1
Shane Pryde
Julie Cairnie
ENG2200
November 13, 2023
Close Reading 2; Passage 2: “My Son the Fanatic”
Opening Statement
A closer look at this passage offers insight to Ali’s perspective and reasoning. Ali is
presented as confident and ‘fluent’ in his views, as he has clear arguments for his stance. On the
contrary, Parvez is described as ‘annoyed’, ‘perplexed’, and ‘miserable’. I noted that these
descriptions are not only important to the scene at hand but they also represent the narrator’s
negative tone to Parvez’s life. I covered this short story for a weekly discussion question, where I
asked why is the father contempt with western society. This question is relevant to the passage as
Ali essentially asks him the same thing saying, “how can you love something which hates you?”
I found it interesting that while his life is not ideal in London, Parvez loves the
freedom/democracy of it, which is why he looks out the window at the end of the passage. I
believe this is used to represent London as is his escape, and that small detail reflects his
migration.
Finally, Postcolonialism and anti-imperialism are especially present within this passage,
with Ali’s firm stance against the Western world. I began to question who’s morally right here?
Is there a clear answer the narrator wants the reader to have? Also, with Parvez telling his wife
that they have to fit in, which reinforces harmful assimilations. Overall, this passage represents
that moment in a story where the monster is revealed. Parvez is faced with a non-compliant,
2
violent, and seemingly radical son. However, the denouement shows Parvez reflecting Ali’s
character, and asks the question: Who’s the monster?
“My Son the Fanatic” and His Criticism of Postcolonialism
Hanif Kureishi’s short story “My Son the Fanatic” reflects on the generational differences
of immigrants and their interactions with Western society. The father and son’s opposing views
on life are expressed in the passage where the two are out at dinner to talk. Throughout the
passage the narrator directs a negative tone in describing Parvez, Ali criticizes Parvez for
forceful assimilation, and the underlying postcolonial theme represents Hanif’s criticization of
the degenerate effects postcolonialism imposes on migrants.
Uncoincidentally, the negative tone towards Parvez in this passage reflects the overall
tone towards his role in the story, which is an overworked and underpaid migrant worker who
indulges in alcoholism. The narrator presents him in this moment as a mess; perplexed,
miserable, burping and drinking, using exclamation points (only with Parvez) at times to
highlight his impetuous replies. In contrast, Ali is clear and confident in his views, which is
evidenced when “Ali addressed his father fluently, as if Parvez were a rowdy crowd that had to
be quelled and convinced.” (222) The negative tone towards Parvez is amplified as the narrator
describes Ali as the more level-headed character, which further denounces the postcolonial
effects imposed on Parvez.
With Ali portrayed as the favored character, his criticisms of Parvez are therefore shared
with the narrator. The main point Ali makes in criticizing Parvez is his assimilation with the
West. Ali states that “You are too implicated in Western civilization.” (222) In addition, he cites
3
an example of a time where Parvez made his wife cook pork sausages, saying “You’re not in the
village now, this is England!” (222) Parvez’s assimilation gives Ali reason for his resentment, as
it goes against the rules he is dedicated to, which is the Law of Islam. Thus, his forcing of
assimilation to his wife stems from postcolonialism, in where his life and culture have been
affected by the historical context between British colonialism and their home country, Pakistan.
While Ali is aware of the postcolonialism that is affecting his family and culture, Parvez
is content with England. For example, when Ali is beginning to describe Islamic extremism,
Parvez “looked out of the window as if to check that they were still in London.” (223) This small
detail hints at Parvez’s migration; his escape is London. As Ali is spewing autocratic ideas,
Parvez looks for London to find comfort. More specifically, comfort within western society and
therefore, democracy. However, Ali asks, “how can you love something which hates you?” (223)
This question refers to the postcolonial problems that immigrants are faced with when migrating
into western society. They are discriminated against, poor, given menial jobs, despite the illusion
of freedom under democratic rule. In essence, this passage examines the effects of
postcolonialism imposed on Parvez’s life as a migrant.
To conclude, the negative narrative tone towards Parvez and his ordered assimilation of
his wife, along with the underlying postcolonial themes that are found in this passage, overall
represent the criticism of degenerate postcolonial effects imposed on migrants.
Final Reflection
Starting with what worked best, our discussion questions from week 7 helped me develop
a somewhat deeper understanding of the story. Therefore, I was already familiar with the story
4
and it’s themes. I knew that the most important piece of the story was the inherit differences
between characters Parvez and Ali. That difference is what drives the story and thus had to be
further examined. In terms of writing the close reading, it was relatively easy deciding the topics
I wanted to use for my argument. I felt that there was enough evidence in the passage itself for
quotations and overall focus, and thankfully I never got carried away in extra writing from the
story that was not this specific passage.
The most difficult part was deciding which term I would use for my argument. This is
mainly due to there being lots of anti-imperialism themes throughout the story as a whole, but I
ended up choosing postcolonialism. I felt it would be more concise and less word heavy as
opposed to explaining Ali’s anti-imperialist views. It’s hard because both are important to the
story, so it’s as if I’m debating which theme is more prevalent. Also, keeping word count was
especially hard for this close reading simply because there is so much to cover. However, I’m
confident I kept quite concise with my points as well as stated and re-stated my thesis clearly.
While there’s not another close reading for this course, this was great practice for the exam!
WORKS CITED
Kureishi, Hanif, “My Son the Fanatic.” The Penguin Book of Migration Literature: Departures,
Arrivals, Generations, Returns, edited by Dohra Ahmed, Penguin Books, 2019, pp.222-3.