Since Time Immemorial:
Memory and Forgetting in the works
of Khaled Hosseini

Abstract

​

This essay probes how Khaled Hosseini presents the theme of memory, which pervades his historical-realist fiction novels — The Kite Runner, A Thousand Splendid Suns, and And the Mountains Echoed. Memory is a sociocognitively complex phenomenon, being involved in identity construction by underpinning self-perception, and fuels the gamut of human emotion by subsuming the polar driving forces of nostalgia and regret. Moreover, memories can be threatened by its antithetical counterpart, forgetting, which is driven by the the liminal entity of time. From a literary and psycho-philosophical perspective, this essay proves memory’s relevance to the human condition by surveying Hosseini’s historical-realist fiction. Firstly, the conflict between memory and forgetting and how it nuances the human condition of narrative personae are examined vis-à-vis symbolism and imagery, comprising the relics undergirding memory. Secondly, by analysing linguistic voice, memory’s subversion and delegitimisation of projected identity by creating an underlying identity are explored. Finally, memory’s role as a driver of redemption and ultimately catharsis will be considered via narrative structure and intertextuality. The psycho-philosophical lens examining memory’s functions in Hosseini’s writing foregrounds memory’s intrinsicity to the human nature. Overall, on a literary level, this essay proves the primacy of memory as an integral aspect of the human condition; on an academic front, it makes a foray into Hosseini’s works with a literary approach, distinguishing it from many of the plot-driven analyses clouding scholarly focus on Hosseini’s historical-realist fiction.

​

Introduction

​

This essay probes how Khaled Hosseini presents memory in The Kite Runner [1], A Thousand Splendid Suns [2], and And the Mountains Echoed [3]. 

 

During an interview with The Atlantic regarding And the Mountains Echoed, Hosseini mentioned ‘the role of memory’ [4] in our lives interested him, prompting inquiry into memory’s role in his previous novels. Memory forms identity: it underpins self-perception, determines one’s internal motivations, and inheres in the human condition. Memory subsumes both nostalgia and regret, therefore fueling the gamut of human emotion. Nostalgia, its positive aspect, assures us we are valued and live meaningful lives [5]; contrastingly, regret entails self-blame for a bad outcome, a sense of loss or sorrow, and the desire to undo the past. [6] Memory lacks fixity: forgetting, driven by the liminal entity of time, threatens memory, its antithetical counterpart. From a literary and psycho-philosophical perspective, this essay proves memory’s relevance to the human condition by surveying Hosseini’s historical-realist fiction. 

 

Firstly, the conflict between memory and forgetting and how it nuances the human condition of narrative personae are examined vis-à-vis symbolism and imagery, comprising the relics undergirding memory. Secondly, by analysing linguistic voice, memory’s subversion and delegitimisation of projected identity by creating an underlying identity are explored. Finally, memory’s role as a driver of redemption and ultimately catharsis will be considered via narrative structure and intertextuality. The psycho-philosophical lens examining memory’s functions in Hosseini’s writing foregrounds memory’s intrinsicity to the human nature.

​

Symbolism and the Opposition between Memory and Forgetting

​

We firstly consider the interplay between forgetting and memory by analysing symbol and imagery. The liminal entity, time, constructs forgetting, which appears hostile by erasing positive memories. Contrastingly, forgetting is beneficial when purging harmful, deceptive memories, expediting post-trauma recovery.

 

Unlike his later works A Thousand Splendid Suns (Suns) and And the Mountains Echoed (Echoed), The Kite Runner (Kite) presents a more dogmatic and complex dynamic between memory and forgetting. The pomegranate tree symbolises the mind, a storage vector of memories both divisive and unifying. The protagonist Amir and his friend, Hassan, ‘[carved] their names on it: “Amir and Hassan, the  sultans of Kabul”’ [7] Their aspirational self-elevation to nobility reflects their childhood memories of friendship. The engraving’s physicality and permanence symbolise their friendship; the tree immortalises their connection.

 

However, like the mind storing negative memories, the tree bears fruit, symbolising memories of regret and betrayal. Amir hurts Hassan with ‘overripe [pomegranates] that had fallen to the ground.’ [8] The '[overripe]' pomegranates suggest Amir's dwelling on negative emotions; the fruit skin's turgidity and hardness reflects the semi-permanence of harmful memories.  Amir’s hitting Hassan with one creates an ‘[explosion] in a spray of red pulp’ [9], the blood-like colour imagery mirroring the violent culmination of acting on such stewing emotions. This outburst taints the conjoint symbolic engraving, now ambiguous since negative memories have upended their friendship

 

After Hassan’s demise, the tree becomes ‘wilted’, ‘leafless’, and unable to ‘[bear] fruit’ [10], representing mental deterioration and forgetting. Through the kinaesthetic imagery of '[tracing] the curve of each tiny letter with his fingers', Amir recreates the engraving, a positive memory engendering a sense of delicate nostalgia.  Yet this conflicts with his ‘[picking] small bits of bark from the tiny crevasses.’ [11] This repetitive pulling action suggests restlessness borne from a desire to remove aspects of an undesirable past. By intentionally undoing the symbol partially, Amir desires to forget his betrayal of Hassan, represented by ‘crevasses’. The depth and dark imagery suggests how deeply rooted the memory is however consciously Amir tries forgetting. Thus, ambivalence: although some memories are pleasant, they too have negative aspects, further complicating forgetting’s role when only partially desired.

 

Interestingly, Hosseini’s subsequent titles achieve more binary presentations of memory. Suns presents forgetting as beneficial albeit unattainable through the sugar bowl, symbolising past wrongdoings. Although appearing explicitly only initially, its extended presence has resonance: it underpins the protagonist Mariam’s lifelong feelings of being othered, described by the linguistic symbol of the harami, an illegitimate child. The tea set it constituted was ‘the sole relic that Mariam's mother, Nana, had of her own mother,’ [12] memorialising lost familial connections.

​

Nana’s positive memory, however, translates to Mariam’s regret when Mariam drops the bowl. In response, Nana calls Mariam, ‘An heirloom-breaking, clumsy little harami.’ [13] As the sugar bowl’s destruction first spawns the symbol of illegitimacy, the expletive label harami, they become closely interconnected. The epithets preceding ‘harami’ impute Mariam with feelings of bastardisation, unwantedness, and guilt. By pinpointing her illegitimacy, these symbols drive Mariam’s future insecurities. 

 

Twenty-eight years later, when Mariam is ‘[thirty-three-years-old]’, the memory remains recallable despite the presupposition that forgetting comes with age; forgetting has failed Mariam. Her husband Rasheed calling her a harami ‘still [stung]’ The psychological impact unceasingly renders itself physically through the insect metaphor, as though having poisoned her and lodged in her body; Mariam’s recollection of Nana’s words verbatim indicates their scarring nature. The allusive epithet ‘heirloom-breaking’ [14] evokes the accident by implicitly positioning Mariam as the semantic Agent [15]: despite the bowl lacking immediate recallability, its associated sentiment, being a harami, supplants it. Thus, by associating feelings of othering with the symbolic harami, the symbolic heirloom induces guilt; Suns presents forgetting harmful memories as desirable yet unattainable. 

 

Echoed opposes this dynamic: forgetting is a hostile force. Note Echoed’s chapter segmentation into near-independent short stories, each with varying literary significance. Abdullah, Echoed’s primary protagonist, loves and desires to remember his sister, Pari,  post-separation; feathers embody these sentiments.

 

The vivid colour and light imagery of the ‘iridescent green peacock feather with a beautiful large eye at the tip’ [16] he gifted her illustrates its physical value, beauty, as embodying his affection; the polysemy of ‘eye’, symbolising sight, shows Abdullah’s instinctive watching over his sister. The peacock represents immortality in Islamic culture, establishing the relic’s everlasting nature. [17]

 

The ‘old tin tea box’ [18] Pari contains feathers in symbolises the mind, which the storehouse memory model [19] describes as storing memories, physically embodied by the feathers. The ‘rusty latch’ [20] is analogous to mental recollection, the imagery of deterioration alluding to the fallibility of human memory. The box’s containing effect diminishes the feathers’ value by concealing their beauty. Forgetting, evaluated vis-à-vis the mind itself, diminishes memories.

 

Abdullah’s old age results in dislocating mental illness — critical speculation suggests dementia or Alzheimer's [21] — undoing blissful memories with Pari; the feathers’ meaning becomes uncommunicable. Dementia, symbolic of the mental faculties wasting away, accelerates forgetting, opposing Abdullah’s memories. An illness’ connotation of adverse abnormalities in bodily functions proves forgetting harms memory and thus self-image.

 

Pari’s failure to grasp the feather’s ‘story’ [22] conferring it meaning renders it a mere artefact, unsymbolic of love and memory. The feather’s previously rich illustrations contrast with the now nondescript, unspecified feather in Pari’s ‘[lifting] a feather, brushing it against her wrist, eyeing it’ [23]: the indefinite article reflects her unappreciation for the individual feathers she once loved; the ironic failure of the physical action of ‘eyeing’ to translate to mental enlightenment subverts the motif of sight; the symbol’s meaning is lost to Pari. Despite feathers ostensibly being connective devices between the siblings, Dementia subverts their symbolism— no longer of memory but grief. Thus, by shrouding and invalidating symbols of memory constituting identity-forming relationships, forgetting impairs the self.

 

Considerable ambivalence thus exists within Hosseini’s presentation of the memory-forgetting interface. Kite defines the desired role of forgetting as selectively applied by suggesting a complex internal construction of memories. However, more conventional approaches are offered later: in Suns, forgetting is necessary but not always attainable, yet in Echoed, forgetting is a pernicious force. Nevertheless, Hosseini’s later novels reconcile the polarity featured in his first: his conflicting multiplicity of presentations already suggests memory and forgetting have a convoluted, intricate relationship. 

​

Linguistic Voice and the Conflict between Underlying and Projected Identities

​

Secondly, we consider how linguistic voice proves memory forms an underlying identity, undermining projected identity. Memories, manifesting as recollections or interpretations of past events, can be intentionally distorted to become untruths as part of projected identity. However, true memories, held by the self or others, undermine this projected identity by forming an unalterable underlying identity.

 

Whose memories undercut narrative personae’s projected identities differs across texts: personae themselves in Kite, but others’ in Suns and Mountains. In Kite, Amir regrets not stopping Hassan’s rape, yet his ego supersedes guilt: he projects a self-righteous identity. Eventually, his guilt drives him to faux-confession: ‘“I watched Hassan get raped,” I said to no one.’ [24] Amir secretly wants to reveal his underlying identity of guilt, yet his identity conflict renders his voice ineffectual — he speaks to ‘[no one]’, his sleeping uncle and father. This self-imposed muteness compounds his guilt by externalising his identity crisis.

 

When Hassan attempts reconciliation, Amir responds, ‘I want you to stop harassing me. I want you to go away.’ [25] Amir’s instructional voice, the declarative form tempering the imperative function, conceals his guilt. He imposes muteness on Hassan, yet ‘cried’ [26] in private: the uncontrollable, unintended muteness of weeping reveals his inner conflict. Ultimately, his retrospective first-person narrative voice reveals regret: ‘I realize I have been peeking into that deserted alley for the last twenty-six years.’ [27] Despite time passing, Amir cannot forget the cause of his guilt; his confessional voice describing his mental translocation during this ‘[realisation]’ acknowledges the irrepresibility of underlying identity; guilt and regret drive the revelation of underlying identity. Thus, individual voice progresses from self-imposed muteness in faux-confession to an uncontrolled voice muting others and finally to true confession — revealing that the regret driving this progression undoes the projected identity by uncovering the underlying.

 

Unlike memory’s self-driven role in Kite, the disparity between the recollected memories of narrative personae and others in Suns undercuts projected identity. In their conflict, Mariam’s parents, Nana and Jalil, persuade Mariam with distorted truths. In Nana’s ‘story,’ [28] her recollective voice, the jinn is spawned after Nana’s incomplete marriage and forms her projected identity; it allows her blaming her epilepsy-like disease on the incorporeal, legitimising her rejection of Jalil’s treatment offers. Nana blames the jinn, the malevolent being she conceptualises to deceive Mariam, for ‘[entering her] body.’ [29] Nana’s corrupted memories spawned the jinn; it is analogous to her nostalgia by existing within the same mental plane, being a deceptive ideational conception. Nana’s voice expresses her memories, constructing her projected identity.

 

When Mariam threatens to leave her, Nana ‘[tries] guilt’ [30], invoking the jinn. ‘I'll die if you go. The jinn will come, and I'll have one of my fits... Don't leave me, Mariam jo. Please stay. I'll die if you go.’ [31] Nana’s appropriating the victim’s voice reveals her secret desperation; her vacillation between certainty in the modal auxiliary verbs ‘will’ and anguished appeals ‘Please’ and ‘Don’t leave’ foregrounds Nana’s mental chaos upon realising that Mariam recognises her underlying identity. The jinn metaphorises the guilt Nana imposes on Mariam. Mariam ‘knew the jinn was a lie’; ‘Jalil had told her that what Nana had was a disease with a name and that pills could make it better.’ [32] Jalil’s refutation of Nana’s vernacular of the jinn by pinpointing her illness creates variance by offering dichotomous presentations of Nana’s memory. Jalil’s voice damages Nana’s projected identity via the linguistic notion of a diagnosis. Nana and Jalil’s conflicting narratives thus antagonise Nana’s projected memory: the version she presents to Mariam is undercut by Jalil’s, revealing the unadulterated memory via medical vernacular, uncovering Nana’s underlying identity of mental disease.

 

Similarly, others’ memories undercut the projected identity of personae in Echoed. Idris, Chapter Five’s protagonist, projects an identity to differentiate himself from his cousin Timur, whom he deems insincere. He impulsively agrees to provide for Roshana, nicknamed Roshi. He begins with resolute promises to Amra, Roshana’s caretaker: ‘Worst comes to worst, I’ll pay for it.’ [33] The first person singular pronoun ‘I’ and the absolute ‘will’ convey his certainty, positioning himself as the heroic actor and Roshi the implied Benefactive [34]. His fleeting memory of Roshana, upon which his promises are predicated, is reflected in his personal voice. Idris’ increasing apathy to memory gradually undoes his projected identity.

 

When communicating with Roshana — ‘We all look forward to your arrival’ [35] — he appropriates his family’s voice with the inclusive ‘we’ and absolute ‘all’. His message to Amra is written in third-person unlike his first-person message to Roshi. ‘He answers Amra, thanks her, writes that he is sorry to hear about the flooding…. He tells her that he will discuss Roshi with his chief this week.’ [36] His personal voice being substituted by third-person narration suggests increasing indifference; the simple present tense verbs reduce his actions to mere habitual behaviour — he responds to her as he would work emails. This insincerity, ironically like Timurs’, undercuts Idris’ projected identity. 

 

Finally, Idris confronts Roshana, who published her autobiography comprising her projected memories in an autobiographical voice. Roshana gives him a note: ‘Don’t worry. You’re not in it.’ [38] Roshanah’s imperative presupposes her awareness of his guilt. While a duality is presented, both pathways have the same outcome: Idris is hurt regardless of his inclusion or exclusion from her autobiography, her projected memory. The exclusion suggests an erasure and recognition of his fraudulent underlying identity, yet an inclusion would criticise him, revealing he is worse than Timur.

 

Ultimately, the outcome of uncovering the underlying identity by damaging the projected identity is constant across Hosseini’s works, though differing in method of revealing — Kites by the muteness of the regretful confessional voice, intentional and unintentional, Suns by the conflicting voices of remembered truth, and Echoes by the intentional and unintentional exclusion of memory.

​

Narrative Structure and Intertextuality and Regret-Induced Redemption

​

Lastly, we consider regret, a product of memory, via narrative structure and intertextuality. Regret drives redemption and ultimately catharsis, as purging one’s sense of moral duty is needed for inner peace. 

 

Regret’s role in Kite is considered via parallel narratives of betrayal and corresponding corrective, redemptive actions. Despite the differences between Amir and his father, Baba, each performs a significant betrayal: Baba’s fornication with Ali’s wife and Amir’s inaction during Hassan’s rape. Amir and Baba’s regret catalyses their moral redemption.

 

Amir learns Baba’s betrayal ‘was a shameful situation’ for his ‘honour [and] name’. [39] Yet Baba’s shame, self-destructive self-judgement, sublimated to regret, a positive impetus for redemptive action. [40] The motif of shame and honour complements Baba’s redemptive actions, expressed in his personal maxim: the ‘only one sin… is theft’; ‘Every other sin is a variation of theft’. [41] By this reasoning, adultery divests marriage of legitimacy. In retrospect, despite Baba’s seeming hypocrisy, Baba is no longer seen as an authority making pronouncements but rather a moralising influence offering injunctions against sin, fulfilling Baba’s redemptive course. 

 

Similarly, Amir’s betrayal is revealed by the constant narratological retrospection as suggested by ‘Looking back,’ [42] which by employing in medias res, reflects his regret explored through deixis to the past; the mental ‘[return]’ [43] to relive his shameful passivity interrupts narrative progression, highlighting his guilt. Ultimately, Amir’s understanding of the convergence between his and Baba’s narratives culminates in his realisation: he had ‘to atone not just for [his] sins but for Baba’s too.’ [44] Thus, recognition of other’s guilt also drives Amir’s redemption quest; the process drives itself. When Amir finally rescues Hassan’s son, Amir ‘[laughed]’ in response to abuse, being finally ‘at peace’ and ‘healed’ [45], equating redemption with receiving physical punishment and somatic pain. This irony reveals Amir’s moral redemption:  absolution from regret grants emotional catharsis. Thus, Kite demonstrates regret’s sublimation into a redemptive quest; recognition and thus vicarious experience of others’ guilt drives one's own morality.

 

Similarly, regret in Suns catalyses redemption, demonstrated by the mirroring effect between three narratives: Mariam’s betraying Nana causes her guilt, eventually driving her to save the deuteragonist, Laila. Although Jalil’s failure as Mariam’s father-figure leads to lifelong regret and reconciliation attempts, their narratives diverge as his redemption quest ultimately fails. The bookend effect created by intertextual references to Pinocchio [46] unifies their redemption arcs.

 

Jalil’s primary betrayal is his implicitly forbidding Mariam from watching Pinocchio at his cinema, marked by hedging and evasion: ‘Maybe you can think of another present.’ [47] By suggesting alternatives, Jalil’s compromises the unconditional nature of a ‘present’, devaluing its intended recipient, Mariam. Jalil’s betrayal drives Mariam’s own, eliciting Nana’s objections to abandonment, Mariam’s betrayal of Nana: ‘How dare you abandon me like this, you treacherous little harami!’ The linguistic symbol, harami, appears again, though its entailed illegitimacy is gradually lost. Similarly, in the film Pinocchio, Pinocchio begins as illegitimate, symbolised by his physical state as a wooden puppet; Pinocchio’s moral compromises are his choosing of fun over school [48], betraying his father-figure, Geppetto.

 

These betrayals evoke regret and guilt. Jalil’s letter to Mariam reveals his guilt: ‘I regret that I did not make you a daughter to me…. And for what? Fear of losing face? Of staining my so-called good name?’ [49] Jalil’s explicit regret is tied to the renunciation of his reputation in the series of interrogatives, signalling his desire for forgiveness, a subset of redemption only the betrayed can offer. The narrative converging point is Mariam’s ‘[wishing] she had been a better daughter to Nana.’ [50] In Pinocchio, Pinocchio behaves in opposition to Geppetto’s wishes [51]; the recognition of unfulfilled familial obligation underlies regret.

 

Ultimately, characters make parallel attempts of redemptive action. Jalil’s letter is an attempt for reconciliation, a form of redemption: ‘forgive me, Mariam jo.’ [52] The betrayed’s forgiveness releases betrayers from deontological obligation. Mariam’s course of redemption is subtler: Mariam’s agency in saving Laila defines her redemptive action: ‘this was the first time that she was deciding the course of her own life.’ [53] Saving Laila indirectly compensates for Mariam’s abandonment of Nana; these chronological yet contrasting elements show Mariam’s transformation. The cathartic sublimation of regret to peace in Mariam’s final moments — ‘it was not regret any longer but a sense of abundant peace’ [54] — demonstrates her transformation from passive to proactive, defined by her decision. Similarly, implicit intertextual reference to Pinocchio’s physical transformation into a human boy symbolises his moral redemption from saving his father from Monstro the whale [55], driven by his misbehaviour-induced regret.

 

Thus, Suns resonates the defining characteristics of the redemptive arc with reminiscential regret straddled across a bipartite narrative structure; intertextual references to Disney’s Pinocchio reinforce this notion. Despite Jalil’s questionable attainment of true redemption, the direction of the moralising redemption quest in nonetheless clear.

 

Finally, Echoed also proves regret’s catalysation of redemption, though redemption is not necessarily  achievable. Echoed’s embedded narrative mirrors the main narrative: the story of Baba Ayub (Ayub) in Chapter One by Saboor, Pari’s father, reflects Saboor himself.

 

The narrative’s antagonist-figure, the Div, forces Ayub to betray his son, Qais. The recurring sacrificial notion, ‘A finger had to be cut, to save the hand’ [56] is the converging point between the parallel narratives, but subsequently appears as: ‘The finger cut, to save the hand’. [57] The former ‘finger’ refers to Qais and the latter Pari: they represent each narrative’s archetypal betrayed figure. Interestingly, the omitted semi-modal of obligation ‘had to’ in the latter implies Saboor’s deliberate choice to sell his Child, Pari, was not completely forced by circumstances, though it guaranteed her a better life. Contrastingly, Ayub was obligated to forsake Qais to the Div. Ayub’s predicament is direr, yet he projects himself in the narrative parallel: his externalisation in the embedded narrative shows Saboor perceives his betrayal of Pari to be similarly forced.

 

Saboor does not ‘tell stories anymore.’ [58] His narrative muteness highlighting his guilt, akin to Ayub’s imagining accusations of ‘[cowardice] for willingly giving away his son.’ [59] His belief reveals his regret’s escalation to guilt. The perceived external imposition of ‘cowardice’ he now regrets constitutes his self-defined moral shortcoming from which he seeks redemption. By leaving Qais to the Div’s better care, Ayub’s self-sacrificial decision at the cost of his desire for reconciliation with Qais demonstrates his moral redemption; he secures Qais’ best possible future despite his grief, converging with Saboor’s narrative. The subsequent layer of redemption is Ayub’s drinking the ‘potion that erased these memories,’ [60] invoking forgetting as a form of quasi-redemption.

 

Although Saboor does not achieve true redemption, he projects himself on Baba Ayub who does, albeit not achieving positive emotional catharsis. Furthermore, the embedded narrative proves forgetting as an alternative to redemption, foregrounding memory’s universal roles across all forms.

 

Thus, Hosseini demonstrates the central role of regretful memories within the redemptive pathway. Negative memories are controlled by negative feedback; regret catalyses its own removal. Though redemption is not completely achieved in Suns and Echoed, mental transformation is nonetheless evident. Kite evolves this dynamic: awareness of others’ redemptive quests paralleling one’s own provides further impetus for action. Furthermore, all betrayals are intra-familial, demonstrating the omnipresence of the redemption arc.

​

Conclusion

​

Hosseini offers a diverse, satisfying commentary on memory’s many functions. The conflict between forgetting and memory highlights their complex internal constructions and how perception shapes memory. Memory constructs both underlying and projected identities yet undermines the projected to reveal individuals’ true selves; evolving regret spurs redemption and catharsis. Even then, forgetting substitutes true redemption where it is impossible; the process of memory comes full circle. Memory and the lack thereof, forgetting, construct the human condition; memory’s two broad faces, regret and nostalgia, perform distinct roles. The functions of memory are interlinked and cannot be considered in isolation. This concern of memory becomes more poignant vis-à-vis Hosseini’s Afghan diaspora status and émigré voice [61]: through memory in historical-realist fiction, Hosseini explores his relation to his reminiscential sociocultural origin, Afghanistan. 

 

List of In-Text Citations

[1]  Hosseini, Khaled. The Kite Runner. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2017. ISBN: 978-1-4088-9133-9

[2] Hosseini, Khaled. A Thousand Splendid Suns. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2008. ISBN: 978-0-7475-8589-3

[3] Hosseini, Khaled. And the Mountains Echoed. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014. ISBN: 978-1-4088-5005-3

[4] Ali, Wajahat. “'Kite Runner' Author on Writing, Afghanistan, and His New Book.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 16 May 2013.

[5] Burton, Neel. “The Meaning of Nostalgia.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 27 Nov. 2014.

[6] Greenberg, Melanie. “The Psychology of Regret.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 16 May 2012.

[7] Hosseini, The Kite Runner, 26.

[8] Ibid., p. 86.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid., p. 243.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Hosseini, A Thousand Splendid Suns, p. 3.

[13] Ibid., p. 4.

[14] Ibid., p. 216.

[15] Aarts, Bas. Oxford Modern English Grammar, p. 106. Oxford University Press, 2011.

[16] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 22.

[17] Green, Nile. “Ostrich Eggs and Peacock Feathers: Sacred Objects as Cultural Exchange between Christianity and Islam.” Al-Masāq, vol. 18, no. 1, 2006, p. 27–78., doi:10.1080/09503110500222328.

[18] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 22.

[19] “Epistemology of Memory.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, www.iep.utm.edu/epis-mem/#H1.

[20] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 22.

[21] Pir, Farhad Ahmad. “Major Themes in the Novel And the Mountains Echoed.” DJ Journal of English Language and Literature, vol. 2, no. 2, May 2017, p. 9–9., doi:10.18831/djeng.org/2017021002.

[22] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 462.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Hosseini, The Kite Runner, p. 80.

[25] Ibid., p. 82.

[26] Ibid., p. 83.

[27] Ibid., p. 1.

[28] Hosseini, A Thousand Splendid Suns, p. 9.

[29] Ibid., p. 10.

[30] Ibid., p. 27.

[31] Ibid.

[32] Ibid.

[33] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 179.

[34] Aarts, Bas. Oxford Modern English Grammar, p. 106.

[35] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 188.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Aarts, Bas. Oxford Modern English Grammar, p. 245-246.

[38] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 197.

[39] Hosseini, The Kite Runner, p. 206.

[40] Hacker, Peter. “Shame, Embarrassment, and Guilt.” Midwest Studies In Philosophy, vol. 41, no. 1, 2017, p. 202–224., doi:10.1111/misp.12073.

[41] Hosseini, The Kite Runner, p. 17.

[42] Ibid., p. 1.

[43] Ibid., p. 85.

[44] Ibid., p. 209.

[45] Ibid., p. 265–266.

[46] “Pinocchio.” Walt Disney Productions, 1940.

[47] Hosseini, A Thousand Splendid Suns, p. 26.

[48] Bosworth, David. “From Wariness to Wishfulness: Disney's Emasculation of Pinocchio's Conscience.” The Georgia Review, vol. 65, no. 3, 2011, pp. 596. JSTOR.

[49] Hosseini, A Thousand Splendid Suns, p. 394.

[50] Ibid., p. 280.

[51] Bosworth, David. “From Wariness to Wishfulness: Disney's Emasculation of Pinocchio's Conscience.” pp. 589.

[52] Hosseini, A Thousand Splendid Suns, p. 394.

[53] Ibid., p. 341.

[54] Ibid., p. 361.

[55] Bosworth, David. “From Wariness to Wishfulness: Disney's Emasculation of Pinocchio's Conscience.” pp. 597.

[56] Hosseini, And the Mountains Echoed, p. 6. 

[57] Ibid., p. 54.

[58] Ibid.

[59] Ibid., p. 7.

[60] Ibid., p. 15.

[61] RFE/RL. “'Kite Runner' Author On His Childhood, His Writing, And The Plight Of Afghan Refugees.” RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty, RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty, 22 June 2012.

​

Bibliography

 

Primary Texts

 

1. Hosseini, Khaled. A Thousand Splendid Suns. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2008.

 

2. —. And the Mountains Echoed. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014.

 

3. —. The Kite Runner. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2017.

 

Books

 

1. Aarts, Bas. Oxford Modern English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

 

Journals and Periodicals

 

1. Bosworth, David. "From Wariness to Wishfulness: Disney's Emasculation of Pinocchio's Conscience." The Georgia Review 65.3 (2011): 584-608. <www.jstor.org/stable/41403351.>.

 

2. Green, Nile. "Ostrich Eggs and Peacock Feathers: Sacred Objects as Cultural Exchange between Christianity and Islam." Al-Masāq 18.1 (2006): 27-28.

 

3. Hacker, Peter. "Shame, Embarrassment, and Guilt." 41.1 (2017): 202-224.

 

4. Pir, Farhad Ahmad. "Major Themes in the Novel And the Mountains Echoed." 2.2 (2017).

 

Internet Articles

 

1. Ali, Wajahat. 'Kite Runner' Author on Writing, Afghanistan, and His New Book . 16 May 2013. Atlantic Media Company. 1 February 2018. <www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/05/kite-runner-author-on-writing-afghanistan-and-his-new-book/275736/.>.

​

2. Burton, Neel. The Meaning of Nostalgia. 27 November 2014. Sussex Publishers. <www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/201411/the-meaning-nostalgia.>.

 

3. Greenberg, Melanie. The Psychology of Regret. 16 May 2012. Sussex Publishers. February 2018. <www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-mindful-self-express/201205/the-psychology-regret.>.

 

4. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Epistemology of Memory. n.d. February 2018. <www.iep.utm.edu/epis-mem/#H1.>.

 

5. RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty. 'Kite Runner' Author On His Childhood, His Writing, And The Plight Of Afghan Refugees. 22 June 2012. 1 February 2018. <www.rferl.org/a/interview-kite-runner-afghan-emigre-writer-khaled-hosseini/24621078.>.

 

Films

 

6. Pinocchio. Dirs. Ben Sharpsteen, et al. Walt Disney Productions. 1940.