I would pull this quote from the story: "He knew he was unreachable, but hit him nonetheless." I think that this probably sums up where the relationship between the Ali and Parvez is at this point. I think that the generational divide between both reaches its critical point of separation when Parvez beats Ali. At this point, it is a father, whose values have been rejected and shamed by his son, that must assert some type of control or authority in a situation where he is devoid of it. I think that a subtext of Kurieshi's story is that the conflict between both father and son is one of generational repudiation. The son repudiates all that the father holds dear. The father's ability to boast about his son's exploits at school and on the cricket field, his cosmopolitan approach to life in London, the lack of spirituality in his life, as well as his state of being are all called into direct question and brought into opposition by the son. When the son calls all of these values and practices into question with his own embrace of a more spiritual and orthodox approach, it inverts the power in the relationship. When Parvez says that he and Ali were "like brothers," it is a reference to how he, as a father, was able to still preserve power in a relationship where father and son can be seen as colleagues and cohorts. In this light, the beating of the son by the father is a last ditch attempt to reestablish some semblance of that power. Ali's repudiation of Bettina might have been the last straw in that it was a complete rejection of the power structure that Parvez enjoyed. The beating was the last moment of this configuration.
No comments:
Post a Comment