Literature
The Great Indian Novel
That’s right. It is the famous book by Shashi Tharoor I am talking about. I know it’s a bit late to review that book on this blog, but what can I do? I bought myself a copy just a week ago, and finished reading it just a couple of hours ago. But, I can say this confidently. I regret having taken so long to read a book that is so delightfully irreverent and astonishingly well-informed. Now, where do I start? Before I say anything else, let me state that I always knew that Tharoor was a prolific writer. But, this one exceeded my expectations. To cut a long story short, I loved the book. There were many things that I liked about the book. The first, and most important: the treatment of the fictional Gangaji, (the real-life Gandhi) as a master tactician, an expert politician, and sometimes, a biased moralist. The portrayal must have ruffled quite a few Congress feathers when it was first published. It makes me wonder if the current generation of Congress-walahs have even read the book. After all, Tharoor does not exactly flatter them by labelling their ‘Goddess Indira’ as Priya Duryodhani. Or is the allusion too subtle for the videshi mind of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi to grasp? Do the apologists of the Dynasty even have the brains required to understand Tharoor’s satire? I highly doubt they do. For if they had, they would not have nominated him as India’s candidate for the position of Secretary General of the United Nations. Congratulations Mr. Tharoor! You have made your point quite clearly.
The second positive aspect, perhaps as important as the first is our beloved first Prime Minister as Dritarashtra. Oh yes, Dritarashtra was blind, literally. That is not his fault. But, Nehru was blind in the metaphorical sense. And, as Tharoor puts it, chose to see the world as he wanted to see it and not as it really was. The analogy, I must say, is quite apt. The references to Draupadi Mokrasi puzzled me, until the very end. Until about an hour after I finished the book. The brilliance of it all hit me on the face as suddenly as a flash of sunlight in a dull, dreary day. Draupadi Mokrasi is precisely that, De-mocracy!! Wow!
Anyway, with that, I will end this eulogy of Tharoor and his book. I do, however, have something to say about Nita’s latest blogpost. She has finally completed an incomplete post on NRIs and dollar-earning desis. It was published, if I remember right, way back in October 2006. Wow Nita! Your posts certainly have a long gestation period. Her objections to Rashmi Bansal’s article on Rediff are certainly valid. When I first read the said article a year ago, I wasn’t as offended as Nita. In fact, I even questioned her defensiveness. But today, I bear testimony to the fact that attitudes evolve. I am just as bugged as Nita by the way Bansal portrays all Indians working abroad as those who are not good enough to make it to top-of-the-rung institutions in India.
Secondly, Nita’s feelings about nostalgia are quite valid too. Not everyone feels the need to wax eloquent about crowded sabzi mandis and traffic jams and mum’s cooking. We must accept that some people are decidedly happier in their First-World homes with 52-inch televisions and three cars. That doesn’t mean they are not Indian. Why do we, as Indians, feel the need to be so judgemental about those who choose to make a foreign land their home despite what Bansal calls cold reception? Do they not have the right to choose the way they want to live? Do we seriously think our NRI cousins or American-born nephews are out to make us jealous and plant diffidence and wistfulness in our desi heads? If we do, we are simply too naive for the world…and lack greatly in entrepreneurship and confidence. If some of us want to chase dollar dreams, so be it? Why is the rest of the world so bothered about that? We may or not may not be good Indians, but we are certainly successful and happy, albeit in an alien land.
Right to free speech?
Yesterday’s attack on controversial Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen speaks volumes about the increasing intolerance in Indian society. We, as Indians, pat ourselves on the back about democratic tradition in our beloved homeland and pride ourselves on the inherent tolerance of the Indian people. But, where has that tolerance gone now? Ms. Nasreen was in Hyderabad to release the Telugu version of her new book Shodh, when activists of the All-India Majilis-E-Itihadul Muslimeen attacked the gathering. Not only is the attack worth condemning but the words of a local AIMIM MLA on CNN-IBN are simply outrageous. He claimed, in full view of television cameras, that the “punishment” meted out to Ms. Nasreen was insufficient and she should have been killed to teach a lesson to all other presumptuous Muslim women who dare to speak out against oppression. The new book Shodh explores the life of a woman wanting to break free and live life on her own terms.
The AIMIM claims that the book is anti-Islamic and that Taslima Nasreen is a kafir for daring to express herself. The attack against Ms. Nasreen is just one example of the growing intolerance in Indian society. In fact, the incident reminded me of the annual anti-Valentine’s Day vandalism carried out by the Shiv Sena. It is not just religious fundamentalist groups who indulge in such acts. A few years ago, about 20 young couples were arrested by the Chennai City Police at a park in Anna Nagar, one of the posher areas of the city. When the parents of the arrested arrived, the police claimed to have arrested them for indecent exposure in public. Apparently, holding your boyfriend’s hand in broad daylight is considered indecent exposure. As usual, the local Hindu Munnani activists and other fundamentalist outfits, both Hindu and Muslim, condemned the behaviour of the poor couples and blamed the decadence on the West.
All this brings us to one fundamental question. Since when is speaking your mind taboo in this country? Why should Ms. Nasreen be attacked simply because she chose to say out aloud what many of us think privately anyway? A more pertinent question would be why nobody does anything when such incidents occur? Everyone from the AP Chief Minister to the Prime Minister to the press condemns the attack on Ms. Nasreen, but the attackers were let off on bail almost as soon as they were arrested. Chances are the case will be forgotten over the next week. Why does nobody think it fit to arrest the man who practically called for Ms. Nasreen’s assassination and slap a charge of inflammatory speech on him? All this makes me wonder whether the right to free speech is not merely a politically correct thing to accord in this country. Do we really have the right to free speech without fearing reprisal? I don’t know.
On literature and cinema
Over the past few days, I have heard more about Harry Potter than I did over the last 10 years. The hype surrounding the release of Book 7 is unbelievable. Among other unbelievable things is this article in the San Jose Mercury News about giving Harry a “proper send-off”. I began to read the article out of sheer curiosity. By the time I finished it, I was convinced that all the hype was unnecessary. To “hold “Goodbye, Harry” gatherings” and mock funerals seems utterly ridiculous to me. If there is one thing the Potter series has done to children, it is to teach them that death is a certainty. It tells the tale of an epic battle between good and evil and shows that many lives, some innocent and others not, will be lost in the process. When a series as realistic as this one ends, why should children go into a state of manic depression? It seems that when they do, they have not really learnt the lesson Jo tried so hard to convey. That “for the well-organised mind, death is but the next great adventure.” If that is true, children would understand why the series has to end. They would understand that all good things must end at some point so that better things can take their place. By advising parents to hold mock funerals and memorial services in the memory of the fictional hero, I think psychologists and psychiatrists are underestimating the intelligence of children who read the Potter books. Perhaps, they have understood the point of the books better than we have as adults. Perhaps, they are not as dumb as child and family psychologists think they are.
Having said that, on to the second theme of this post. I recently saw the trailer of the forthcoming movie “Gandhi, My Father“. It’s tagline states that “one family’s tragedy was the price of a nation’s freedom.” Why is that, you may wonder. For the first time, a movie humanises Gandhi and talks about the complicated relationship he shared with his eldest son, Harilal. As usual, the political parties claiming uphold the Gandhian legacy have created a furore about the movie allegedly tarnishing Bapu’s squeaky clean image. Why is it so difficult for us to accept that the man who brought us independence through the mantra of non-violence may not have been the perfect human being we make him out to be? Does his failure as a father undermine, in any way, his contribution to the Indian freedom movement? The question I asked a few months ago of Indian crickets is valid in this context too. Why do we seek to deify those who do us good? Why can’t Gandhi be human, with his flaws and drawbacks? Why does he have to be God-incarnate to hold a place in our hearts? To me, Gandhi is a man. A great man, but a man nonetheless. Yes, his contribution to the freedom struggle was invaluable. But he had his faults. Who doesn’t? I don’t agree with many of his principles, but I still respect him. If I were to criticise his ideals, do I become the Devil’s advocate? I don’t think so. I certainly hope people don’t stop questioning what must be questioned in an attempt at blind reverence. Gandhi was a great man. He was a Mahatma. But even Mahatmas have their flaws.Where is the reading habit going?
The latest, and the last, instalment of Harry Potter is out. I am still awaiting the verdict from acclaimed critics and ardent fans, but the hype surrounding the book release has set me thinking. Yesterday, when I went to pick up my copy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, I found that I was probably the only adult, apart from the harassed parent running to the bookshop early in the morning to shut their child’s whining. In fact, I suspect the other parents thought I too was a parent who came to pick up the book for her child. Anyway, there I was, picking up the book for the sheer pleasure of reading. Yes, Harry Potter is a children’s novel. But there is no rule that adults must not read children’s novels, is there? There is no rule that intelligent 25 year-olds wanting to do research on terrorism must not escape into the fictional and extremely fascinating world of Hogwarts, Voldemort and Harry Potter for the sheer fun of reading an extremely well-written piece of literature. So, why is it so difficult for my “mature” adult friends to appreciate my taste in literature without looking upon me as a mentally retarded freak who likes to read “kiddish” books with the zeal of a 13 year old?
Ok, now I am ranting. Back to the point I wanted to make. Where has the reading habit disappeared to in the children of today? While it is certainly true that the Harry Potter series has bought many a kid back to books, Jo has not entirely succeeded in weaning today’s child away from brainless cartoons and violent video games. I have been thinking about this whole issue ever since I got back home last evening. I live in an apartment where there are at least 25 children between the ages of 5 and 15. None of them, and I repeat, none of them were remotely interested in the fate of poor Mr. Potter in the final book released not 12 hours ago. I came home at 6 pm and buried my nose in the book almost immediately, pausing only for dinner, and finally stopping shortly before midnight because I could not keep my eyes open. The reading session continued this morning and continued only with brief pauses for bath and food until I finally finished the book around 2 pm. The kids around me seemed oblivious of the interest that the book generated and were quite content in watching Scooby Doo and Popeye on Cartoon Network, or whatever it is that they watch. To me, that was a travesty. I cannot imagine putting down an interesting book to watch a movie where I am not required to use my brain.
Unfortunately, creativity seems to be becoming a bad word for Generation Y (or Z or whatever) They are quite content copying answers from textbooks without questioning their rationality or relevance and watching stupid cartoons and equally stupid movies. They refuse to use the greatest gift God has ever given humankind, the ability to think and reason. Schools that they attend are equally content in accepting textbook answers to textbook questions and far from encouraging thought and creativity, actively discourage any variation from the accepted textbook answer. Any child impertinent enough to attempt an original answer is quickly sanctioned with low marks and a note to the parent complaining that the child is too arrogant for his own good. The charade does not stop there. The parents, obsessed as they are with grades and class ranking quickly stifle any more originality by ordering the child to do as the teacher says or face the consequences. And so starts the process of unquestioning acceptance of the written word. But wait, what are we doing? Why are we making a nation-full of people incapable of expressing original ideas and creative impulses? Why are we sticking to the colonial principle of making a nation full of clerks? If that is truly what we want, why are we complaining of the lack of research in Indian universities?
It is frustrating to sit here and see children of today scorning the reading habit as if it were the plague. How does one explain the pleasure of spending a lazy afternoon with an interesting book in hand? How does one explain the thrill of imagining the deadly magical duel between Harry and whoever attacks him instead of having to make do with what Warner Brothers chooses to show us on screen? Why are the children of today becoming so lazy that even picking up a real book with paper and cardboard is a bother? At this point, after observing children around me, I only have questions. The answers seem too elusive to hope for in the near future.
The Harry Potter Phenomenon
While on a smelly 7-hour long Air India flight from Paris to Mumbai, one tends to try and distract oneself by reading. And that is precisely what I did. Before I proceed, let me register my disappointment with the state of India’s shining national carrier. After a highly annoying conversation with the Air India Paris representative about baggage allowances and laptop computers, I boarded the flight with an armload of magazines and newspapers. The flight’s condition gave me serious doubts about its air-worthiness and made me wonder if Air India had at all bothered to maintain its fleet since it first acquired the aircraft in the 1970s. Trust me, it was that bad.
Anyway, back to the point. Once I got over the shock of seeing the state of “Air India shining”, I began to read the highly interesting, but atrociously expensive Time Magazine. The article in question was about the efforts of the “Harry Potter Brain Trust” to keep up the net of secrecy surrounding the much-hyped release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. While the process in itself was extremely interesting, what spurred me on to writing this post was the conclusion of the authors, Lev Grossman and Andrea Sachs. They ask whether the publishers of the Harry Potter books are not under-estimating the power of the same series they are working so energetically to promote.
This was a particularly interesting question. If people only read books to find out the story and the ending, nobody would read the same books more than once. Such is not the case, as we all know. Dickens, published many decades ago still holds a sway over lovers of books. Some books are classics and we never tire of reading them. I have read David Copperfield and many times over and the books hold the same appeal today as they did all those years ago, during the first reading. To cite more examples, the story of Iliad and Odyssey are so famous that they must have become boring by now. But no, they continue to inspire the production of such blockbusters as Troy and Gladiator. The same goes for the Potter books. Why then, are we obsessing with secrecy? Why are we so paranoid about spoilers on the Internet affecting our enjoyment of the books? So what if we do find out the ending? Do we not read a book simply because we want to read it irrespective of who killed whom and who defeated whom?
As a student of literature (ex-student, but that’s beside the point), I find that it only makes sense if Harry finally defeated the evil Voldemort. Why would Jo create the character only to have him defeated at the hands of the most powerful and evil sorcerer ever? From a purely literary perspective, that is the only thing that would make sense. The good must always triumph over the bad. That is poetic justice. And not even J K Rowling would throw us a googly on that. That brings us back to the original question. What is the point of reading. The point is to spend time with the book and enjoy the time thus spent. It is appreciate and even experience a good book. And Harry Potter, is a good book.