> >> Erm. I'm a Gujju, not a TamBram..... more seriously, there are several >> problems with her writing. "Why don't I love thee? Let me count the >> ways..." >> >> The TamBrahm analogy was because I know so many men who hate Roy and they > always describe their dislike of her with this dispassionate, rational, > logical, arguing-equations-in-IIT tone that bugs the shit out of me. As if > it was self-evident that Roy is an inferior writer and a hypocrite > activist... when in fact this dislike goes deeper and more visceral than > that...and I am curious why. >
I'm a Tam-Brahm and I've seen this contempt-for-Arundhati thing among men AND women, and not just of the Tam-Brahm persuasion either. What's common to the lot that despise her is that they're all intellectuals (or literary critics) - and to me it seems they think she hasn't paid her dues in the Kanu Sanyal or Potti Sreeramulu sort of way to claim the intellectual high ground that she does so well. Two arguments are trotted out. One that she writes for the farang reader, not for the Indian. Sure enough, the deliberately over-florid prose in TGOST is something that would choke bile in many Indian throats. But then Vikram Seth in A Suitable Boy does the same thing, as does Rajkamal Jha in all his work. And neither of those get the derision she does. All three certainly understand the market of the American reader that loves the idea of something Indian from a safe distance, much like those who have 'Indian' food at a gentrified restaurant downtown once a quarter and then bemoan the relatively colourless lives they lead. In some ways these 3 are the slightly updated incarnations of Merchant-Ivory-Jhabwala, writing about a fictitious India for a market that is happy to pay to read about it. They make a good living at this - and more power to them for figuring out the angle. The other issue brought up is her choice of causes. Well, Ms Roy is a cause celebre - and sure enough, she uses her fame to light up issues that are in the dark - perhaps in a slightly more intellectual way than the I'm-Lindsay-Lohan-I-Saved-An-Indian-Child method. Sure you can argue her choice of expedience and issues. but I don't think it's any different from what retired cricketers, not-yet-recognised billionaire wives or wannabe film stars do when they are trotted out with the cause-of-the-moment at their elbows in the glare of media strobe lights. Now what is interesting is neither of these categories of folks: Vikram Seth, Ruth Jhabwala et al or Neeta Ambani et al invite loathing like Ms. Roy does. We have benign acceptance for the roles they are playing Something in the combination that makes up Ms. Roy makes the teeth grate for many, I've noticed. Wonder why. :-)
