In Response To:
1. Family history¢wLike Foucault disagreeing with "the structure of exclusion"
to deal with a period to a simple, unified essence, Rushdie, here, deals with
"his" family history in complex, unlineal fragments. So, I wonder if the way
Dr. Aziz diagnoses Naseem could support or imply Rushdie's attitude to arrange
his writings. It is also the fragments when Dr. Aziz sees Naseem through the
perforated sheet each time. The fragments that Dr. Aziz sees each time are not
in order, (not from the neck to the feet or from the left to the right, for example.)
After seeing some fragments, he starts to imagine what the whole person would
like, even though he has no chances to see her head. We reader are in the similar
situation. We also wonder what the whole history would like to be, and what
happened during the narrator's birth (just like the imagination of Naseem's head to
2. Padma's role¢wI agree that Padma has multiple roles in Midnight's Children.
But, if we discuss her in the way of metafiction, she plays a role only as a reader.
Here, she is not only a reader to ask "in some confusion. 'That fat soft cowardly
plumpie? Is he going to be your father?'" (53), and to push the narrator to go
straight to his birth and stop some unnecessary details; but also a very active
one to somewhat lead the direction of Saleem's writing. I wonder if it is because
of her, Saleem would go more quickly to the plots of his parents, "'To me [Padma]
it's a crazy way of telling your life story,' she cries, 'if you can't get to where your
father met your mother;" (38). It is also because of her, we have "a brief paean
to Dung." ^_^
3. Whatsitsname¢wAs to this one, I'm unsure if it interferes the theory of "signifier"
and "signified," for whatsitsname could be anything. I don't know if it subvert
anything in Structuralism?