from school journal:

Jasmine is a survivor, and changes according to whatever environment she finds herself in next.

I was immediately on Jasmine’s side because she was such an underdog, and she doesn’t let it stop her from escaping her situation. Even when she is illegally in the United States she crosses cultures and adapts completely. As the modern world forces cultures to collide they are themselves changing and Jasmine is an example of this also. The novel seems to suggest that identity is entirely mutable and non-permanent and with Jasmine/Jyoti/Jane it is an assertion which is clearly proven. Jasmine herself compares herself to Eliza in Shaw’s Pygmalion on page 77.

Jasmine tries to escape her past since it won’t help her at all - she doesn’t return to Hasnapur however even after being in America for some time. Jasmine casts off her past and only using it to propel her forwards keeps on going. It is interesting that rather than going to a country which has as strong a culture as India Jasmine goes to America, the cultural imperialist, the country in which a cultural icon can be a diverse range of things, and is probably not based in traditional conceptions of religion at all.

The violence against and by Jasmine in the novel is interesting – it is not common to see such portrayals of women as this. The easy way to explain what I mean here is to say that Jasmine has the aspects of a traditional male in the novel; she is violent and deals with violence against both herself and people she is close to without seeming to be too affected by it. She continues going and doesn’t return to her culture or her country of origin when any of these episodes occur but continues her journey and forming new aspects of her identity.

Jasmine is strongly contrasted with Drew in the novel. Both immigrants in a foreign country they deal very differently with it. Drew doesn’t give up his past life at all and does not make a concerted effort to assimilate in the wholly new environment he finds himself in while Jasmine seems excited by the change. She notes on page 144 that “I felt my English was deserting me”. It would seem odd that her second language is the one which she worries about losing, not her “mother” tongue.

With Jasmine I was hopeful; it is easy to believe that no matter what happens to her she is a survivor and has the will to adapt and come out on top of any situation she finds herself in.

in some ways i feel like jasmine isn’t just escaping her past, but identities. in many ways her travels are ways of testing out being different people. she is different people in each section, with each name. in light of that, it’s interesting that the book is called “jasmine”–is that her truest or most desired version of herself?

the more i think about it, i feel like the story didn’t end at the ending. when she leaves nyc after seeing the man from india, i don’t feel like that conflict was resolved at all. isn’t her past always going to follow her? maybe that’s more clearly articulated than i saw it though. i felt like it wouldn’t be so easy to just leave iowa like that. though i guess their adopted son did pretty much disappear.

after reading the short stories, i feel like mukherjee doesn’t develop her stories as much as i’d like. too many questions at the end tend to bother me.

doesn’t she escape her past WITH her different identities? or at least, superficially…because she carries her past with her.

i felt unsatisfied by the ending too but i think its up to the reader to decide why the book is called jasmine.

for some reason i got this feeling like she felt very distant from her previous identities. though it’s true, she does still carry them within her.

so why do you think it’s called jasmine?

i am so confused with this novel ..im loosing interest in it and all the characters in the book are getting me completely lost!