For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/anthology.php#8

“Maybe it’s not enough that we are both Bengali.”

                                     (The Namesake, 1:44:00-1:44:04)

Mira Nair’s movie The Namesake (2006), deals with multiple issues of identity, ethnicity, the clash between the home and host countries etc. at length. All these other aspects related to the expatriate subjects have been dealt with by scholars in detail which try to explore the myriad ways in which these first-generation immigrants negotiate with the space and time they inhabit. For instance, Madhurima Chakraborty in her essay, “Adaptation and the shifting Allegiances of the Indian Daispora: Jhumpa Lahiri’s and Mira Nair’s The Namesakes(s)” explores the nuances of the adaptation of the novel into a film thereby simultaneously creating and deviating from certain aspects in a first- and second-generation migrant’s journey between the home and the host countries. Rashna Wadia Richards in her essay, “Love, Desi Style: Arranged Marriage and Transnational Mobility in Mira Nair’s The Namesake” argues that the arranged marriage in Jhumpa Lahiri’s novel has been turned into an ‘arranged-love marriage’ and how Ashima Ganguly is not an oppressed immigrant Hindu wife but somebody who finds her independent self in a land away from home through her gradual love for her husband.

The objective of this paper is to study the Plato’s Conception of love as a Third-Space in Mira Nair’s movie "The Namesake".

Love as a category evades any possible definition, but we understand that it is the most common phenomenon occurring all the time and affecting the lives of almost all the beings present on this planet. If we go back to the origin of the concept then possibly it has been there since time immemorial. In ancient Greece, we find Plato who has contributed to the conception and nature of love at length which is at its peak in his two seminal works the Symposium and the Phaedrus. Plato talks about the nature of human desire at length, explaining the prevalence of Pederastic relationships in the Greek aristocratic society that used to flourish between an older male lover (erastes) and a younger male beloved (eromenos), and the pursuit of happiness among other things. Plato interestingly enough observes the ubiquity of love, in the dialogue Symposium wherein he says, “Love pervades the bodies of all animals and all that is produced in the earth, which means that Love pervades virtually everything that exists.” (Plato, 18)    

My argument here is that Love offers a space which is beyond any kind of restriction or boundary imposed by culture, place, caste, class, gender and ethnicity. When we consider the Platonic conception of love, which is there in the Symposium, then we find that he is mentioning something very significant about the ascension of desire; which according to him successively passes from one from of beauty to the other. Through this gradual stepping from one to the other, the lover realizes the ultimate aim of human desire, which according to Plato is, the contemplation of the beauty absolute. Plato in the Symposium, speaks of it thus,

…the true order of going, or being led by another, to the things of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth and mount upwards for the sake of that other beauty, using these as steps only, and from one going on to two, and from two to all fair bodily forms, and from fair bodily forms to fair practices, and from fair practices to fair sciences, until from fair sciences he arrives at the science of which I have spoken, the science which has no other object than absolute beauty, and at last knows that which is beautiful by itself alone. This, my dear Socrates,’ said the stranger of Mantinea, ‘is that life above all others which man should live, in the contemplation of beauty absolute…’ (Plato, 225)   

It is in this sense that I argue to use Love as a third space which frees itself from the already multi-layered signification prevalent in the realm of cultural theory. This paper examines the experiences of the characters in Mira Nair’s movie The Namesake and how their amorous relationships or encounters offer them a third space where they could negotiate some of the challenges that they came across as first or second-generation migrants. The two characters belonging to two different generations Ashima Ganguly and Nikhil or Gogol present the scope of being read as the two lovers in the Platonic sense of the term who finally through gradual ascension of desire try to seek that absolute beauty which Plato talks about. Love as a category can also be interpreted in the terms of a “non-place” as defined by Marc Auge in his essay “From Places to Non-Places”, where he says, “…a space which cannot be defined as relational, or historical, or concerned with identity will be a non-place” (Marc Auge, 78). The paper though, shall explore Love as a third space that gives both these lovers an opportunity to step onto the path of seeking their ultimate solace.

The very first relationship that we encounter in Mira Nair’s The Namesake is that of Ashoke and Ashima Ganguly, which begins with an arranged marriage. As mentioned earlier, Rashna Wadia Richards in her essay argues that “Nair’s film explores how arranged marriage is altered in an era of transnational mobility, which enables Ashoke and Ashima to create a hybrid arranged-love marriage (Richards, 65). This argument opens up the possibility of love providing a third space in a transnational frame work. Though it is not explicitly depicted in the movie, but Mira Nair remains faithful to the task undertaken by her that of showing Ashima not a traditional Hindu wife caught up in a loveless marriage far away from her own land but bestowing upon her an agency of achieving her own liberation in a land away from home gradually through her love for her husband transforming later into the larger self-reliance.

Though the love that Ashoke and Ashima bear for each other is an outcome of their familial obligatory relation of marriage, yet it provides a third space in this transnational framework wherein both of them could overcome the hardships or could fill the diasporic void generated out of their being first generation of migrants in America. There are some instances in the movie that substantiate this argument. The very first encounter of Ashima and Ashoke’s shoes is symbolic of their meeting. It is not a physical or actual encounter but it sets the course of the love that was to gradually flourish from this marriage. The act of posing herself as a confident person after putting on Ashoke’s shoes indicates the intensity of self-independency that Ashima is going to achieve out of this union.

Ashima Ganguly is able to realize her full being, through this space which gradually grew out of their love for each other. Nair has beautifully captured this in scenes like just after their marriage Ashima tries to explore the new city by understanding the map of the same which is not only a moment of her exploring the new city but also exploring her new relationship with her husband that of love and familial bonding. Nair has deliberately devoted some space to the next scene which is of first love making that provides a solace to the newly wedded couple whose exploration of each other gets some refuge in this consummation of their marriage. Rashna Wadia Richards describes it “a desi hybrid, an arranged-love marriage” by saying, “Instead of the typical American relationship, where romance precedes matrimony, or the typical Indian relationship, where obligation supersedes love, for the diasporic couple, love develops over the long years of their marriage” (Richards, 69).

Another such instance in the movie is when the Gangulies visit the Taj Mahal, which for these first and second-generation diasporic subjects, becomes a site of connecting not only to the home country but also to their own selves and to their loved ones. The scene in which Ashoke is sitting on a bench with Ashima, holding her hand is of interest since he confesses his love for Ashima by saying, “not all men can afford to make physical memorials to love,” and they both exchange affectionate glances. (Richards, 75) This act of Ashoke holding Ashima’s hand becomes a promise of companionship and mutual understanding in the process of trying to carve a home in a distant land, a third space which is only possible through the burgeoning love that they have cherished for all these years within the constraints of the marriage. Madhurima Chakraborty in her essay writes of this scene as:

The tone of the scene is calm, the visit clearly brings relief to all the Gangulis, and Nair uses this moment to cement the importance of India and the answers the nation-state can provide to its wandering subjects by playing on the connection between the symbolically Indian Taj Mahal and the tranquility of the migrants visiting it. (Chakraborty, 618) 

The scene in which Ashoke and Ashima are walking in the lawn of Victoria Memorial in Calcutta, Ashoke’s curiosity to know why did she consent at all to marry him back then when he came to see her for the marriage, reveals a very deep thread between both of them which could not find its articulation till then. Initially, Ashima tries to evade the depth of the question by saying that she perhaps chose a better one by not going for a widower with four children or a cartoonist with one arm. But when Ashoke persists on asking, she shyly says, “Do you want me to say, I Love You, in the American way!” Both of them could not help themselves smiling at this strange way of their inability to say these words over all these years of companionship and love for each other. These are some of the subtle ways in which Nair has tried to capture the almost invisible threads of love in which Ashoke and Ashima are tied with each other. They created a third space offered by their love for each other which helped them both tackle the individual battles they had to fight in order to overcome the feeling of loss of the homeland which almost all first-generation diasporic subjects go through.

Mira Nair’s The namesake represents another thread of second-generation migrant, Ashoke’s son Gogol. Most of the critics have focused upon the identity crisis that Gogol goes through in the movie, which he genuinely does go as there is a kind of oscillatory mobility in his character associated with his name Gogol and Nikhil. Unlike the other Diasporic scholars who have explored the different avenues of identity, ethnicity, the tension between the host and the home countries etc. my interest lies in the complexity of the love relationships that Gogol or we may call him Nikhil as he had changed his name by then out of his own choice; goes through. He, a second-generation migrant, or a possible ATCK, combining the elements of more than one culture or country at the same time gives ample scope of the study that this paper undertakes: the nature of love relationships or love as a third space which offers these hybrid subjects an opportunity to find their life partners. Nikhil’s case becomes an interesting one as he comes in contact with two girls, Maxine, an American girl, a daughter of extremely well to do family; and Moushumi Majoomdar, a Bengali girl, a second-generation migrant from India itself, whom he also marries; but both the relationships end in disaster. This enquiry into why the nature of these love relationships becomes so complex and destructive becomes worthy of being undertaken to substantiate the argument of love acting as a third space.

To go into the root of the problem, the first prerequisite is to understand the social and cultural becoming of these ATCK’s or second or third generation migrants. I quote Antje M Rauwerda mentioning David Pollock’s definition of a TCK in her essay “Third Culture Literature,” as:

An individual who, having spent a significant part of the developmental years in a culture other than the parents’ culture, develops a sense of relationship to all of the cultures, while not having full ownership in any. Elements from each culture are incorporated into the life experience, but the sense of belonging is in relationship to others of similar experience. (Rauwerda, 18)      

This tells how a third culture kid is a beautiful amalgamation of different cultures belonging to all the cultures up to some extent he or she has been to and not belonging fully to any of those at the same time. This tells us the half of the story of a second-generation migrant. Nikhil, in Nair’s The Namesake is someone who carries an Indian appearance or external looks but has an American inside giving rise to this complexity in his relationships as well. His first love relationship with Maxine shows this confusion and clarity at the same time. He has a happy relationship with Maxine, full of warmth and love as they spend lots of time together. And the fact that Nikhil was reluctant to come to see his father off to Japan because he wanted to stay with Maxine and her family shows that Nikhil had developed quite an understanding and love with Maxine. This kind of a love relationship between people belonging to completely different cultures and countries indicates that love offers a third space where this kind of a mingling is possible bereft of any cultural similarity. But when Nikhil’s father dies and Nikhil tries to connect himself to his cultural roots by imitating his own fathers’ funeral rituals by getting his head shaved and devoting a complete month full of rituals like offering his fathers’ ashes to Ganges and all, Maxine is not able to connect to any of these traditions or customs. She is completely at loss when she comes with bare shoulders wearing black for the funeral ritual to Nikhil’s place, she appears strange among completely white clad Bengali women.  Maxine is unable to understand the bizarre behavior that she faces in the hands of her boyfriend. She wanted to accompany him to India for his father’s last rituals. Nikhil doesn’t allow her for that as he thought she wouldn’t be able to connect to all those proceedings there. This cultural gap, turned them both into complete strangers as if they didn’t know each other at all for that moment. When Maxine leaves the place in tears completely broken, a woman tells her that they all were grieved by the death which could be interpreted as not only the death of Nikhil’s father but also of his earlier self whom Maxine was in love with. What is important here is that this very quest of tracing back those cultural affiliations that Nikhil could trespass or he could transcend while he fell in love with Maxine, the third space that both of them enjoyed through love is completely destroyed. It seems though as if this relationship which was based primarily on love rather than their identities or other affiliations would have gone a long way, had Nikhil considered it that way.

Nikhil’s another relationship with Moushumi Majoomdar, who he even marries thinking that she being a Bengali girl, might offer a better companionship following the advice of the elders that he ought to marry a Bengali girl; miserably fails at the end. After the mourning period of his father’s death got over, Nikhil found himself emotionally lacking. On her mother’s insistence, he met Moushumi Majoomdar whom he found attractive and engaging. Both of them had a pressure from their families to marry someone from India especially of Bengali origin. Without much thought, giving priority to their cultural and ethnic identities, they married each other. For some time, they found the marital ties full of love and warmth. Very soon, Moushumi Majoomdar, started feeling caught up in the trap of this relation. She started missing her earlier boyfriend, some French guy, who she is shown sometimes talking to over phone. When Nikhil who is more Gogol now, is away for work, his mother visits their home and finds this extramarital interest of Moushumi. Later, when Gogol returns from the work and is very much excited to meet his wife, Moushumi isn’t able to reciprocate the same happiness. Gogol finds himself almost ditched. He blames her for marrying him if she had been in love with that French guy at the time of her approval for marriage with Gogol. What Moushumi Majoomdar confesses at this point is really interesting. She says, “Maybe it’s not enough that we are both Bengali” (The Namesake, 1:44:00-1:44:04). Gogol completely breaks down at this moment and is at loss, as he is not able to understand the whole thing. They both leave each other.

This break-up after marriage, and Moushumi’s finding her love in someone from the past who belonged to a completely different place, marks something peculiar about the very nature of love relationships that these second-generation migrants form. This is only love that offered this third space to Moushumi where she could be in love with someone from France. Moushumi and Gogol both, in an attempt to make their mothers happy married each other. But it didn’t work. When Gogol’s mother Ashima comes to know of this she feels sorry for it was she who insisted upon Gogol’s meeting Moushumi. Gogol consoles his mother by telling her that it was none her fault. He said, “it’s just that different people want different things”. And he also confesses that for the first time in his life he has started to realize who he was and what was it that he wanted. In other words after these two relationships, his desire has now gradually ascended to something deeper which could be paralleled to the seeking of the beauty absolute in Plato’s terms.

It seems realized that love doesn’t have to do with anything like identity, ethnicity or things like that. Gogol’s two relationships make this very clear. The former one in which he had a love relationship with Maxine he thought she could never become his family because of the cultural differences. Despite Maxine’s ardent desire of accompanying him to India for scattering the ashes, he turned her down, saying that it was a family thing. Maxine insisted upon being a part of his family. She says that he was a part of herself and her family. Gogol couldn’t realize the intensity of that love just because he was too much engrossed with his fathers’ roots and his own quest for the cultural belongings. Later when he met Moushumi, it seemed to him that she was the perfect match as she was a girl of Bengali origin. But this marriage failed miserably as it was not enough to belong to the same country or culture for love especially in the cases of a second or third generation migrant or a TCK who is a mix of more than one cultures and values.

Therefore, it is apparent that Mira Nair’s The Namesake does have a scope of being studied from the viewpoint of examining the nature of love relationships that involve the complexities and myriad negotiations that a first or second-generation migrant might have to go through. We could also establish how both the characters of Ashima Ganguly and Nikhil or Gogol are the prototypes of Platonic love which helps them grow gradually after the separation from their beloveds. Ashima finds her solace in returning to the art of music a fair practice and Gogol to that of seeking his own nature, both thereby two probable seekers on the path of the beauty absolute, which according to Plato is the life that must be led.  

1. Chakraborty, Madhurima. “Adaptation and the Shifting Allegiances of the Indian Diaspora: Jhumpa Lahiri’s and Mira Nair’s “The Namesake(s)”. Literature/Film Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 4 (2014), pp. 609-621

2. The Namesake. Directed by Mira Nair, Mirabai Films, 2006.

3. Plato. The Symposium, translated by Christopher Gill and Desmond Lee, Penguin Books, 2006.

4. Sheffield, Frisbee C. C. and M. C. Howatson. “Introdcution”, Plato: The Symposium, Cambridge University Press, 2008.

5. Richards, Rashna Wadia. “Love, Desi Style; Arranged Marriage and Transnational Mobility in Mira Nair’s The Namesake” Revue Canadienne d'Études cinématographiques / Canadian Journal of Film Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (SPRING | PRINTEMPS 2017), pp. 64-80

6. Levy, Emmanuel. “Namesake: Interview with Mira Nair.” Emmanuellevy, 16 February, 2007, https://emanuellevy.com/interviews/namesake-mira-nair-1/

7. Bahri, Deepika. “The Namesake: Deepika Bahri Is Touched by Mira Nair's Vivid, Sonorous Account of Immigrant Life in an Adopted Home City.” Film Quarterly, vol. 61, no. 1, 2007, pp. 10–15. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/fq.2007.61.1.10. Accessed 11 Sept. 2020.

8. Projansky, Sarah, and Kent A. Ono. “From Documentary to Fictional Realism: Mira Nair’s Documentary Roots, Fictional Home and Production Politics.” Indie Reframed: Women's Filmmaking and Contemporary American Independent Cinema, edited by Linda Badley et al., Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 2016, pp. 171–187. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g0529f.16.

9. “An ‘Arranged Love’ Marriage: India’s Neoliberal Turn and The Bollywood Wedding Culture Industry.” The Politics of Time and Youth in Brand India: Bargaining with Capital, by Jyotsna Kapur, Anthem Press, LONDON; NEW YORK; DELHI, 2013, pp. 93–106. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1gxpc43.8.

10. Mitry, Jean. “Remarks on the Problem of Cinematic Adaptation.” The Bulletin of the Midwest Modern Language Association, vol. 4, no. 1, 1971, pp. 1–9. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1314966.

11. Andrew, J. Dudley. “The Film Theory of Jean Mitry.” Cinema Journal, vol. 14, no. 3, 1975, pp. 1–17. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1225130.

12. Shah, Amit. “A Dweller in Two Lands: MIRA NAIR, FILMMAKER.” Cinéaste, vol. 15, no. 3, 1987, pp. 22–23. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41687477.

13. Badt, Karin Luisa, and Mira Nair. “I Want My Films to Explode with Life: An Interview with Mira Nair.” Cinéaste, vol. 30, no. 1, 2004, pp. 10–15. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41689800.

14. “Collective Mode of Production.” An Accented Cinema: Exilic and Diasporic Filmmaking, by Hamid Naficy, Princeton University Press, PRINCETON; OXFORD, 2001, pp. 63–100. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv346qqt.8.

15. Sawhney, Cary Rajinder. “'Another Kind of British' An Exploration of British Asian Films.” Cinéaste, vol. 26, no. 4, 2001, pp. 58–61. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41689402.

16. “Journeying, Border Crossing, and Identity Crossing.” An Accented Cinema: Exilic and Diasporic Filmmaking, by Hamid Naficy, Princeton University Press, PRINCETON; OXFORD, 2001, pp. 222–288. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv346qqt.12.