A technically brilliant novel. Review on Shadow Lines - Amitav Ghosh

The Shadow Lines is a wonderfully written text, and I could appreciate the use of language by the author. The plot has been well presented and everything has been tied very nicely. Stylistically, it is a very beautiful text. Thematically, the novel seems to be saying so many different things.

The Shadow Lines

The shadow lines that the title proclaims to be the theme of the novel are very shadowy themselves. We never get to see them as they are and there is never a mention of these lines anywhere in the novel. The interpretation of the meaning of the shadow lines is left to the reader. Now that points to an interpretation itself as the shadow lines could mean something that is insubstantial and therefore, its existence is doubtful. Another interpretation of the shadow lines could be that they are lines that change positions with the gaze or perspective. Yet another interpretation of the shadow lines could be that they are just a pale imitation of reality.

What are lines associated with? Lines could be boundaries or they could just signify the linearity of relationships. Lines are also used to measuring and dividing length. They are also constructs created by humans and are thus, unreal. Shadow could be referring to the physical shadow that light casts when obstructed by objects. It could also mean protection or security. It could also mean an inseparable companion as a shadow always follows some object or a pale representation of the object. Together, ''shadow lines'' could mean insubstantial boundaries or boundaries that provide a sense of false security or shifting boundaries or boundaries that humans carry everywhere and so on and so forth.

There is no dearth of interpretations for the shadow lines. But what does the author mean by the shadow lines? The shadow lines could be boundaries that humans create and which are insubstantial. The mental boundaries present in the minds of people that limit their vision to what is visible is transcended by Tridib and the narrator by their imaginations. These mental boundaries are shown to be immaterial, as they cannot limit the sights and scenes of the world. Transcending these boundaries is shown to be a human task that broadens the horizons that one sees. This can be interpreted as a philosophical message that humans can broaden their minds just by broadening their scope of view. It can be done by seeing things beyond the visible and the obvious, and by seeing things that are subtle and those that are hidden for various reasons. The shadow lines that mark our horizons are merely shadows of the real boundaries and humans should cross it like Sita crossed the Laxman-rekha.

Boundaries demarcate and classify. Man is inherently programmed to classify and form groups of all that he samples by his senses. These classification are generally based on adjectives that are dependent like good, bad, warm, cold, etc, etc. These boundaries are shown to be very flimsy and perspective oriented. The categorisation is based on the perspective of an individual. He/she would classify a person as good if he does some good to her and thus this categorisation varies from person to person and are never a true representation of the people and object of the world. The best example from the book of this perspective-oriented classification is the way many people look at the riots that killed Tridib. For the narrator's father, it was an accident, for May it was a sacrifice, for Robi it was a nightmare. An event has been shown as categorised in several ways by different people. They are correct in some way or another but for the people who classify them so, they are experienced in so varied ways and hence, the difference in the classification. Shadows are known to change shape and size with changing light positions. The light positions could be considered as the perspective of a person and the shadows as the lines that classify. Hence, the perspective determines the classification and as shadow lines demarcate them, they are unreliable.

Also the physical boundaries of the nation are also shown to be immaterial when an event in Kashmir triggers off riots in Dhaka and people not belonging to Dhaka are killed in the riots. This event does not trigger any riots in parts that are closer to in linear distance but does so in a land that is quite a long way away and also with an intervening boundary. The author may be trying to say that the causes of events are not bound by mere the lines that joins them but are influenced by varied complex relationships. So the lines that connect are merely shadow lines that have no part in the relation itself. They are just human constructs that have no real significance. Grandmother asking whether she would be able to see lines on the land separating India and East Pakistan, and the narrator's father saying that the boundaries start at the airports itself and grandmother trying to find the boundaries in the Dhaka airport. Even though boundaries separate them, grandmother reveals that Dhaka and Calcutta are very similar to each other. So the boundaries that separate and divide, though having some reality in the minds of the people, do not have any importance. These boundaries also provide the people with a sense of security that they are part of a nation and hence are protected by the society and government of that nation. This sense of security is questioned with events like the bombing of London, Tridib dying in Dhaka, riots in Dhaka because of an event in another country. The physical boundaries that countries have drawn around themselves have been the cause of many bloodshed but they are known to be boundaries that have never stood the test of time. The boundaries of a nation have changed many, many times over the centuries of human existence and so have the loyalties of humans with them. So why do we have wars to extend the boundaries when we know that they are only going to last a couple of generations. Why waste so much human resources and money (another human construct) on such boundaries that have been known to be insubstantial. This is a very political statement and thus the novel seems to be a political one.

This is one novel that can be interpreted in so many different ways in so many different perspectives. This is something that the novel seems to be emphasising. The interpretations vary form person to person, as they are dependent on the person. This is the message I see from the novel from my perspective. Of course, someone else may differ on this. This is the beauty of this novel, again from my perspective.