AN EXERCISE IN WORLDMAKING 2009 - ISS

194 TARA TABASSI
ments, undermine her and generate a feeble, pathetic character. Is Gula
presented as anything more than nothing? The narrative continues
brightly, ‘The two younger daughters still have a chance.’ If they have a
chance at the light Gula has supposedly missed, the assumption is that
something must occur so as to remedy this lack. And quickly….
5. Result/Resolution: Reunion of Survivor and Saviour!
The result/resolution clause releases tensions in the narrative and finally
tells what happened (Johnstone 2001:638). ‘The reunion between the
woman with the green eyes and the photographer was quiet.’ This is justified
through cultural explanations, ‘[for] married women, cultural tradition
is strict. She must not look [and]… smile - at a man who is not her
husband.’ Repetitively the article continues, ‘she did not smile at
McCurry’ as if to imply unfriendliness to him, despite earlier explanations.
Gula’s thoughts are constructed, ‘she cannot understand how her
picture has touched so many. She does not know the power of those
eyes.’ Gula has become multi-layered in her ignorance: she cannot perceive
what all in the West know of her: the power of ‘those’ eyes.
6. Coda: She survived?
The story closes with the Coda, whereby summaries or brief connection
with the world is achieved (Johnstone 2001:638) and concludes with her
Survivor role. ‘Such knife-thin odds. That she would be alive. That she
could be found. That she could endure such loss.’ Repetitious sentence
structure emphasizes the gravity. ‘Knife’ imagery implies danger and recalls
her ethnically-violent inherency. The pairing of the dehumanising
‘found’ and dangerous imagery implies courage of those who find her.
The righteous conclusion that ‘surely, in the face of such bitterness
the spirit could atrophy,’ comparing what could have happened, suggests
that Gula’s spirit has indeed atrophied. Reference is made to Gula’s
‘losses,’ not mentioned before except of one daughter’s death. Gula is
asked: ‘How had she survived?’ Such a grand question fails to take into
account her point of reference, as if her survival was nearly impossible,
despite the survival of millions of Afghani refugees. ‘The answer came
wrapped in unshakable certitude. “It was,” said Sharbat Gula, “the will
of God”.’ This is one of few times Gula’s full name is used instead of
female pronouns or only first name, reinforcing diminutive objectification.
The choice of ‘unshakable certitude’ suggests fanatical faith, and is