Two sides of the coin.

Two articles I came across in last week’s Hindu Literary Review:

Article 1:

A fairly good review by Ajit Duara on a book called ‘Govardhan's Travels’. The book, originally written in Malayalam by P. Sachidanandan comes up with a very creative technique. It borrows a character from a 19th century satirical play and takes him through the eras that follow, bringing out the grotesque unfairness of judicial systems in different societies spanning through the centuries. The review elaborates on the story line and appreciates the novel idea that forms the central theme and structure of the book. I was very impressed by this book, for one might come across a new story now and then, but it’s not every day that one gets to hear about a new and original writing style.

I am not sure if the reviewer felt that he had to mention some shortcomings of the book to make the review sound fair and neutral, nevertheless he ends with these words,

“When the average reader needs to consult a glossary to read a work of fiction, there is a slight problem”

An arcane novel, meant to provide an enriching experience, written in a thoroughly new style and above all, still managing to be faithful to a central theme, is so not meant to reach the masses. The readers are expected to scale up to the standards of the creator's imagination, and that is how art and culture has flourished throughout the years.

Article 2:

With these thoughts , I turned the page, to chance upon Tabish Khair’s commentary “Share'-value of stories today”.

The commentary starts off well, detailing about how novel writing has degraded to becoming every-day merchandise meant to be picked up from the grocerer's down the street. He also goes on to show how popular sentiments are woven into a fine messy mesh by story tellers who somehow end up diluting the fine art of novel writing.

Though the article meanders in the middle, it re gains pace when it brings out the stark hypocrisy in some of today’s sought after novel writers, who seem to be writing for awards and the west's acknowledgement.



The articles mentioned above provide contending view points. What Tabish Khair aims to say appeals to me as a reader of some these “well-known” Indian writers in English. And probably the sentiments of shared by “Ajit Duara” in the closing lines of his review explain the reason why factually rich, and structurally unique Govardhanan’s Travels bows out to dilettantish “The God of Small things” and historically inaccurate “Midnight’s Children”.

Publishing both the articles together may not have been intentional. But , it proved to be one of the reasons why I still stick with The Hindu.

P.S : Wanted to post this before the week ended and the next Sunday supplements came in. Simply couldnt find the time !