-4). Ð. 451-464.

14. Phabha Pathak. SILENCE and the Need for Communication in the Short Stories of Jhumpa Lahiri. The Criterion: An International Journal in English. August, 2013. vol. 4. issue IV. URL: https://www.the-criterion.com/V4/n4/Indu.pdf (last accessed: November, 21, 2022).

15. Raj S.A. Cultural Alienation in Jhumpa Lahiri's Short Stories “Interpreter of Maladies”. International Journal of English Language, Literature and Humanities. Jan. 2016. Vol. 4. Issue 1. P. 459-470.

16. Rizzo A. Translation and Billinguism in Monica Ali's and Jhumpa Lahiri's Marginalized Identities. Text Matter. 2012. ¹ 2 (2). Ð. 264-275.

17. Shankar Saha. A. The Indian Diaspora and Reading Desai, Mukherjee, Gupta and Lahiri. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture. 2012. ¹ 14 (2). Ð. 9.

18. Yalovenko Olha. New Interpretation of Gender Relations in Jhumpa Lahiri's “Hell-Heaven”. Àêòóàëüí³ ïèòàííÿ ãóìàí³òàðíèõ íàóê. ̳æâóç³âñüêèé çá³ðíèê íàóêîâèõ ïðàöü ìîëîäèõ â÷åíèõ Äðîãîáèöüêîãî äåðæàâíîãî ïåäàãîã³÷íîãî óí³âåðñèòåòó ³ìåí³ ²âàíà Ôðàíêà. 2022. ¹ 47 (4). Ñ. 159-165.

References

1. Bhalla, T. (2012). Being (and Feeling) Gogol: Reading and Recognition in Jhumpa Lahiri's “The Namesake”. MELUS: Multi-Ethnic Literature of the U.S. ¹ 37 (1). Ð. 105-129.

2. Chatterjee, K. (2016). Negotiating Homelessness through Culinary Imagination: the Metaphor of Food in Jhumpa Lahiri's “Interpreter of Maladies”. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities. ¹ 8 (3). Ð 197-205.

3. Dasgupta, S. (2011). Jhumpa Lahri's “Namesake”: Reviewing the Russian Connection. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities. ¹ 3 (4). Ð. 530-544.

4. Friedman, N. (2008). From Hybrids to Tourists: Children of Immigrants in Jhumpa Lahiri's “The Namesake”. Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction, 2008. ¹ 50 (1). Ð 111-128.

5. Heinze, R. (2007). A Diasporic overcoat? Naming and Affection in Jhumpa Lahiri's “The Namesake”. Journal of Postcolonial Writing. ¹ 43 (2). Ð. 191-202.

6. Ishrat, I. (2019-2022). Translating the aching absence and screaming SILENCE: a study of diasporic experiences of the characters in the selected stories of Jhumpa Lahiri. Ideas. Vol. 5. P. 62-72.

7. Kral, F. (2007). Shaky Ground and New Territorialities in Brick Lane by Monica Ali and The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri. Journal of Postcolonial Writing. ¹ 43 (1). Ð. 65-76.

8. Lahiri, J. (1999). Interpreter of Maladies. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. 198 p.

9. Lahiri, J. (2003). The Namesake. A Mariner Book, Houghton Miflin Company. Boston, New York. 195 p.

10. Lahiri, J. (2008). UnaccustomedÅarth. New York, Toronto: Manotosh Biswas.

11. Lutzoni, S. (2017). Jhumpa Lahiri and the Grammar of a Multi-Layered Identity. Journal of Intercultural Studies. ¹ 38 (1). Ð. 108-118.

12. Neary, L. Political violence, uneasy SILENCE echo in Lahiri's “Lowland”. URL: https://www.npr.org/2013/09/23/224404507/political-violence-uneasy-silence-echo-in-lahiris-lowland (last accessed: November, 21, 2022).

13. Noelle, B.W. (2004). Reading Jhumpa Lahiri's Interpreter of Maladies as a Short Story Cycle.MELUS. ¹ 29 (3-4). Ð. 451-464.

14. Phabha. P. (2013). SILENCE and the Need for Communication in the Short Stories of Jhumpa Lahiri. The Criterion: An International Journal in English. August, vol. 4. issue IV. URL: https://www.the-criterion.com/V4/n4/Indu.pdf (last accessed: November, 21, 2022).

15. Raj, S.A. (2016). Cultural Alienation in Jhumpa Lahiri's Short Stories “Interpreter of Maladies”. International Journal of English Language, Literature and Humanities. Jan. Vol. 4. Issue 1. P. 459-470.

16. Rizzo, A. (2012). Translation and Billinguism in Monica Ali's and Jhumpa Lahiri's Marginalized Identities. Text Matter. ¹ 2 (2). Ð. 264-275.

17. Shankar, S. (2012). A. The Indian Diaspora and Reading Desai, Mukherjee, Gupta and Lahiri. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture. ¹ 14 (2). Ð. 9.

18. Yalovenko, O. (2022). New Interpretation of Gender Relations in Jhumpa Lahiri's “Hell-Heaven”. [Current issues of humanitarian sciences]. ¹ 47 (4). Ð. 159-165.

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru