Who Is Jhumpa Lahiri's A Temporary Matter?

The comparison of Jhumpa Lahiri’s “A Temporary Matter” to “Interpreter Of Maladies”, converges upon a single, salient point of thematic interest: issues like double-sided swords in life. Conventionally, a double-sided sword performs both favourable and unfavorable consequences of an issue on the protagonists. Nothing is absolutely positive or negative. The protagonists of these stories, both meet struggles in their lives, but these struggles also provide opportunities for them to solve more important problems they previously had. Double-sided swords most aptly describes the roles of Shoba, Shukumar, Mrs. Das, and Bobby. They all meet matters that also bring positive sides to them. While these people all meet problems in their family, they

ultimately benefit from their problems because the changes they make. Lahiri uses the final achievements of the two families to suggest that most problems in families are like double-edged swords; people should face their problems instead of worrying about them because they may benefit from their problems.

Lahiri uses the darkness like a double-edged sword because it brings temporary problems but also improves communication between Shoba and Shukumar. Shoba and her husband, Shukumar, meet a contemporary matter in their home: “for five days their electricity would be cut off for one hour, beginning at eight P.M” because “a line had gone down in the last snowstorm” (1). The setting of the story is directly related to the title “A Temporary Matter”. The couple don’t have access to electricity, which means they have to spend their time in darkness and seems to foreshadow more problems they will meet in this situation. Up to now, They eat dinner separately: Shoba in front of television and Shukumar in front of computer. A gap has existed between them as Shumkumar didn’t accompany with Shoba when their baby had been stillborn. When Shumkumar returns to Boston, “the baby had been born dead” (3). “In a wing of the hospital they hadn’t been to on the tour for expectant parents”(3). Their baby’s death leads to the alienation between the couple and seems to reveal Shumkumar’s irresponsibility

to his family. The Point-of-View throughout the story is omniscient because the story has a third-person point-of-view character but the narrator also knows character's interior thoughts. Lahiri also uses analogy, which serves to suggest the reason of the couple’s alienation and the contemporary matter of communication between them because of the failure of being “expectant parents”. Nevertheless, Schumukar still pays attention to Shoba. He wakes up and looks at her every morning as he opens his eyes and “see the long black hairs she shed on her pillow and think of her” (3). Through the details of Shoba’s “black hair”, indicates Schumukar’s affection of her. The color of her hair not only shows Shoba’s identity but also foreshadows the opportunity between them to communicate with each other again in the darkness. As the electricity goes off, it reminds Shoba of Indian dinners at her grandma’s home. Thus, she suggests confessing something they have never revealed before to each other. During each dark night, they tell each other their “secrets”. When the house is dark, they are able to “talk to each other again”. One night after supper, “they’d sat together on the sofa, and once it was dark he began kissing her awkwardly on her forehead and her face”. When they walk upstairs, to bed, “feeling together for the final step with their feet before landing”, and Shoba “traced his eyebrows with her finger in the dark” (14). Through their close movements in the darkness with each other, love seems to be reproduced between them. Lahiri uses a lot of details of movements to indicate the positive side darkness brings to them: communication and taking care of each other again. As normal, ready for the dinner, Shukumar has “the candles ready on the countertop, standing in brass holders shaped like lotuses” (10). Even if an insignificant setting of the dinner, Shukumar prepares carefully. Lahiri uses simile--compares “candles on the countertop” with “lotuses”--to suggest the environment of their communication. Furthermore, lotuses in indian culture symbolize how people can become awakened to the spiritual reality. They indicate the communication between them is not only confession and honesty, but also spiritual contact, which is imperative in redeeming love. When the lights are back, Shoba tells Shumukumar the decision of buying another apartment to separate with him. In the end, Shumukumar tells her his last “secret”: “our baby is a boy” (15). Shoba finally turns out the light and they “weep together” (16). In the darkness, Shumukmar confesses the truth that he goes to the hospital and holds the baby. He is not as irresponsible as Shoba assumes and she misunderstands him. Lahiri uses an ambiguous ending since it does not directly indicates what happens between the couple but an action of turning off the lights. Darkness is like a double-edged sword: it seems to bring inconvenience between the protagonists, but ends up making them closer.
Lahiri uses the monkeys as a double-edged sword to reveal that they physically hurt Bobby, but enable Mrs. Das to redeem for her betrayal and bring harmony to the fa]mily. The Das family go to India for vocation and hire Mr. Kapasi as their tourist guide. Ronny, Tina, and Bobby are all kids in the family. Mr. Das calls his wife’s name differently and speaks in an unusual way with his kids. Mr. Kapasi think Mr. and Mrs. Das treat their children like siblings rather kids. The Das see a lot of monkeys on their way and seem to be interested in them. Mrs. Das tells Mr. Kapasi the secret that her son, Bobby, is her and another man’s son to seek for Mr. Kapasi’s help. As Mrs. Das confeesess, “He did not know that he was Bobby’s father. He never would” (64). Mrs. Das directly tells Kapasi the relationship between Bobby and Mr. Das. At this point, Mrs. Das obviously wants to keep the secret forever and never confessed to her husband and children. In response, Mr. Kapasi asked, “Is it really pain you feel, Mrs. Das, or is it guilt?” (66). The language Kapasi uses is solemn, which emphasises the important consequences of betrayal and necessity of remedy. Lahiri’s writing also focuses on diction. Kapasi compares the word “pain” with “guilt” in order to differ unintentional faults in life from dishonesty and suggests her to confess to her family. Mrs. Das realizes what he means and goes to join her family, but her son, Bobby is missed. They find him surrounded by a group of noisy monkeys and is hurt in chaos. Over a dozen of monkeys, “pulling at his T-shirt with their long black fingers” (67). Bobby is in silent; “his body frozen, swift tears running down his startled face.” His legs are “dusty and red with welts from where one of the monkeys struck him repeatedly with the stick he had given to it earlier”(68). Through the details of Bobby’s scars and reactions, reveals that the monkeys have seriously hurt him physically. In this scene, monkeys attack him “with the stick he had given” to them, which reveals that they to some extent also betrays Bobby. This foreshadows if Mrs. Das doesn’t redeem her betrayal, she will also end up giving bad impressions on others like the monkeys. Fortunately, the Das family take care of Bobby together although they seem have already the “secret” of him. “Mr. Das brushed some dirt off the boy’s T-shirt and put the visor on him the right way. Mrs. Das reached into her straw bag to find a bandage which she taped over the cut on his knee. Ronny offered his brother a fresh piece of gum” (68). They are like a real family now. The last scene symbolizes harmony in the family. At this point, the scars the monkeys causes play a positive side in the family. Mrs. Das is able to redeem herself and the family is full of love and care.
The author uses the unique situations of the Das and Shumukar family like double-sided swords in order to show some problems in people’s lives end up benefiting themselves. The problems they meet bring both negative and positive sides to them. The process of these families facing and dealing with these problems with detailed description enriches the characters with credibility and authenticity, a credit to the writer who crafted them. It is remarkable that Lahiri convey a common theme through the two families, of such different backgrounds, in two separate stories with conflicts. Connecting with problems in our lives, struggles we meet can also sometimes avoid us from another more serious problem. The complete understand of problems is one of the most crucial part to achieve success. As a Canadian celebrity, Rachel Sklar, explains, “Seeing how easy it has been to use Twitter for good has exposed the double-edged sword of how easy it could be to co-opt.” She penetrates the negative side of a problem and uses an example of social media to explain double-sided sword.