Compare the Ways the Immigration Process Dehumanises People in Both ‘The Reluctant Fundamentalist’ and ‘The Inheritance of Loss’

Both of these texts show how the immigration process can be a dehumanising experience but ‘The Inheritance of Loss’ does so in a more complex way and although they were both published during the same time period, they are both set in different ones. They both show how the process of immigration can be dehumanising to different people from different countries, and in different contexts of time.

‘The Reluctant Fundamentalist’ is told through the dramatic dialogue of the protagonist Changez to an implied American listener. The author uses both of these characters to represent a conversation which he has with himself in order to understand his emotions and opinions about the events of 9/11, around which the events of the novel takes place. Hamid uses the character of Changez to represent how the process of immigration became dehumanising after 9/11 as many of his Muslim friends ‘began to be questioned and harassed’, which he said in his article ‘My Reluctant Fundamentalist’.

One of the ways in which Changez is dehumanised is how when he is returning from his business trip back to America when he is ‘escorted by armed guards’ and is stripped searched but the fact that his choice in boxer shorts ‘had no impact on the severe expressions’ of his inspectors. This shows how Changez is dehumanised because instead of the guards seeing him as a human being and treating him as such they see him as a potential threat, represented by their lack of humour and personality. Dehumanisation through a lack of humanity and personality is also shown in ‘The Inheritance of Loss’, as they are told where to go by an ‘invisible loudspeaker’, which has connotations of detachment and lack of emotion, showing how they are being deprived of compassion from the people who are supposed to be helping them.

Another way in which Changez is dehumanised is by being asked ‘what is the purpose of your trip to the United States?’ is a clinical and detached tone and through the woman’s lack of interest when he says ‘I live here’. This again represents a refusal to show him compassion. The blunt, impersonal question is also similar to the questions on the visa form that Biju has fill out in order to be able to go to America, which are detaches them from and makes their personal life irrelevant, which would be a dehumanising experience because it is people’s personality that makes them who they are and human.

Hamid then depicts Changez sitting on a ‘metal bench next to a tattooed man in handcuffs’. The handcuffs having connotations of criminality and the metal bench having connotations having connotations of  sterility and a lack of humanity, also show how the process of immigration is dehumanising Changez because of the fact that he is being seen again as a potential threat before being seen as a human.

In ‘The Inheritance of Loss’ Biju shows the Darwinian ideal of ‘bigger pusher, first place’, representing how their desperation to get to America has dehumanised them and caused them to regress into an animalistic mindset to try to have the advantage over potential competition and to put yourself first before others. This is dehumanising because the people who were previously filling out their forms together are now trying to compete with each other. Changez is also dehumanised in a similar way he says ‘my team did not wait for me’ after he had been inspected, which would have been a very isolating experience, but his team till put themselves before Changez.

In conclusion, ‘The Reluctant Fundamentalist’ and ‘The Inheritance of Loss’ both show how the immigration process dehumanises people through both the main characters being subjected to isolating experiences as well as not being shown compassion from the people who were supposed to help them throughout their experience. This is also shown through imagery such as the lack of humanity in the ‘metal bench’ and the ‘invisible loudspeaker’.