I was inspired by our group discussion today! It started me thinking about different boundaries in The Hungry Tide, how they’re presented and what their function is. The novel explores boundaries in a really beautiful and interesting way. Ghosh puts forward a lot of different kinds of boundaries but they all generally fall under the following categories: nationality & language, and humans & nature. 

The boundaries of nationality and language are very clear from the start. It is the first thing Piya and Kanai talk about, both of these things play an integral role in every relationship she forms. The language barrier plays a significant  role because it hinders Piya’s ability to communicate with Fokir, but they form a connection despite it. There is also a moment earlier in the book when Piya relearns the word gamchha and all the memories she reconnects to. Ghosh shows us these different ways that boundaries exist in the world, especially regarding nationality and language, but then shows us how they are not end all be all. 

The boundaries between humans and nature are incredibly significant in the novel. On page 248, when Kanai and Piya are going back and forth about the killing of the tiger, we see how Piya is viewing nature as its own separate thing, something that we as humans with agency have a responsibility to protect. This reminded me of some of the readings we did earlier in the semester, because there is this hint of a belief that we are not part of nature, so there again is that rigid divide. I think this moment also highlights a divide that exists surrounding conservationist ideals and their real implications within these communities that are living lives that are entirely surrounded by nature, all of the time. Even in sleep the snakes will come. In my group Kat mentioned  in the novel that Bonbibi, when a newcomer arrives, determines if this newcomer is worthy. It made me wonder if the tiger was a test, not necessarily a test of “will you live or die”,  but rather a way to challenge what Piya thinks she knows about nature and what it means to not only be a champion of the natural world, but how to truly be a part of it.

There are so many ways that boundaries make an appearance in the novel that you could write an entire paper about it. In the tide country, the tide is always moving, always reshaping the land. There is a fluidness to this constant change. Perhaps the way boundaries exist in the novel is meant to emphasize this point of changing with the times, learning to adapt in a world affected by climate change. We see it in the way that all the separations are bridged. The tide country is described as inhospitable, and yet people live there. People learned how to live with nature, how to coexist with nature.

In the book, “The Hungry Tide,” Ghosh portrays an extreme dynamic between Nature and Humans. In the Chapters, Ghosh complicates the problem of perceiving wildlife versus the cost of human lives. The chapter “Crimes” reveals the livelihood of humans stripped to protect wildlife. The cost of human lives and blood is hidden under the cover of saving another species. In this chapter, Kusum cries out “This island has to be saved for its trees, it has to be saved for its animals, it is a part of a reserve forest, it belongs to a project to save tigers, which is paid for by people from all around the world… Who are these people, I wondered, who love animals so much that they are willing to kill us for them? Do they know what is being done in their name?” (Ghosh 217). This brings into question the so-called “kindness” to protest for animal rights where human rights are violated behind the curtain. The chapter “A Killing” represents Piya’s perspective on protecting and preserving animals. Piya argues “You can’t take revenge on an animal.” (Ghosh 242). Piya’s desire to protect animals is admirable because her education and studies taught her to protect them, however, it is also her limitation to only see the animals in danger, not the struggles of livelihood of humans. In my view, Ghosh seems to force the reader to pick a side over providing possible solutions to the conflict like Butler’s work of teaching ways and knowledge to survive.

I want to share some of my insights on this conflict. In the tiger instance, I understand the need to kill the tiger to save the village. Although it’s cruel based on Piya, it is understandable from a survival perspective. However, I disagree with the notion of prioritizing the animal’s life over a group of villagers. It’s not logical to save a life to endanger others. In this situation, there is no win-win solution. There is a report that the tiger has killed numerous people and broken into the boundary of the village to set up for its death. Protecting wildlife is crucial but what are the boundary lines of protection where it endangers lives? Kanai has pointed out, “If there were killings on that scale anywhere else on earth it would be called a genocide, and yet here it goes almost unremarked…And the reason is just that these people are too poor to matter. We all know it, but we choose not to see it. Isn’t that a horror too – that we can feel the suffering of an animal, but not of human beings? (Ghosh 248). Rebuttal to Piya’s argument, if this case was present in advanced countries I could imagine the lines between protecting animals would be blurred when it endangers human lives. The settlers of tide country are poor people and their rights are not granted to them. Why are their lives dismissed when they are killed by the tiger? Furthermore, this conflict has revealed the complications with the kinship between humans and the ecosystem. How does one choose to help when both sides of the argument cannot be blamed for their actions? 

In the novel “The Hungry Tide” by Amitav Ghosh, Fokir symbolizes the often-overlooked voices of marginalized communities in stories about environmental and social issues. His lack of a personal story or clear voice is crucial since it emphasizes themes of identity, survival, and complicated relationships between people and nature. Through Fokir, Ghosh reveals the challenges faced by marginalized groups in the Sundarbans and critiques “dominant” narratives that silence them, which in this case is represented through Kasai.

Fokir’s silence represents the experiences of marginalized people in the Sundarbans, an area dealing with many ecological and economic struggles. By not providing Fokir with a detailed backstory, Ghosh shows how these communities often go unheard in essential discussions. As a fisherman, he represents the indigenous people whose lives are tied to their environment, yet their stories are rarely ever included in climate change or adaptation. His silence highlights how history erases these communities’ importance, urging readers to recognize the need for diverse voices in meaningful/critical discussions about identity and belonging.

Fokir also represents the strong connection between the people of the Sundarbans and their environment. As a fisherman, he deeply understands the tides and nature that support him and his community. His lack of a personal story or a voice symbolizes a natural bond with nature that doesn’t require words to be understood. This is shown in his relationship with Piya; he shows her dolphins and guides her to Lusibari despite not speaking the same language. This reveals a key theme of the novel: the interdependence of human lives and nature. Fokir reminds us that knowledge comes from experience/natural understanding of the land and water rather than formal or “standard” education. This contrasts with Kanai, who feels superior and arrogant because of his conventional education and ability to translate multiple languages. Fokir’s character also highlights the importance of cultural identity that is shaped by mutual experiences rather than individual stories/experiences. In many indigenous cultures, identity is often linked to memory, with community stories passed down through generations, which is demonstrated in the notebook left for Kanai by his uncle. Ghosh emphasizes this communal identity by not giving Fokir a clear personal narrative. Fokir symbolizes the shared struggles/resilience of his community, and the way Kasai belittles him reflects how marginalized groups are often treated.

In “The Hungry Tide,” Fokir’s lack of a personal story critiques how society often overlooks marginalized voices. His character represents the resilience, cultural identity, and deep connection to nature of the people in the Sundarbans. Through Fokir, Ghosh highlights the unspoken struggles of these communities, while stressing the need for inclusion/representation in discussions about environmental/social issues. Fokir becomes a symbol of the diverse life in the Sundarbans, encouraging readers to recognize the complications and connections that shape our world.

The novel “The Hungry Tide” written by Amitav Ghosh expresses this mythical belief that revolves around the tide country that people have already endorsed and acknowledged to be real and why it is connected to nature and not understand that that’s how nature functions. Throughout the novel, some chapters cover these mythical ideologies such as “The Bon Bibi” which is a spirit that protects people who live on those islands from dangers such as the tiger which from my point of view seems like the tiger has to do with evil spirits based on this belief. Characters in the novels, the ones who lived in the tide areas never heard of this legend while some do but they all have their own opinion to express about it.  Kanai when he first heard about Bon Bibi didn’t know what it was until Kusum explained to him that it was a guardian spirit that would protect people navigating the forests from any evil confrontation (tigers) and they would celebrate through plays. “It was Kusum who spoke first. “ I called her too,” she said. “But she never came.” “Who?”  “Bon Bibi. The day my father died. I saw it all, it happened in front of me, and I called her again and again …”” (Pg. 89) This is some exchange dialogue between Kusum and Kanai in which Kanai went running after her after he accidentally touched her and wanted to know why she run and why she is crying, in which then Kusum open up to a tragedy event that happened in which includes the death of his father and the day that this traumatic moment happened Bon Bibi never heard her calling. “That’s what happened, then . They crossed the line by mistake and ended up on one of Dokkin Rai’s islands. Whenever you have a storm like that- one that appears so suddenly out of nowhere- you know it’s the doing of Dokkin Rai’s and his demons.” (Pg. 123) This sentence points out the belief that people carried out during this novel since in one of Nirmal writings he writes out a moment in which they had entered a territory while navigating in which people would claim that some islands are protected by malicious entities and one of them could be this expressed in this sentence in which natural disasters occurs and say that it was the bad thing that was trying to harm them. Also in the chapters where Kanai is reading Nirmal writing, he also encounters the name Bon Bibi to appear in the writing in which Nirmal expresses that he isn’t the type of person to believe in any type of religious belief because for him he sees it as the false consciousness and was confused when Horen and Kusum where doing expressions later on to find out that they crossed out the Bon Bibi line. 

Piya is unaware of these beliefs at some point in their trip a group together they sees a light in a certain village and once they arrive at the place she witnesses that the village where cheering the people who were torturing the tiger to die and she was disgusted about it and asked Kanai to help her shut this down, but he refused because there was nothing he can do. ““Fokir says you shouldn’t be so upset.” “How can I not be upset? That’s the most horrifying thing I’ve ever seen- a tiger set on fire.” “He says when a tiger comes into a human settlement, it’s because it wants to die.”” (Pg. 244) She asked Fokir to help but he also refused because he believed that things happened for a reason and if the tiger’s destiny was to die then it will die. ““This is an animal, Kanai,” Piya said. “You can’t take revenge on an animal.””(Pg.242) She was disappointed because she couldn’t help and when she tried people looked at her weirdly because it’s their thing that tigers are seen as something evil but for her, it was intervening in nature and affecting nature. So from what I can understand from this, her views are different compared to the villages as she believes that every being’s life matters and they shouldn’t kill nature nor try to get revenge. While the villagers believed in their beliefs, both Piya and the people who live on the islands have different perspectives and how they view nature. And I think the reason religion some people would believe it’s connected to nature is because of its unpredictable moments and no one can predict what can happen next but to preserve faith in what they believe in and hope for the best.

In The Hungry Tide, Ghosh portrays a relationship between nature and humans through the dynamics between Piya, Kanai, and Fokir as they guide Piya in her dolphin research. 

Piya, though devoting her career to animals and wildlife, actually seems heavily disconnected from nature, and this is evident when she first meets Fokir as well as in the different perspectives that arise between the two when it comes to killing the tiger later on in the novel. Increasingly, Piya seems to be transforming from someone invested in cetacea, nature, and connecting with it, into the kind of person we might imagine Canavan and Frazier to be speaking up against when we talk about white environmentalism. Though Piya is Indian by descent–and not to diminish Piya’s nuances by equating her to the “typical Bushwick nature-lover who uses reusable shopping bags” as we said in class–she is extremely disconnected from the language and culture in this setting, she grew up in America, and has made a point that her study of dolphins has nothing to do with her heritage. Over the course of the novel, she turns from someone who seems to us as knowledgeable about nature, with all her Western equipment, into someone who is at a loss when it comes to actually understanding life alongside these animals. 

This is why Fokir is so appealing to Piya. To her, it is “amazing to come across someone like Fokir”, who knows how to live with the rhythms of the tides (Ghosh, 221). He spots alligators in the rivers with as much perception as a tiger stalking prey, his knowledge about finding dolphins or hunting crabs is attractive to Piya for its inherent connection to nature. But doesn’t every Sunderban have to learn to adapt to the “rhythms of the tides”? The nets that surround the beds in Nilima’s home, Horen and his son’s knowledge about boats and navigation, and the people who–as Nirmal notes in Morichjhapi–had very quickly organized themselves in shelters and communities, are all reflective of people whose lifestyles have forced them into “becoming animal”, to function under a certain bare humanity where the only thing separating them as a human collective from the dangers of their world are their myths about Bon Bibi, Dokkhin Rai and the threshold between humans and the mangroves, and Ganga. The difference between Piya–and often Kanai due to his retrospective accounts of Lusibari as something “always a thing of the past” and not having a present or future of its own– compared to the rest of the Sunderbans is that the inhabitants of the tide country understand what nature is–it impacts their life everyday, twice a day at that. Piya and Kanai seem to only know about nature. It is for this reason that Piya can, with some privilege, be angry about the angry mob setting the tiger on fire. For her, it was “the most horrifying thing [she’s] ever seen,” but for everyone else, it is a necessary sacrifice as people like Piya and Kanai–who are as close to a first world character as the novel gets–contribute to these climate disasters and increasing man v. nature brawls due to the consequences that their lifestyles in their respective western and elitist worlds perpetuate. 

The culture shock between these three characters seems to be reflective of a broader idea of climate fiction, and pushes us to reevaluate what privileges or positions we might be in in the world, and what we think we might understand. Fokir and Piya show us there is a difference between knowing about something and knowing the thing for what it is.