What makes Rahel a sympathetic character in Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things?
Rahel, one of the central characters in Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things, is a sympathetic figure because her life embodies innocence, emotional resilience, and the lasting scars of trauma. Her character evokes empathy through her deep emotional intelligence, her enduring connection with her twin brother Estha, and her ability to perceive beauty and pain with equal intensity. Roy presents Rahel as both victim and observer—someone shaped by familial tragedy, societal repression, and unspoken love. Through Rahel, the novel explores how childhood suffering and adult alienation reveal the enduring human capacity for empathy and endurance (Roy, 1997).
1. Introduction: Rahel as the Emotional Core of the Novel
Rahel’s story anchors The God of Small Things in both emotional depth and narrative coherence. As a character, she functions as the reader’s primary lens into the world of Ayemenem, mediating between childhood innocence and adult disillusionment. Arundhati Roy crafts Rahel with both fragility and quiet strength, allowing readers to experience the social injustices and familial dysfunction of the Ipe household through her sensitive eyes.
Critics have often described Rahel as the emotional and moral center of the narrative. According to John Thieme (2004), Rahel “acts as the novel’s conscience, perceiving truth beyond the limits of societal order.” Her presence unites the fragmented timelines of the story, transforming trauma into a form of understanding. This blend of emotional vulnerability and perceptive intelligence makes Rahel one of Roy’s most sympathetic creations.
2. Rahel’s Innocence and Sensitivity
Rahel’s sympathetic nature begins in childhood. From the opening chapters, Roy portrays her as an observant and sensitive girl who perceives the beauty and cruelty of her environment with equal intensity. She notices “small things” — gestures, sounds, and feelings that others overlook — highlighting her intuitive understanding of human emotions (Roy, 1997).
Her innocence is not ignorance but awareness untainted by prejudice. She questions the injustices of caste and gender without fully comprehending their social structures. Scholar Julie Mullaney (2002) observes that “Rahel’s childhood perception serves as a moral critique of the adult world, revealing its hypocrisy through the clarity of a child’s vision.” Her empathy for Velutha, the marginalized carpenter, and her love for Ammu and Estha make her profoundly human. Readers sympathize with her because she feels deeply, even when she cannot fully articulate why.
3. Rahel’s Relationship with Estha: Twinship and Emotional Unity
Rahel’s bond with her twin brother Estha is one of the most tender and tragic elements of the novel. Their relationship transcends conventional sibling attachment; it represents emotional symbiosis — two halves of a single soul. This connection evokes sympathy because it is both beautiful and devastating.
Their shared trauma during childhood, particularly surrounding the death of Sophie Mol and Velutha’s brutal killing, fractures their innocence. Yet even in separation, their psychic bond persists. When Rahel reunites with Estha as an adult, their silence communicates volumes. As critic Supriya Chaudhuri (2001) notes, “The twins’ relationship exists beyond language, a shared memory of pain that binds them in mutual exile.” Readers feel for Rahel because her love for Estha survives trauma, guilt, and time. It is a love both pure and forbidden, revealing the depths of human emotional endurance.
4. Rahel as a Victim of Social and Familial Injustice
Rahel’s sympathy also arises from her status as a victim of social and familial oppression. She grows up in a world defined by rigid hierarchies — of caste, class, gender, and morality. Her mother, Ammu, is ostracized for defying patriarchal expectations, and Rahel inherits that social stigma.
Throughout her childhood, she experiences rejection, particularly from Baby Kochamma, who constantly enforces moral and social discipline. Her eventual expulsion from school for “corrupting” other children further isolates her (Roy, 1997). This institutionalized rejection reflects the broader social cruelty faced by women and children in conservative systems. Brinda Bose (2005) writes that “Rahel’s suffering is emblematic of the female condition in a postcolonial patriarchal society that punishes emotional honesty.” Her victimhood is not passive, however—it is deeply human, making her pain resonate universally with readers.
5. The Role of Memory and Trauma in Shaping Rahel’s Character
Rahel’s adulthood is defined by memory — fragmented, haunting, and cyclical. When she returns to Ayemenem years later, the house becomes a museum of loss, and her memories replay like visual fragments. Through Rahel, Roy explores how trauma shapes identity and perception.
Rahel’s fragmented memory mirrors the novel’s nonlinear narrative, suggesting that time itself is broken by trauma. Her empathy stems from this constant negotiation between past and present. As Elleke Boehmer (2005) argues, “Rahel’s consciousness is a site of historical memory, where personal grief reflects collective silences.” Readers sympathize with her because she continues to carry love and guilt without bitterness, demonstrating emotional resilience in the face of despair.
6. Rahel’s Compassion and Empathy
Rahel’s greatest strength — and the reason she earns such reader sympathy — lies in her compassion. Even after years of pain, she remains capable of understanding others. Her empathy for Estha, for her mother’s choices, and even for the ghosts of her past reveals a forgiving heart.
Her return to Estha is not simply an act of reunion but one of healing. Their silent companionship, culminating in their intimate yet controversial reconnection, symbolizes the human need for closeness after profound isolation. Roy portrays Rahel’s compassion as her ultimate act of survival. As Padmini Mongia (1997) observes, “Rahel’s empathy transforms her from victim to moral witness; she refuses to turn her pain into hatred.” Her tenderness becomes a quiet rebellion against the cruelty of the world that wounded her.
7. Rahel’s Feminine Strength and Rebellion
Rahel’s sympathy also comes from her subtle defiance of gender expectations. Like Ammu, she resists the societal norms imposed on women. Her independence and refusal to conform mark her as a continuation of her mother’s rebellious spirit.
As an adult, Rahel’s nonconformity and emotional honesty make her both alienated and admirable. She rejects societal roles that would define her worth through marriage or motherhood. In this way, Rahel becomes a feminist figure — one who embodies survival through authenticity rather than conformity. Brinda Bose (2005) asserts that “Roy’s female protagonists possess strength not in dominance but in endurance; Rahel’s power lies in her emotional truth.” Her defiance, though quiet, invites empathy because it stems from courage, not arrogance.
8. The Symbolic Dimensions of Rahel’s Character
Symbolically, Rahel represents the “God of Small Things” — one who cherishes moments, gestures, and emotions that others overlook. Her name itself suggests fluidity and connection, echoing the river that flows through the novel’s geography and symbolism.
Rahel’s vision — how she perceives the world — aligns with the novel’s broader themes of seeing, remembering, and feeling. She recognizes the sacred in the ordinary and the tragic beauty in imperfection. As Mullaney (2002) states, “Rahel’s gaze transforms the broken world into a space of moral perception.” Through her, Roy elevates small emotions into profound acts of meaning. This poetic sensitivity makes her irresistibly sympathetic to readers who recognize in her the struggle to find beauty amid pain.
9. Rahel’s Return and Redemption
The conclusion of the novel, where Rahel and Estha reunite, marks a quiet form of redemption. Their togetherness, while controversial, is depicted as an act of healing rather than sin. Rahel’s ability to forgive, to love without judgment, and to find solace in human connection redeems both her and Estha’s fractured identities.
Her sympathy, therefore, arises not only from suffering but from her refusal to let suffering destroy her humanity. The final scenes, full of tenderness and silence, embody the essence of Roy’s moral vision: that love, no matter how small or forbidden, is redemptive. John Thieme (2004) concludes that “Rahel’s empathy is the novel’s final gesture of hope—a belief that emotional truth can survive social ruin.” Readers sympathize because Rahel’s love endures where everything else collapses.
10. Conclusion: Why Rahel Evokes Deep Reader Sympathy
Rahel remains one of the most sympathetic characters in modern postcolonial literature because she embodies humanity in its purest form — flawed, gentle, and enduring. Through her, Arundhati Roy critiques social hierarchies, patriarchal oppression, and emotional repression while affirming the power of love and empathy.
Rahel’s life mirrors the tension between innocence and corruption, belonging and exile, love and loss. Yet she never loses her capacity to see beauty and to feel compassion. Ultimately, readers sympathize with Rahel not because she is tragic, but because she is profoundly human — the silent witness of both suffering and love.
References
-
Bose, Brinda. The Politics of Postcolonial Feminisms: Arundhati Roy and The God of Small Things. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2005.
-
Boehmer, Elleke. Colonial and Postcolonial Literature: Migrant Metaphors. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
-
Chaudhuri, Supriya. “The Small Voice of History: The God of Small Things and the Problem of the Subaltern.” Modern Fiction Studies, 47(1), 2001.
-
Mongia, Padmini. “Postcolonial Identity and Gender in Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things.” Literary Review, 41(2), 1997.
-
Mullaney, Julie. Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things: A Reader’s Guide. London: Continuum, 2002.
-
Roy, Arundhati. The God of Small Things. London: Flamingo, 1997.
-
Thieme, John. Postcolonial Con-texts: Writing Back to the Canon. London: Continuum, 2004.