“Paradise Pickles and Preserves. It lay between the house and the river. They
used to make pickles, squashes, jams, curry powders and canned pineapples.
And banana jam (illegally) after the FPO (Food Products Organization)
banned it because according to their specifications it was neither jam nor jelly.
Too thin for jelly and too thick for jam. An ambiguous, unclassifiable
consistency they said. Looking back now, to Rahel it seemed as though this
difficulty that their family had with classification ran much deeper than the jamjelly question” (Roy, 1998, pp. 30-31)
The aim of this essay is to critically reflect on the above-mentioned quote, with
specific reference as to how the issue of classification that the Ipe family
faced resulted in many difficulties not only amongst the members of the Ipe
family itself, but also in the family’s relationship with the larger community.
This will be done by firstly considering the historical and societal context in
which “The God of Small Things” is based, before considering and analyzing
the social obligation, love, familial duty and personal dislikes in the
complicated relationships, within the family itself and with the larger
community, that each Ipe family member struggles with (Cosby, 2014). In
conclusion the essay will illustrate how such complicated relationships and the
difficulty that the Ipe family has with classification ultimately manifests itself in
tragedy that not only affects the Ipe family, but also the larger community.
In order to properly understand the classification issues that the Ipe family
face in ‘The God of Small Things’, one must first understand the historical
context in which the novel is based as well as the societal norms and laws
followed in much of India at the time. The novel takes place mostly during
1969 and 1993 in Ayemenem, a district found in the Indian state of Kerala
(Cosby, 2014) and follows the story of the Ipe family, an upper caste, Syrian
Christian family. During this time India can be described as being a country
“rooted in caste structure, patriarchal family hierarchies, class divisions, and
diverse religions” (Needham, 2005, pp. 372) It is, however, also during this
time (1969) that Marxist ideas gained popularity in the larger society of Kerala
and the class system of laborers and landlords began to experience the first
signs of turmoil (Cosby, 2014), as seen when the communist party leader
Comrade Pillai (whom also prints labels for Paradise Pickles) urges the other
workers of Paradise Pickles on to revolution (Roy, 1998, p. 120).
In addition to the historical context of the novel, the societal norms and
practices of the time must too be considered. In fact, majority of the difficulties
that the Ipe family face, with regards to classification, is the direct result of the
implementation or transgression of such social norms and practices by the
various members of the Ipe family. The novel focuses on how social norms
influence every part of society; with rules dictating how each person should or
should not act according to their gender, class division and most notably
according to the caste system (Shakely, 2005, p.1). Whilst the Caste system
was outlawed in the 1950’s, it still remained “strongly imprinted on the minds
of the public” (Cosby, 2014) as seen through the ‘Love Laws’ – “the laws that
lay down who should be loved, and how.” (Roy, 1998, p. 33) and the divide
between Touchables (such as the members of the Ipe family) and
Untouchables (a caste seen as extremely inferior) (such as Velutha and his
father, Vellya Paapen)(Roy, 1998).
As stated above, each of the Ipe family members struggle with social
obligation, love, familial duty and personal dislike in their relationships (Cosby,
2014), most of the characters are forced to cross moral boundaries at some
point throughout the novel (Shakely, 2005). The two types of morality (moral
boundaries) that are dealt with and ultimately overlap throughout “God of
Small Things”, is social morality, which can be defined as what a group thinks
is good and right or the way one should behave” (Shakely, 2005) and
individual morality, which can be defined as “what oneself thinks is the right
way to act” (Shakely, 2005). The difficulties that the Ipe family face with
classification is a result of the overlapping of two moralities mentioned above.