The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini, Book Review Example

Khaled Hosseini’s 2003 novel The Kite Runner is arguably structured around two main axes of tension which prima facie possess two respective points of origin. Firstly, there is present what may be termed a familial and social tension that is engendered by the basic roles that constitute familial, friendship and community relations. In other words, certain problematics in the narrative emerge because of the very nature of these relationships. Secondly, there is present a cultural and political tension, in which relations between different political ideologies, cultures, classes and ethnicities are the primary causes determinative of conflict and antagonism. The way Hosseini intertwines these two problematic contexts is arguably the most striking aspect of his novel, insofar as he effectively synthesizes both universal and particular experiences to shape his story. That is to say, on the one hand, the familial and social tension presented in The Kite Runner can be considered universal to the extent that almost anyone can identify with the specific difficulties inherent to the relationships between father and son, brothers, classmates, and social peers. On the other hand, the cultural and political tension is what particularizes the novel: present throughout the work are the ethnic inequalities and political antagonisms unique to the narrative’s Afghani setting, such as the conflicts between the Pashtun and Hazara tribes, and the ideological turmoil that persists throughout Afghanistan’s radically changing political history, moving, as Hosseini describes, from monarchy to communism to the Taliban. In light of how Hosseini combines these two separate tensions in order to construct his narrative, the following essay has two aims. Firstly, it will summarize the salient conflicts that constitute the novel through a synopsis of the relevant characters and the personal, ethnic, political, cultural and historical relations that exist between them, so as to provide both a recapitulation of the narrative and how these various antagonisms are interwoven by the author. The second part of the paper will examine precisely how these two tensions can be interpreted in terms of a comparison with the reader’s subjective experiences and personal history. Whereas the political tensions presented in the novel are obviously unique to the Afghan context, providing the reader unfamiliar with its history a vivid account of the culture of Afghanistan, it is the turmoil of the individual personages that transcend this very context, thus creating a universal empathy experienced by the reader towards the suffering of the characters.

The form of Hosseini’s text can be said to carefully compliment the changes within particular phases of an individual life, such as childhood and adulthood, with an ever-changing Afghani political situation. Accordingly, the first part of the novel chronicles the narrator Amir’s childhood in 1970s Kabul, Afghanistan, a time where the nation was under monarchic rule. Amir is the Pashtun son of a wealthy merchant and entrepreneur, referred to by the narrator with the affectionate name Baba. Baba is a powerful and respected member of the community in Kabul, possessing influence within the Afghan government of the time. Whereas Amir’s childhood can be considered somewhat idyllic because of his position within the dominant economic class, it is nevertheless not without its difficulties. Two key relationships and the tensions intrinsic to them inform Amir’s childhood. Firstly, there is an antagonism in Amir’s relationship to his father. Amir, whose mother dies while giving birth to him, senses that his father is somehow dissatisfied with him. Thus, Hosseini’s portrayal of Amir’s childhood is largely based on the notion that the young Amir is seeking to gain Baba’s favor. The extroverted and forceful Baba contrasts with the introverted and more intellectually minded Amir. This tension is, however, not merely the result of Amir’s perception:  Baba is also conscious of a difference between father and son, as he states to his friend Ramir Khan: “If I hadn’t seen the doctor pull him out of my wife with my own eyes, I’d never believe he’s my son.” (Hosseini, 2003, p. 22) The character differences between the two, as, for example, crystallized in Amir’s love for literature and his nascent aspirations to become a writer, leads to an antagonism that is explicitly detailed by the narrator through descriptions of the precise feelings of his own inadequacy.

The second crucial relationship present is between Amir and his childhood friend Hassan. Hassan is of Hazara ethnicity, which is traditionally regarded as an inferior ethnic group by the dominant Pashtun tribe. Hassan’s father, Ali, is a servant to Baba’s household, and Hassan, as Hazara, is condemned to following his father’s subservient path. For example, Hassan is restricted from inclusion into the social system because of his Hazara ethnicity – Hassan does not attend school and is illiterate. Whereas Amir and Hassan are good friends, this relationship also produces its own problems for Amir. While Hassan displays an immense loyalty to Amir, offering a deep friendship, the narrator is conscious throughout the novel that he did not reciprocate to Hassan this same love. There are instances of cruelty towards Hassan that emerge in Amir, revolving around both Hassan’s inferior ethnic status and the personal jealousy Amir feels towards Hassan, insofar as he suspects that Baba considers Hassan to be the son he never had. Thus, the narrator recounts instances of antipathy towards Hassan, despite their friendship: “What does he know, that illiterate Hazara? He’ll never be anything but a cook.” (Hosseini, 2003, p. 32) In this sense, there is a certain love-hate sentiment that Amir feels for Hassan: it is clear that Hassan is his best friend, but concomitantly, Amir cannot wholly accept Hassan on both ethnic and personal levels.

The ambivalence Amir feels in his relationship to Hassan is crystallized in a crucial incident that occurs at a kite flying competition. Amir, driven by the urge to please his father, surprisingly wins the kite flying competition. Hassan, noted as a gifted “kite runner”, namely, one who collects fallen kites, promises to bring to Amir the last fallen kite of the competition, in a demonstration of his fidelity. Concerned that Hassan has not yet returned with the kite, Amir seeks him out, only to find Hassan trapped in an alley, where his ruffian neighborhood Pashtun schoolmate Assef proceeds to rape him. Amir does nothing to help Hassan, and this incident drives the guilt that he will feel throughout the rest of his life. As opposed to the tension with his father, Amir’s failure to aid Hassan demonstrates a profound individual betrayal that Amir is conscious of. Unable to live with this guilt, Amir eventually conspires to have his father remove Hassan and Ali from their positions as servants of the estate. Amir creates a ruse that Hassan had stolen some of his birthday gifts, with the intent being Hassan’s expulsion. Although he had not stolen the gifts, Hassan nevertheless confesses to Baba his guilt; Baba, accordingly, forgives Hassan. At the same time, under their own free will, Ali and Hassan decide to depart from Baba’s estate. With this departure, one of the two crucial relationships that informs Amir’s childhood ends.

It is arguably the tension with Hassan that defines the remainder of Amir’s life. With the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Amir and Baba are forced to depart from Afghanistan, since their bourgeois background brings them into conflict with the Soviet proletarian ideology. Baba and Amir eventually make their way to America, and various social struggles and culture shocks are depicted: the formerly affluent Baba, for example, must work in a Californian gas station in order to make ends meet. In America, Amir meets his future wife, a young Afghan woman named Soraya, the son of an Afghani general’s daughter. Amir wishes to marry her; yet because of his lack of occupational success, the proposed wedding is not looked upon favorably by Soraya’s father. Baba, who at this time is terminally ill, nevertheless uses his former influence to aid Amir, as he encourages Soraya’s father to accept Amir as son-in-law, a request to which the general acquiesces.

A radical break occurs in Amir’s American life when he receives a message from his father’s friend Rahim Khan, who had encouraged Amir to pursue his desire to become a writer during childhood. Rahim Khan is ill and wishes to see Amir, urging him to journey to Pakistan, where Khan currently resides. During this time period, the Islamic fundamentalists of the Taliban have assumed power in Afghanistan. Amir embarks on the trip to see Rahim Khan, and, against this volatile political background, Khan reveals to Amir that Hassan has been killed by the Taliban because of his Hazara ethnic background, and moreover, that Hassan was the son of Baba and thus Amir’s half-brother. The previous guilt that had been somehow muted by his new life in America returns to Amir and is furthermore aggravated by the realization that he had acted against his own brother.

After this crucial plot twist, the action shifts: Rahim Khan implores Amir to recover Hassan’s son, and thus his nephew, Sohrab, from a Kabul orphanage. Amir, perhaps primarily as a debt to his departed half-brother and an attempt to atone for his guilt, commits to finding Sohrab. Unbeknownst to Amir, Sohrab is currently in the custody of his the childhood nemesis Assef, who is also a member of the Taliban. Upon confronting Assef, Assef violently beats Amir; however, Amir is saved by Sohrab, a symbolic reversal of the incident from Amir’s childhood in which he did not rescue Hassan from Assef’s violence.

After finding out that the American orphanage in Afghanistan that would house Sohrab does not exist, Amir decides to take Sohrab with him to America. Problems with documents prevent Sohrab from leaving Afghanistan and the youngster unsuccessfully attempts to kill himself. Amir eventually manages to secure the paper work for Sohrab, taking Sohrab to live with him and his wife Soraya. Sohrab, however, is greatly depressed, rarely speaking, traumatized by his experiences. Nevertheless, a glimmer of hope is presented at the end of the novel, when, during an Afghani New Year’s celebration at a park in California, Sohrab smiles as Amir flies a kite and speaks of his father Hassan.

The complex imbrication of political and personal tensions and tragedies can thus be said to drive Hosseini’s novel. Individual torment and suffering is both augmented and aggravated against a violent political background that engenders further ethnic and racial hatred, primarily directed against the Hazara by the Pashtuns. It is arguably this interweaving of the problems of individual lives with bloody political situations that are not of individual making that infuses the novel with its tragic element. Accordingly, the novel’s success in portraying this tragic story can be said to lie in this double tension. On a subjective level, one can understand the tragedy of these personal relationships, insofar as feelings of betrayal and inadequacy are universal; moreover, the political and religious ideology that creates stereotypes and prejudices which ruin the lives of the characters underscores the overall senselessness and contingency of the violence portrayed in the particular Afghan context. In this regard, the establishment of the reader’s intimate closeness to the characters is generated through the very universality of their personal relationships. Whereas this universality is accompanied by particular cultural difference, i.e., the Afghan cultural context, such a difference is nevertheless ultimately transcended by the universal personal relationships that drive the story’s narrative, thus allowing the reader to clearly see something through the eyes of another.

For example, considering my own personal background, the narrative of The Kite Runner represents a radical contrast. I grew up in a largely white community in Colorado, and as such, the presence of minority cultures was at a minimum. However, this does not entail that such ethnic homogeneity is the precondition for an idyllic social experience: in my particular case, being skinny and somewhat socially awkward, I found myself the target of aggression from classmates. Accordingly, racial or ethnic differences, as in Hassan’s case, are clearly not the only pre-condition for aggression and hostility: these pre-conditions can take various forms. In this regard, when considering my own experiences as juxtaposed to those presented by Hosseini, the particular Afghani context, while contributing greatly to the tragedy that the narrative portrays, is not necessary to the tragedy itself: such hostilities are as universal as personal relationships, that is to say, they are present to the extent that there are relations between people in a community.

Accordingly, whereas Hosseini encourages non-Afghani readers to understand Afghanistan’s unique history through his intricate re-telling of the country’s recent political turmoil, it can be said that the real point of the novel is to show the universality of traumatized human relations In other words, when one engages in the act of reading a highly culturally specific novel such as The Kite Runner, the author’s intent is not for the reader to see only this cultural specificity, but rather to implore the reader to grasp the underlying humanity of different contexts despite existing cultural differences.  In this regard, although clearly emphasizing the unique Afghan cultural, historical and political context, Hosseini, with the depths of his characters, undermines the significance of this very context: what is of crucial significance to the novel is the universal humanity of its characters.

In this manner, Hosseini forces a radical shift in perspective in the reader’s own personal biases and stereotypes. Hosseini depicts clear ethnic hostilities; he also depicts hostilities between friends and family. There is an omnipresence of such hostility operating on numerous levels. However, by showing these various tensions, Hosseini essentially present a radical critique of the meaningless of these hostilities: they are wholly contingent phenomenon and there is nothing necessary about them. Accordingly, there is nothing necessary to one’s own world view, nor to one’s own biases: these are all contingent and aleatory phenomena. The Kite Runner can be said to encourage a radical act of reflective and self-critical thinking, whose intent is to separate these particularities from an underlying universal image of humanity in its fragile state, an image which is not derivative of these particularities, but rather, despite such fragility, transcends them.

Works Cited

Hosseini, Khaled. (2003). The Kite Runner. London: Bloomsbury.