Essay 2 – Revised

Exit West – An Imperfect Defense

In Mohsin Hamid’s 2017 novel Exit West, traveling is of no difficulty for the main characters, Nadia and Saeed. Hamid gives his characters the ability to travel through magic doors in order to escape their nameless war-torn country. Upon their arrival to Mykonos, Marin, and London, the pair finds themselves in a series of encampments which become increasingly liveable and comfortable. The presentation of the novel from a migrants perspective has led to critics like Nasia Anam praising the novel because it pushes back against traditional European hostility towards immigrants. She argues this allows traditional western readers to develop a greater understanding of the perspective of a refugee through deep character dives which allow the western reader to relate to the problems of a migrant. On the other hand, Yogita Goyal argues that the magical doors detract from the real struggles that migrants face, rendering “the journey of the refugee magical and instantaneous” (Goyal 246). She says the journey of a migrant, which Hamid excludes, is pivotal to understanding the difficulties they have faced. Hamid wants to generate an understanding of migration as a universal right, stating in one interview that “Migration is what our species does, what humans need to do” (Hamid). Exit West is an attempted reflection of his political beliefs that migration is a natural right. In the book, Hamid supports the right to migrate even though he starts from an inaccurate representation of migration itself. His poor representation of migration as an easy process destroys the sense of urgency needed to further his political beliefs surrounding immigration. 

Hamid’s personal beliefs influence Exit West greatly, especially in the vignettes scattered throughout the book. Through these glimpses into other stories, Hamid reveals to us that people of all ethnicities and in all types of situations are moving across borders. In one vignette, Hamid tells of an elderly couple, one of which travels between countries daily. “On the third day, the elderly man could not speak Brazilian Portuguese and the wrinkled man could not speak Dutch, they cobbled together a conversation” (Hamid 175). Here we see Hamid generalizing the idea of migration to people that are not from a war-torn country. The Brazilian man returns to his country willingly multiple times, and returns to the Netherlands just for fun. He is only migrating out of curiosity. Hamid uses his book to motivate the reader to understand migration as a natural practice.

Initially, Hamid allows the reader to understand the suffering that motivates Nadia and Saeed to move between countries. Both characters face great hardship which forces them to move out of their nameless country. Hamid offers us a glimpse into the way life changes in an instant for people in situations such as this one through his description of Saeed’s mother’s death, saying “she might have waited much longer had Saeed’s mother not been killed, a stray heavy-caliber round passing through the windshield of the family car” (Hamid 74). Hamid gives the reader the motivation for Nadia and Saeed to move. He generates empathy for the characters and develops a need for them to travel. 

While the reader can empathize with the original need to migrate, Hamid gives us little to feel concerned about the journey and the encampments that they live in. Nadia and Saeed use a magic door to suddenly appear in Mykonos. Yogita Goyal argues that the use of the magic doors “naturalizes the fact of migration” (Goyal 241). She argues the magic doors detract from the perilous journeys that many migrants face so regularly. Hamid also takes away from the perilous living situation that migrants have to face. In one passage, Hamid describes the camp in Mykonos directly as “like most places” (Hamid 107). While Nadia and Saeed face a little bit of hardship, their lives are never truly threatened. In the end, they move away from the island in an attempt to find a more steady life with better access to healthcare. They appear in London, where they face even less hardship. Similar to Mykonos, they face a little bit of hardship, and are forced to move out of the mansion they initially live in, but the pair still end up with a steady situation. In both of these places, Hamid prioritizes the development of the relationship between Nadia and Saeed over his political goals. He loses track of migration and why it is an important right and instead transitions to a long exposition of two characters. 

Unlike Mykonos and London, Marin has no threats to the couple, from within or from the outside. It ends up being a fully functioning society where Nadia and Saeed end up branching off and beginning new relationships. Hamid describes the influx of migration as “not apocalyptic, which is to say that while the changes were jarring, they were not the end” (Hamid 217). Both Nadia and Saeed make inroads within the flourishing community, finding new partners. Once again, Hamid returns to the development of the characters rather than the precarious situation that they have lived through. 

Without doubt, this is a happy story from the point of view of migrants. It might help “native” readers identify with migrants and build an understanding of their situation. However, each settlement ends up being peaceful, leaving the reader with almost no urgency to make political or structural change. One critic, Isaac Choitner, describes the novel as flat, saying “Hamid doesn’t really explain how the world has or has not changed” (Choitner). The people change, not the world around them. By portraying refugee camps as perfect little blending pots rather than sites of struggle and hardship, Hamid diminishes his ability to support the right to migrate. Goyal says “the scale of the [migration] crisis has prompted a sense of urgency” (Goyal 253). However, Exit West slows that importance by not portraying the journey that Nadia and Saeed face to escape terrible violence. In other words, the description of migration as uncomplicated becomes misleading and destroys the urgency of advocating for the right to migrate.

Works Cited 

Anam, Nasia. “The Migrant as Colonist: Dystopia and Apocalypse in the Literature of Mass Migration.” ASAP/Journal, vol. 3 no. 3, 2018, p. 653-677. Project MUSE, https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/asa.2018.0043.

Chotiner, Isaac. “Faceless Masses: Exit West by Mohsin Hamid, reviewed.” Slate, 6 March 2017, https://slate.com/culture/2017/03/exit-west-by-mohsin-hamid-reviewed.html. Accessed 17 October 2024.

Goyal, Yogita. “We Are All Migrants”: The Refugee Novel and the Claims of Universalism.” MFS Modern Fiction Studies, vol. 66 no. 2, 2020, p. 239-259. Project MUSE, https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/mfs.2020.0019.

Hamid, Mohsin. Exit West: A Novel. Penguin Publishing Group, 2017.

Hamid, Mohsin. Interview. By Anne Brice, Sept. 1, 2020. https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/09/01/on-the-same-page-exit-west-mohsin-hamid/

I acknowledge the use of  ChatGPT to generate materials that were included within my assignment in modified form. The following prompts were used:
1. “Where are the places that I could improve clarity? Please use specific sentences from the essay in quotes. Highlight sentences in passive voice.”
– Original: “It is evident that Hamid’s personal beliefs spill into Exit West, including in the vignettes that are scattered throughout the book.”
Improvement: Revise to an active voice: “Hamid’s personal beliefs clearly influence Exit West, especially in the vignettes scattered throughout the book.”
– Original: “In one vignette, Hamid tells of an elderly couple, one of which travels between countries daily.” Active Voice: “In one vignette, Hamid describes an elderly couple, one of whom travels between countries daily.”
– Original: “This is contrasted with Yogita Goyal, who says the magical doors detract from the real struggles that migrants face…” Active Voice: “Yogita Goyal contrasts this by arguing that the magical doors detract from the real struggles migrants face…”

Honor Pledge TH

Comments:

Kaitlyn:

Hi Tate,

I absolutely loved getting to read your essay! You crushed it! This essay doesn’t read like a rough draft at all! I thought your conclusion paragraph especially tied everything up super nicely.

One thing from the rubric that I thought you did really really well was your thesis. You made it clear in your intro paragraph and then followed it through in every single paragraph. I never felt like I was lost or just drifting; I always knew where we were headed. Great job!

you also did a great job setting up a critical conversation and bringing in good evidence with good quotation sandwiches. You explained every quote before and after, and you helped me understand what I was reading and why it was important.

a couple of things you might think about working on: There are a couple of points in your essay I might disagree with you on. You say that Hamid did not allow for any development in characters (in your second to last paragraph), but I would play devil’s advocate and say that we got a lot of character development in Nadia at the end as she finally explores her sexuality. Also, you say that Nadia and Saeed never really faced any struggles in London, but they really thought they were going to get attacked for a hot minute there. Obviously these are just my opinions but I thought I would share in case they’re helpful at all.

As far as the thesis, goes, there’s really nothing that you are doing bad at all! I could see some improvement on your parallelism between your intro and conclusion topic sentences for your paragraphs. Your intro sentences are very strong, but sometimes you make a different point in the conclusion sentence (paragraph 3).

Overall your essay is awesome and I enjoyed reading it!