One of my favorite things about Home Fire, was the abundance of themes. As a reader, I felt like I was tasked with picking up a trail of breadcrumbs that would lead to me down the path to recognizing the presence of a new theme. Today, I've chosen to focus on fathers and sons. When I first began reading Isma's section, I thought that the intersection of her femininity and religion would be a main theme in the novel. However, as I progressed through the sections I began to understand how much of the story was dependent on the relationship, or lack thereof, between a son and his father.
Firstly, we're introduced to Eammon who would back his father to a fault. Even when he was in love with Aneeka, he was always quick to justify his father's actions regardless of how wrong they were or how harmful Aneeka believed them to be. Honestly, I still feel like I'm not certain why Eammon did this. I'm guessing that it's because he felt a desire to prove to his father that he was a man capable of prioritizing family name and honor. Secondly, we met Parvaiz, a man who yearned so badly to know his father that he was manipulated into joining a terrorist organization on the basis that his father had done the same. In Parvaiz's case, he only learned about his father in the glorified light Farooq cast him in. It was sad to watch Parvaiz feel so desperate to have a male role model in his life that he turned down such a negative path.
Overall, I think that the presence of the father and son theme was largely tied to the negative aspects of the plot. The sons yearned for their father's approval, wanted to be better men than them, or simply wanted to be them. All of these were driving factors for pushing the men to bend their morals or overcompensate by saying, doing, or thinking things they would otherwise not. Of course, a father and son relationship is something special that should be nourished and appreciated. I just think that the father/son relationships in Home Fire were set up to fail because the fathers were not good role models.
Now that you have pointed it out clearly, I am finding the different father son themes to be quite interesting. Especially how Eamonn and Karamat's relationship progressed from Eamonn always backing him up to Eamonn outright publicly calling out personal bias in his father. I also find it interesting how, at least through how they are portrayed, both Adil Pasha and Karamat Lone claim to love their sons, yet in the end, they both manage to "fail" their sons. Your blog post was very insightful!
ReplyDeleteHi Audrey, I think that the father-son themes in the novel are quite telling of how father-son dynamics are so complex and play out in different ways, yet often are the result of similar things (such as the approval and acceptance of the father). I agree that in Home Fire that the fathers were not good role models. Karamat Lone played an impossible father to please to Eamonn and Adil was absent in Parvaiz's life, both creating unsustainable relationships that played a burden in their son's lives. As they learn more about their fathers and develop, they grow out of the need to fulfill their father's expectations or footsteps, breaking away from their father-son bond.
ReplyDeleteHey Audrey! I love how you really unpacked the many parallels between Eamonn and Parvaiz's relationships with their fathers. Another similarity I noticed was that both sons seemed to misunderstand what their fathers really stood for in the beginning. While Parvaiz's misunderstanding stemmed from a lack of information, Eamonn's came from ignorance and a naive nature. Like you noted, much of Home Fire's plot is centered around the dynamic of fathers and sons trying to live up to each other. I wonder why Shamsie chose to explore the father-son dynamic instead of the mother-daughter one when femininity comes up so often?
ReplyDeleteHey Audrey! I agree that in this novel, both sons tried to emulate their fathers while also trying to be even more than them. I also agree with your perspective that both sons' downfalls were a result of the burden they felt from their respective fathers' legacies. Both fathers in the story were absolutely bad role models, which led to both sons' failure.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Audrey. Father-son relationships are a delicate thing. All too often the appeal of toxic masculinity mixed with a desire to please one's father can lead to bad decisions. I think Karamat Lone and Parvaiz's father are two sides of the same coin. Lone is extremely present in Eamonn's life. He controls everything, giving him money, a home, and directions. This leads Eamonn to desiring an extreme level of independence, which leads to his death. Parvaiz's father is the opposite: absent. His absence leaves Parvaiz lost and desperate for some sense of community that will connect him to his heritage. This leads him to Farooq. Both fathers are bad, but in very different ways.
ReplyDeleteHi Audrey, Parvaiz was really in need of a male role model in his life, so bad so that when he finally met someone older that initially protected him, he followed and believed him so much that Aneeka thought Parvaiz fell in love. Parvaiz believed anything Faroq said even if it meant he had to be ducked into water to the point where he can barely breathe. He even trusted Faroq to take him to a country he's never been in before and give him a good life.
ReplyDeleteHi Audrey! I completely agree that in this book, overcompensation is very closely tied to a weak father-son relationship. Each character has a hierarchy of morals, and for Eamonn and Parvaiz, those morals can be completely rearranged in service of feeling masculine. Although they could sometimes acknowledge their father's shortcomings, it was still important for them to always defend their masculine ideal.
ReplyDeleteThe contrast you pointed out between Parvaiz and Eammon is great. It is illuminating to hear about how the father role/lack thereof played such a large role in each of their developments. They are almost too perfectly opposite one another in this way that it almost makes the characters seem unrealistic. I wonder if Shamsie wanted the readers to see Farooq as a father figure to Parvaiz, or if she wanted to see them more as brothers. To me, I see them more as brothers so the absence of a father figure in his life is still quite apparent.
ReplyDeleteInteresting discussion, everyone, which makes the novel read like a condemnation of the effects of toxic masculinity on fathers but perhaps even more on sons.
ReplyDelete