# data[].attributes.body
"The monologue form allows for an intimate conversation, as the reader and the American listener become one. Are we sitting across from Changez at a table in Lahore, joining him in a sumptuous dinner? Do his comments cause us to bristle, making us more and more uncomfortable?"
- The Washington post

I believe that this statement really is true, and the reader does end up feeling as though Changez is speaking to them rather than the American sitting opposite him. I think the author did mean to do this which is incredibly powerful because it allows us to be drawn emotionally attached to the novel.

"What exactly did I do to stop America, you ask? Have you really no idea, sir?" The one-sided conversation leaves us uncertain how far Changez has come down his political path.

This statement gets my thinking about changez's impact on America and on myself as the reader... I

do agree that this particular one-sided conversation did leave me and I'm sure many other readers uncertain of how far changez has come down his political path. Did his political experience transform him into someone that he wouldn't have become if he didn't take these jobs in New York? It all unravels into questions, statements and more questions...

'Changez’s actions betray, as well, a deep lack of gratitude.'
- the Yale review

This is true, and I could say I do agree but Changez had been experienced extreme racism and often got accused of crimes he din't commit. All he had to do to get arrested was walk down the street and, I guess be Pakistani.

# data[].attributes.body
Agree:
"Changez's reassurances to the American throughout the novel – "Do not look so suspicious. I assure you, sir, nothing untoward will happen to you" – have an unsettling effect."
-The guardian.

I agree with this statement, even though Changez is reassuring the American that he is 'safe' and 'has nothing to worry about' it feels uncomfortable to read this scene. We are left unknowing of the American's responses to Changez's reassurances, it makes you wonder what it could be in the setting that is causing the silent character's body language.

Think:
"Later, when he is back in Pakistan and his parents ask for details of his American life, he says, "It was odd to speak of that world here, as it would be odd to sing in a mosque; what is natural in one place can seem unnatural in another, and some concepts travel poorly, if at all."
-The New York Times.

What I find thought provoking is that Changez is reluctant to recount his experiences in America to his parents, what is it that makes him feel that 'concepts travel poorly?' It could possibly be that he doesn't want to relive the discrimination he experienced being a Pakistani in the USA post 9/11.

Disagree:
"The Reluctant Fundamentalist, by Mohsin Hamid, leaves the reader disturbed and questioning. Why does Changez adopt the rabid path that he does?"
-The Yale review.

I will acknowledge that the novel does leave the reader in a state of disturbance and questioning. What I do not agree with in this statement is the review questioning why Changez adopted what the review classifies as a backwards directed path. For me the answer to that specific question was quite vivid, after the event of 9/11 Changez felt a shift in America's treatment of him based on his appearance and religion. People would become uncomfortable around him in public and at work his colleges retained from making forms of eye contact. Changez began to feel America's rejection towards him and I feel this was the main out a few reasons Changez left his job and lifestyle to return to his tougher life in Pakistan.

# data[].attributes.body
"The book appears to build towards a drastic confession, possibly concerning how and why Changez eventually became a terrorist."

I disagree with this statement. Changez did not become a terrorist he just had a strong love of his home country. Being of Muslim appearance caused him to fall victim to so much racial abuse from people all throughout America.

# data[].attributes.body
"Extreme times call for extreme reactions, extreme writing." - The Washington Post.

Interesting - I find this statement intriguing as it shows how an author has the ability to express their opinions and views on worldly issues through fictional novels. It has the opportunity to change an individuals view towards islam by providing a relatable and empathetic tale.

"The book appears to build towards a drastic confession, possibly concerning how and why Changez eventually became a terrorist." - The telegraph

Disagree - Changez is the victim of abuse from many Americans due to his religion. In The Reluctant fundamentalist Changez does not become a terrorist although remains patriotic towards his home country, Pakistan. This does not mean Changez has the values or beliefs of a terrorist. This leads me to disagree with this statement.

"Since the American never speaks, and since Changez addresses him directly throughout, the reader is placed in the listener's shoes, creating a convincing effect of intimacy and immediacy.”
- The Telegraph

Agree - I agree with this statement because the readers knowledge of the man is entirely built upon Changez perspective of the American and the situation. This is due to the lack of dialogue the foreign man exhales. I believe Mohsin Hamid's use of this technique provides a closer relationship between the reader and Changez.

# data[].attributes.body
" Was he, by working in Wall Street and indirectly financing the American military, waging a war against his own family and friends in Pakistan?"

I partially agree with this statement. Changez was not directly waging a war, the quote states 'indirectly' therefore he did not work just so he could contribute to the military of the U.S it was a unfortunate extra but in a way he did still contribute to a country that had/has the power to do so.

# data[].attributes.body
WASHINGTON POST ; "Some books are acts of courage, maybe because the author tries out an unproven style, addresses an unpopular theme or allows characters to say things that no one wants to hear. Mohsin Hamid's new novel, The Reluctant Fundamentalist, does all those things”

Agree - This statement summarises and defines Mohsin Hamids novel brilliantly. Addressing his ‘unproven style’ of writing the novel in a first person manner, his indulgence into ‘unpopular themes’ such as the history of 9/11 and it affects on certain individuals, and discussing how Hamid ‘allows characters to say things that no one wants to hear”.

THE GUARDIAN - “Near the end of the novel he is unconvincingly promising that the men who seem to be following them "mean you no harm". But perhaps the narrator is the prey. Having become an influential "anti-American" spokesman, Changez might be a target for assassination. His companion has a satellite phone, and that bulge under his suit. Who has the power here?”

Think - posing a question at the end of the statement already makes readers indulge into deeper thought about the subject. The presentation of the idea that the narrator may be the prey in the situation makes readers make many more assumptions about the ending of the novel then they may have already had, as well as providing some relevant evidence when stating that since Changez has become “an influential "anti-American" spokesman, Changez might be a target for assassination.”

THE TELEGRAPH ; “'he enjoyed rapid success'
Disagree - Even though one could state that Changez achieved rapid success, Changez certainly did not enjoy the way he was forced to portray himself to be able feel like he was able conform while he was adjusting to the American lifestyle.

# data[].attributes.body
“The book appears to build towards a drastic confession, possibly concerning how and why Changez eventually became a terrorist.”

This statement made me think, as this book is written in the style of leaving readers with their own assumptions, which could lead them into thinking that he either becomes a terrorist or continues to be a lover of America. The beginning of the novel describes how Changez sees only positives in America, as the novel progresses his thoughts change. He becomes more critical of America and does certain actions that would be considered rebellious. The ambiguity of the text leaves the story to have different endings depending on how the reader interprets it.

“The Reluctant Fundamentalist, by Mohsin Hamid, leaves the reader disturbed and questioning.”

I agree with statement as the ending of the story is left unexplained and open for readers to interpret it in their own way. This questions readers because they don’t know if their interpretation is correct or not, making them feel quite disturbed.

“The courage of The Reluctant Fundamentalist is in the telling of a story about a Pakistani man who makes it and then throws it away because he do
esn't want it anymore.”

I disagree with this statement as Changes didn’t simply “throw it away”. His realisation of how America repaid him when he worked so hard for the country made him think whether it was worth staying in America and continue what he was doing. His decision to give up his job was to express how he felt at that moment even though he did feel regretful about it.

# data[].attributes.body
'It is a piece of technically accomplished writing that entertains at the same time as it makes you think."

I disagree with this statement because I think, the purpose of this book was to make people just think and maybe educate people about how different people think about each other. In my opinion the book simply isn't a book meant to entertain the reader.

"Some books are acts of courage, maybe because the author tries out an unproven style, addresses an unpopular theme or allows characters to say things that no one wants to hear. Mohsin Hamid's new novel, The Reluctant Fundamentalist, does all those things."

I agree with this statement. Hamid's novel was definitely an act of courage. Many people don't enjoy the style of writing that was used in this novel but the story and the difference it had to any other novel, made it unique and successful.

"Extreme times call for extreme reactions, extreme writing."

This statement prompts me to thinks that, how is 'The Reluctant Fundamentalist' an extreme writing for the 'extreme time'? and is it the best example of an extreme reaction to an event like 9/11?

# data[].attributes.body
“We are encouraged to wonder whether the meeting between narrator and interlocutor is accidental. Changez's reassurances to the American throughout the novel – "Do not look so suspicious. I assure you, sir, nothing untoward will happen to you" – have an unsettling effect.”
- The Guardian

This statement made me think as during the first time I read the novel I didn’t notice how patronising Changez sounded. After a second reading I clearly see how unsettling it is, as though Changez knew an obvious secret of which the American hadn’t figured out.

“The form of address used in the novel is at once conversational and stylised, and is rare in fiction.” – The Guardian

I agree with this. It is uncommon to read books written in this way and I quite liked the style though it could very easily be used badly.

“In Lahore, he (Changez) becomes a university lecturer, an advocate for anti-Americanism, and an inspiration for oft-violent political rallies."
– The Yale Review

I disagree with this as the conclusion of the novel was very ambiguous and open to the audience’s interpretation. Changez also wasn’t specifically anti-all America but rather some of its political views and ideals.

# data[].attributes.body
“As America prepared for military retaliation in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, he began to feel even more discomfited.”

This statement made me think about what it must have been like, the country he loved and had great wealth in America, fighting against his home country. The country he had grown up in as a little boy and his family and community remained there. Personally, I would think years of family and childhood would outdo a country he had only recently come to. But would his success and wealth in America impact this?

# data[].attributes.body
“In the aftermath of Sept. 11, as the tone of the country becomes more hostile, Changez's corporate cloak lifts, and his life in America no longer seems so perfect.” - Washington Post

I disagree with this because the Washington Post do not talk about the other reasons for Changez American life not seeming as perfect. Erica suffering, then disappearing, his trip back to Lahore and seeing his family and community again all come into play when discussing his changing life. I don’t believe Washington Post is incorrect but to fully explain his life and reasoning why his life isn’t as clearly perfect anymore needs further explanation into other reasons.

# data[].attributes.body
“He appears to have been something of a cipher, until his reaction to the attacks — that sudden smile — pierces the shell. It seems to have come as a surprise even to himself, and while hardly endearing, it sets his tale in motion.” - New York Times

I agree with this statement because before the 9/11 attacks, Changez was a self-confident man, sure of his job. However after the attacks he begins to become less self assured. Directly after he is notified of these attacks he becomes more proud of Pakistan and, even to his surprise, happy that these occurred. However the more time after these attacks it impacts him in a deeper way.

# data[].attributes.body
What is most unusual about this first-person narration is its form: it is addressed to an unnamed listener, an interlocutor.

The author of the book, Mohsin Hamid, definitely has taken a different and unusual style when he writes about the interaction between the American and Changez.  I feel like it gives more of an intriguing aspect to the novel, because you need to pay more attention to the book.

# data[].attributes.body
“He isn’t a “reluctant” fundamentalist. Rather, he is a fairly deliberate and self-deluding one.”

This made me think as the author of this article finds himself nothing that Changez is a deliberate fundamentalist and that he chose the path he went down. However I believe that throughout the novel Changez developed characteristics that also made his confidence deplete and cause him to question himself, hence his appearance of a self deluded individual. His intentions were not to become this fundamentalist and that is how he is so reluctant.

“He wrongly reduces the contemporary political context to a binary—that he could either continue with his New York job and thereby side with America, or abandon America and return to Pakistan. As various inspiring real life accounts attest, these were not the solitary options available to a Pakistani and a Muslim in the aftermath of 9/11.”

I disagree as in the world at the time of 9/11 many Americans views changed and Changez coming up with this ultimatum was the final prompt to his fundamentalist views.

"Perhaps, it is suggested, he had been pursuing Changez, who has become a leader of anti-American protests. Apparently, the man is “on a mission” — ...  the end of the story may mean the death of the teller

I agree with this statement as it gives information about the stranger whom we don't know of and have barely any information on, but It could be an appropriate ending to the story and makes sense as to why he was so mysterious and suspicious.

# data[].attributes.body
"But Hamid’s novel, while it contains a few such moments, is distinguished by its portrayal of Changez’s class aspirations and inner struggle."

I agree with this statement. While the book does incorporate 9/11 into the storyline, this is also used as a tool to further convey his inner struggle.

# data[].attributes.body
New York Times:
"A less sophisticated author might have told a one-note story in which an immigrant’s experiences of discrimination and ignorance cause his alienation.?"

I agree with this statement

# data[].attributes.body
Yale review:
"Changez feels betrayed by America in the aftermath of 9/11. Manhattan, which had always seemed welcoming to him, and its crowds, in which he had always found a place and felt at ease, suddenly began to seem to accuse him."
I agree with this statement that Changez feels betrayed by the country he had put all his effort into contributing to for the past year. Changez, the confident worker he was became looked down upon by society, although he did not do anything wrong.

# data[].attributes.body
"The novel begins a few years after 9/11. Changez happens upon the American in Lahore, invites him to tea and tells him the story of his life in the months just before and after the attacks. That monologue is the substance of Hamid’s elegant and chilling little novel."

# data[].attributes.body
"Hamid, who himself attended Princeton and worked in corporate America, aptly captures the ethos and hypocrisies of the Ivy League meritocracy, but less so its individual members. "

I agree with this statement. The book criticises America without laying blame to any single individuals or organisations. It simply comments on the mindset and attitude of the country.

"We are prodded to question whether every critic of America in a Muslim country should be labeled a fundamentalist, or whether the term more accurately describes the capitalists of the American upper class"

This makes me both consider and compare the two belief systems and societies. The character of Changez is so unique because he embodies both of these positions at once.

# data[].attributes.body
new york times:
'That monologue is the substance of Hamid’s elegant and chilling little novel'
this quote made me think about the American perspective of this novel. in particular the phrase 'chilling'. i can understand why Changez would feel contempt in the 9/11 attacks initially. an american must see these emotions as nothing short of appalling.

# data[].attributes.body
Washington Post
"He seemed to have achieved the perfect American life."
This quote was one that made me think. What exactly is the 'perfect' American life? The 'definition' of perfect life is someone who has it good, perfect house, perfect family etc etc but isn't everyone's life different?

# data[].attributes.body
'The Reluctant Fundamentalist, by Mohsin Hamid, leaves the reader disturbed and questioning.'

I agree with this statement because, after reading Hamid's novel I was certainly left with curiosity and somewhat disturbance. I felt disturbance when Changez was in Manila and felt kind of happy to see America being I guess destroyed through 9/11. After that part, I had questions and felt a bit disturbed because; Living in the world that we live in today, hearing someone say something like that to such a horrible event would almost be a crime.

# data[].attributes.body
This statement I agree with -
The Guardian:

"The form of address used in the novel is at once conversational and stylised, and is rare in fiction."

I personally agree with this statement as this novel is unlike any novel I have ever read before. The view that Changez gives us on his life and his feelings towards the world are easily expressed through this style of writing.

This statement makes me think -
The Telegraph:

"Mohsin Hamid's second novel is an impressively intelligent thriller. It is short, but as it progresses a grim sense of foreboding thickens until the final sentence, which is a masterstroke of ambiguity. I closed the book with a shudder."

The statement causes me to think as, I too closed the book with a shudder as the ending is up to personal interpretation and in my opinion, Changez was shot. This statement also caused me to think as this book in my opinion was an intelligent thriller and has now caused me to read other books in the same genre.

This statement I disagree with -
The Yale Review:

"In Lahore, he becomes a university lecturer, an advocate for anti-Americanism, and an inspiration for oft-violent political rallies."

In my personal opinion, Changez never became an advocate for anti americanism, although he did have negative views on the topics surrounding america, I never felt as if he was anti american. He had certain views and then removed himself from the situation, which in my opinion, was the best thing he could've done.

# data[].attributes.body
"Executed with cool control, it is a microcosm of the cankerous suspicion between East and West."

I agree and find this idea very interesting. Neither Changez or the American are ever fully comfortable and the American seems constantly on edge. This clearly reflects the relationship between the East and the West, who are untrusting of each other, and even in an otherwise calm and friendly situation feel as if something bad is about to happen. Both sides are unsure if the other is out to get them.

"The book appears to build towards a drastic confession, possibly concerning how and why Changez eventually became a terrorist. He refers to Conrad's Heart of Darkness, describing himself as "a Kurtz waiting for his Marlowe", and we wonder whether the silent American is a secret-service operative sent to assassinate him."

This statement is thought-provoking as it points towards some of the themes and ideas Hamid hints towards but never blatantly says. Hamid indicates towards the American being an army-officer, or some sort of CIA agent, pointing towards his strong complexion, constant scanning, and possession of items like a satellite phone or even the hint of a gun. However, this is never confirmed and even if the American is an agent their are no clear hints to his intentions, whether he is there simply to gather intel, for something completely different, or to spy on/assassinate Changez himself.

"The reader is disappointed with Changez because as a young and well-educated Pakistani who has experienced American life, he is uniquely placed to encourage moderation and engage critically in the post-9/11 debate."

I somewhat disagree with this quote. I believe that the opinion the reader has on Changez and his actions depends on how they filled the 'blank holes' Hamid left. From a American point of view you will likely become defensive and side with the American's, seeing Changez path as disappointing. This is done through focusing on the opportunity he had to rectify everything and how his inability to do so was bad, ignoring the struggle he went through and the reason he chose the path he took. However, Hamid also gives the option to feel some empathy for Changez, even if you don't necessarily agree with his choices, the reasoning behind them is all there. This can make the reader understand why Changez and extremists do what they do, shedding light on the other side of the fight.

# data[].attributes.body
The guardian:
"Some books are acts of courage, maybe because the author tries out an unproven style, addresses an unpopular theme or allows characters to say things that no one wants to hear. Mohsin Hamid's new novel, The Reluctant Fundamentalist, does all those things."-  I agree with this statement as it addresses the controversiality of the book and its themes. The book is filled with bold statements about the rapid changes that america experienced post 9/11.

# data[].attributes.body
“After joining his elite employer, he enjoyed rapid success and spent his free time hanging out with Erica”

I disagree with this comment because he did enjoy rapid success until he had to act like someone he wasn’t, in which his days working where unpleasant and weary. He also worked really hard each day, spending time with Erica when he could but putting his work first and foremost.

“He appears to have been something of a cipher, until his reaction to the attacks — that sudden smile — pierces the shell.”

I agree with this comment because his reaction the the attacks did affect him and how he acted around others. He seemed to have been someone who would be deeply deranged by the attacks, but no he smiles instead.

“As America prepared for military retaliation in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, he began to feel even more discomfited.”

This made me think because when he came to America, he thought of himself as an American/ New Yorker straight away, not as a migrant. So when America prepared for war against pakistan, he must have been torn between his family and his love.

# data[].attributes.body
"We are encouraged to wonder whether the meeting between narrator and interlocutor is accidental."
This statement prompts me to think. If everything is not an accident, then what is the  Chagez's intention of speaking to this officer? I think there must be something occurred that makes him change and eventually in my interpretation, turns into a fundamentalist.

"But Hamid’s novel, while it contains a few such moments, is distinguished by its portrayal of Changez’s class aspirations and inner struggle."
I strongly agree with the statement The Guardian mentioned. This novel really explores some vivid descriptions and analyses acutely about the inner pain and  political status Changez experienced.

"...after 9/11 her sadness mysteriously turns pathological. She lands in an institution, then disappears.This part of the story seems a bit too convenient."
I don't agree with this criticism because the novel's major focus is not the romance between Erica and Changez, the whole book tends to emphasis more about the obscure inner thoughts of Changez when he is standing at the edge of American and Pakistani's perspectives. Whether or not he chooses to stay with Erica or Erica disappear, the struggle won't stop merely because Changez's got a heart touching relationship.

# data[].attributes.body
He [the unknown american] is a sounding board for the narrator's re-enactment of his initial love affair with, and final revulsion for, America.
I agree with this statement in that the listener is a plot device for Changez to express his views about America through telling a story. The American is not just a sounding board though. He is a reflection of the America that Changez has grown to be disgusted with, but, Changez remains equally cordial with him throughout the novel and it is only the ambiguous events that close the novel also reflect Changez’s closing view of America.

The book appears to build towards a drastic confession, possibly concerning how and why Changez eventually became a terrorist.
Although the novel is building to the climax in the last paragraph, it is wrong to say that you are left with a closing view of Changez as a terrorist. The ambiguity of the ending is essential to the novel and to definitively say that Changez is a terrorist robs a reader of this conclusion. I think this statement reflects what Hamid described as the ‘British or American’ way of reading the novel, a more suspicious reading of the events and Changez as a character. Also, there is no textual evidence at all that Changez committed any violent acts that would classify him as a terrorist, although we are left with the possibility of him committing these acts in the future.

Time and again he uses predatory imagery (sharks, foxes, hawks) yet we are never sure who is hunting, or being hunted.

I hadn’t even thought about this sort of imagery used throughout the novel. It prompted me to look further into the symbolism in the book, and examine each of Changez’ sentences for more hidden meanings. The predatory and perhaps even aggressive hidden meanings do refer to a more sinister interpretation of the story.

# data[].attributes.body
"It (the narrative structure/way its written) is a technique that dramatises antagonism as well as intimacy, and Changez readily detects resistance in his listener. We keep being reminded of the gulf between the narrator and his American companion. " -  John Mullan, The Guardian
I agree with this statement because whilst I was reading, I felt that I was constantly reminded of the perpetual gap between Changez and his companion. The gap not only represents the racial differences between him and the America, but also the very potent sense of tension thats felt throughout the novel.

" In Lahore, he (Changez) becomes a university lecturer, an advocate for anti-Americanism, and an inspiration for oft-violent political rallies."
The Yale Review
I disagree with part of this statement, because in the end Changez was not necessarily anti-americanism, but more anti american establishment/institution. He wasn't specifically opposed to every single thing American or Western, just particular areas of Americanism.

" He isn’t a “reluctant” fundamentalist. Rather, he is a fairly deliberate and self-deluding one."
The Yale Review
This statement really made me think about the novel and the character. Though I do agree with whats being said, I think that there were certain things that occurred during the novel that almost forced Changez to shift and change into this self deluded fundamentalist character. He wasn't always so deliberately bigoted, different things shaped and changed his final outcome as a character.