Why wont writers allow children to simply be children?

This quote is a common complaint among readers when they read novels that involve children going through traumatic or bizarre situations. The same criticism has been said in reference to Arundhati Roy novel The God of Small Things. At first glance at the action of the novel the reader may believe that this criticism holds true and that Roy did not allow the children to simply be children; however, after reading the novel and looking deeper into her presentation of children throughout her writing it can be seen that The God of Small Things offers so much more as it pertains to the perception of children than another novel with a child going through some extravagant experience as the criticism would imply. Arundhati Roy is able to use the perspective of the children in the novel as a unique way to shed light on how children perceive the events around them. Through her unique writing style Roy is able to present the state of childhood in a different manner while still keeping the events of the children relatable. Nearly every novel that deals with the importance in children also mentions the innocence of children either directly or through the events that occur throughout the novel. Roys novel The God of Small Things is no different from these novels because it too suggests a level of innocence in the children. Roy, however, offers a different perspective on the innocence of children because she does not portray the innocence of childhood simply as ignorance, but rather she shows the innocence of children to be involved with the way they perceive the world around them with the knowledge that they have. Rahel and Estha are the two characters that Roy is able to reveal this through. The entirety of the novel is narrated in third

person omniscient, but many parts of the story focus on how the children perceive the events that are happening around them. The focus on the childrens perspective may be one of the major causes of the confusion that often occurs when reading the novel. An example of Roys stance on the innocence of children is when Rahel sees the dead Sophie in the coffin. Inside he earth Sophie Mol screamed, and shredded satin with her teeth. But you cant hear screams through earth and stone. Sophie Mol died because she couldnt breathe, (9). This quote from the novel shows that Rahel sees Sophie in the coffin and because of her lack of knowledge she believes that Sophie is still alive. The passage also shows how the narration becomes distorted due to Rahels perception of what is going on and her complete conviction that her version of reality was real. Another example of how a childs version of reality can be distorted by their lack of knowledge is shown near the end of the novel. It took the twins years to understand Ammus part in what had happened, (307). Rahel and Estha, the twins mentioned, did not know about Ammus part in the events surrounding Velutha and Sophie, therefore the children believed their own version of what happened and did not accept the possibility of a different reality for quite some time. Roy is able to shed a new light on how children perceive events in their lives due to their ignorance and their belief that everything that happened occurred in the specific way that they perceived it. The God of Small Things, like any other novel that speaks of the innocence of children, would not be complete without the loss of innocence. Esthas loss of innocence occurs after the Orangedrink Lemondrink man molests him. His loss of innocence is illustrated best in chapter 10: As Estha stirred the thick jam he

thought Two Thoughts, and the Two Thoughts he thought were these (a) Anything can happen to Anyone. and (b) Its best to be prepared, (186). Roys showing of Esthas loss of innocence does two things for her presentation of childhood throughout the novel. First, it gives a deeper understanding as to how innocence is lost and that it often occurs through simple realizations accumulating over time like these two thoughts that Estha has. The second thing that Esthas loss of innocence does for the novel is to make the children seem more relatable to the reader. The criticism about writers not allowing children to simply be children is significant because it often means that the readers feel that the children in the novel are difficult or impossible to relate to. Although the major events that occur in the twins lives may be very specific, the basic principles behind each major event are what makes the story so relatable. As stated above, Esthas loss of innocence makes the story relatable to the reader because Esthas two thoughts prompt the reader to contemplate the time that they began to lose their innocence because it too would have occurred through a similar thought process. The two main traumatic events in the twins lives may seem to only increase the backing of the criticism Why wont writers allow children to simply be children?, but Roy is able to make both of these events seem relatable to the reader because she tells them through the perspective of the children. Estha being molested is an example of something bad that has happened to us that changed us. The event in the readers life may not be as traumatic as Esthas and it may not cause us to stop speaking, but some negative event has affected us throughout our life, which is what Roy wants us to be reminded of during these events. The death of Sophie Mol is a representation of a

choice that we want to have undone and the guilt that we feel due to the result of our decision. Arundhati Roy does a surprisingly good job of taking events as particular as those that occur to the twins and making it into a relatable story. The children in Arundhati Roys novel The God of Small Things put a stop to the criticism behind the quote about writers not allowing children to simply be children. The twins partake in events that would bring about this type of criticism, but Roy is able to make the children all the more relatable because of this. Not only can the reader relate to the novel better through Roys presentation of the children, but also she offers a different perspective on the thought process and innocence of children through her unique writing style.