I enjoyed this book while reading it, yet I am unaware if my judgment is accurate because it's out of my reading zone and genre, and very far from my reality. I relished the description of India and the overall submission to society of that period. The locations were described lividly, which I adore about the book. The concept is very successful, yet it was a poor effort to fulfill its potential.
There were multiple wrongs in the book, majorly including:
1- Lakshmi herself: The idea of a woman striving for freedom and fleeing away from an abusive arranged marriage and poverty was brilliant, especially with the skills the writer equipped her with. The problem rests solemnly with her character, she is a self-centered person who blames everyone but herself for her mishaps, all whilst feeling guilt yet never admitting to it. From her perspective, it is a must for people to understand what she feels within herself, even though she never attempts to vocalize it. Not to mention she compares herself to her ladies and always feels as if she deserves more.
2- Radha: I've read many comments stating that Lakshmi is the most intolerable character, which I simply think is not true, how could she be when Radha is present? An intolerable Bratt who takes everything her sister does to her advantage, and always plays the role of the victim. Even though the book says she is smart she is so naive and stupid. Her character - I presume- is very far from what a teenage girl at that time would be like, it is more like the incompetent spoiled girls of the present. How smart do you have to be to not get pregnant at thirteen, seriously!
3- Samir Singh: A rich man who thinks he should have the right to have every woman he wants.
4- Ravi Singh: Like father like son. Moves around praying on vulnerable girls and destroying their lives, then walks away so quietly and pretends to be an angel.
5- The portration Indian society: Am I the only one who noticed the praise the writer has for the brits? At the first glimpse one see's the opposite, but when you read in between the lines, you can see it. Whether it's in the way they wished they spoke nonchalantly as them ,or the praising of their beauty wealth or clothing. She made it seem as of they wished they were English.
6- The so called "Romance": Instead of the platonic innocent love we all enjoy reading, this book is full of lust. It seems as if the writer had mixed up the meanings of these very different feelings. Also when Samir's wife says: Men can't control their lust, it's the job of women to stay out of their way. They actually have a term for that: It's called cheating. She just acknowledged it so normally as if it was a factual right.
I think the book is great, but the writer should've paid more attention to the character development. The best part of the story was by far Malik, he brightened up the plot with his smile!