Context – ‘historical, cultural, or social – can have an influence on the way literary works are written or received. Discuss with reference to at least two works you have studied.

The context of a text has a great impact on the way it is read an interpreted as well as the manner in which it is written. It may include references to prevalent issues at the time as well as provide opinions of ongoing social and cultural matters. I will analyse the impact of context on two works – ‘The Kite Runner’ by Khaled Hosseini and ‘A Hero of Our Time’ by Mikail Lermontov. I will do so by exploring the roles of the minority and majority groups presented in both texts, Islamisation of evil in ‘The Kite Runner’ and the characterization of Pechorin in ‘A Hero of Our Time’.

In ‘The Kite Runner’ Hosseini portrays a vivid account of the relationship between the Hazaras and Pashtuns in Afghan society in 1970s Kabul. We see a sharp divide between the two groups of people, where the Hazaras are discriminated against and sexually abused, while the Pashtuns hold positions of stature. In the novel, Hassan, a servant boy, is seen as the epitome of the Hazara community, representing the victim of society’s brutality. “I wondered briefly how one could live with such an ingrained sense of one’s position in a hierarchy”, says Amir, who is naive and young and hence oblivious to the highly prevalent racial discrimination against the Hazaras. The crux of the novel – the rape of Hassan by a bully named Assef – is another example of the brutality against the Hazaras. As Amir silently watches he thinks, “maybe Hasan is the price I have to pay, the lamb I have to slay to win Baba”. Hosseini portrays how a heinous crime is mentally justified as the victim is a ‘nobody’ in society: “He was just a Hazara wasn’t he?”

Towards the end of the novel, the reader finds out that in reality Hassan is Baba’s illegitimate son from a Hazara woman named Sanaubar. Hassan is deprived the truth of his lineage, simply because Baba’s “nang and namoos” or pride and honour would be marred with the knowledge that he had an affair with a Hazara woman. Hosseini condems the discrimination of the minority community as he shows the Amir’s path to atonement wherein he adopts Sohrab, Hassan’s son as his own.

‘The Kite Runner’ was published in 2003, following the ‘9/11 attacks’ on the World Trade Center in New York. Hosseini makes a strong association between the religion of Islam and the evil prevalent in the novel. This, probably, is done to appease the Western reader that the novel is written for. In an interview, Hosseini said that “it is un-American to diss the book”. The islamisation of evil is presented in the characterization of the character of Assef, a bully and rapist, who goes on to become an official in the Taliban. Hosseini goes so far to compare Assef to Hitler. The reader is encouraged to detest his character and values as he is represented not only as a rapist, but also as a murderer. He says, “Afghanistan is like a beautiful mansion filled with litter. Someone has to take out the garbage”, in response to the massacre of Hazaras at Mazzar-i-Sharif. The stoning at the stadium is also seen as a crucial and important representation of the evils of Islam as Sharia law is implemented. A woman is labeled an adulterer and pelted with rocks. The Mullah announces, “a sinner should be punished in a manner befitting his sin”. Towards the end of the novel, Amir feels “healed” after a gruesome fight with Assef, as he finally attains redemption.

As the novel is aimed at a Western reader, the portrayal of Islam as ‘evil’ is a notion that is likely to parallel the reader’s sentiment. The most righteous character of Baba is shown through his condemnation of religious teachings when in reference to the Mullahs he tells Amir, “piss on the beards of those self righteous monkeys”. Hence, the values presented in the novel (discrimination of Hazaras and Islamisation of evil) by Hosseini coincide with the cultural and social values of the time.

In the novel ‘A Hero of Our Time’, Lermontov portrays the minority group as the Caucasians. The Russian characters in the novel – Maxim Maimych, the unnamed narrator and Pechorin are observed to have imperialist and colonial attitudes towards the people of the Caucasus. The Oriental attitude of the Russians is made evident when Maxim calls the Ossetians “little swindlers” and “cheats”. The Russians presume the Caucasians to be thieving, conniving savages. At the wedding, Maxim goes to see if the horses are still outside because of his suspicion that they may have been stolen. Lermontov shows admiration for the fearlessness of the Cossacks and yet degrades them by referring them as savages. When seen through the lens of Orientalism, the Caucasian people lose their individuality and are referred to as “a multitude of children” or “a group of Ossetians”. Pushkin once wrote that the Caucasus is a region “where in the mountains martial robbery occurs and the savage genius of inspiration is hiding in the mute silence”. Lermontov, inspired by Pushkin, portrays in the mountains as savage and wild.

The women of the Caucasus are also materialized as objects of pleasure and sexual satisfaction. In reference to Bela, Pechorin says “she will train her to accept the thought that she is mine”. There is also a constant comparison of these ‘exotic’ women to animals. Bela is compared to a “hill chamois” and Pechorin states that “breeding in women, as in horses, is of great matter”.

Lermontov intended the novel to be a satire of the existing generation. He once said, “Pechorin is the composite of all the vices of our generation in the full of their development. Hence, the characterization of Pechorin is largely impacted by social and historical context. Pechorin is a nihilist and hedonist. He is known as the ‘superfluous man’ of Russian literature. Pechorin is often bored and has no sense of ambition or desire, taking pleasure in the downfall of others. He says, “I am melancholy. Was I born on this earth solely to destroy others?” He believes in fatalism and is unafraid of death, saying that “the worse that can happen is death – and you can’t avoid death”.

The time the novel is written was filled with repression. Pechorin free from the bonds of authority: “The decade was a time of constraints, where young men like Pechorin felt stifled and ineffectual”. Pechorin’s hedonism is exemplified when he says, “I have a congenital desire to contradict. My life is merely a chain of sad and unsuccessful contradictions of heart and mind.” The title of the novel is a satirical reference to all the afflictions and vices of the time. It begets the reader to question the identity of the ‘hero’. The Czar believed it to be Maxim, a hard working military man, while the public assumed it to be Grushnitsky. However, Lermontov’s intended hero was Pechorin, intending to direct the reader’s attention to failures and flaws in Russian society.

In conclusion, both novels are best appreciated by readers who pay attention to the social and historical contexts of their production. The context of each novel moulds the characterization and thematic concerns, and enables the authors to criticize aspects of their society and time.