Have a great trip, Shoba. I'll make sure that I have a response ready for you.
Nikhil Mehra Advocate, Supreme Court of India Tel: (+91) 9810776904 Res: C-I/10 AIIMS Campus Ansari Nagar New Delhi - 110029. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:46 PM, Shoba Narayan <narayan.sh...@gmail.com>wrote: > The first part is factually correct. The second part is, frankly, >> embarrassing. I don't hold any personal grouses against Ms. Roy, and I >> admire any one with the strength of character to engage in a lengthy >> dissent >> against the State. But I cannot tolerate someone who seems to do it >> without >> a vision - this is dissent for dissent's sake, and it is more often than >> not >> counter-productive. >> > > > Oy vey!! So anyway, I leave tomorrow morning for Corbett for ten days and I > don't want people to think I am backing off. There is nothing that gets my > juices flowing more than a solitary (it seems) protest on behalf an underdog > (which is what Ms. Roy is turning out to be on this thread). This preamble > is just to let people know that my silence henceforth for a week is not > because I am agreeing with you-- on this topic anyway. > > But Nikhil...deep breath...here we go. Everybody who has commented on A > Roy seems pretty entrenched in their opinions, including I. > > I thought GOST turgid in parts and good in others. Frankly, it's an > insignificant book and doesn't form even an iota of my objections against > Ms. Roy. I don't think the book even defines her any more in the public > eye. > > I completely disagree but GOST is fiction so you're entitled to your > misguided view. Let me just say, "insignificant" it was not. We wouldn't > be discussing it here if it were. Booker prize? Lannan cultural freedom > prize-- keeping company with Mahmoud Darwish, one of the other winners. > > > My problem stems from her being an "activist". She is not one. She pretends > to be one. She achieves nothing, sees nothing through and frankly, she > gains > fame by temporarily attaching herself to causes of all sorts - not the > other > way round. > > I don't think it is 'causes of all sorts.' I see a clear thread there. In > a word-- underdogs. In five: giving voice to the voiceless. > > > She would have faded to insignificance except she wants to > constantly tell us that Ind/Isreal/US democracy is shit. She can sit in a > place like Oman and say this without batting an eyelid about the state of > human rights in the middle eastern countries. > > I don't get the Oman reference, but lots of people have strong views on the > way the US is handling the Israel Palestine conflict. Again, it interests > me that you remember hers. > > > She may be described as a professional polemicist, > > Nothing wrong with that. > > but let's not denigrate the term "activist". > > I think she is definitely an activist. She has devoted her life to various > causes, as you call it, when she could be skiing in Gstaad or sunning > herself in Como. I think that some existential vaccum in her is forcing her > to go out there and fight-- some misguided and some guided battles. > > > From ground water use by Pepsi/Coke (where she bashed > MNCs and the Indian Govt for permitting MNCs per se) to the Gujarat riots > (where madam was kind enough to let us know that we're all barbaric without > giving to us animals any idea of how to go forward) > > Modi needs to apologize. that's a start. but that's also a different > debate. > > to Narmada Bachao > Andolan (an exercise in glorymongering). > > Is marching with the Maoists glory mongering too? > > Tge pattern is clear - bash govt, > bash monied party, bash policy, bash govt some more, pretense of empathy, > can't find a solution, move on. Thanks for the stardust. > > Being a brilliant supreme court lawyer, I think even you would agree that > the causes A. Roy is fighting are too complex for one person to come up with > a solution. She does suggest solutions but I think her goal is to shine the > spotlight. I think she needs to change her style because for some reason, > she evokes so much ire > > She never addresses the actual issues. She makes broad allegations. Never > does she actually address the issues at hand. > > Please re-read her essays. > > And let's forget about > offering solutions. I was in court on the day of her disgraceful contempt > exercise in the face of the Supreme Court. Again, she thinks she knows > everything. She thinks that our SC is a Court that perpetuates the tyranny > of the Indian democracy. She says this in about 5,000 words without at any > point betraying even a passing knowledge of Indian legal history. There is > a > reason why the Indian SC is considered the most powerful court in the > world. > It is because no other court in the world has evolved the kind of doctrines > to keep Parliament under check. It is the foremost Court when it comes to > public activism, and even the shirllest critics of the Court's activism, > cannot deny that it has been forced to fill a void left by a corrupt and > asinine Executive, and that much public benefit has accrued from such > activism. But this is symptomatic of Ms. Roy. GOST's recognition gave her a > pulpit - she uses it neither to educate herself nor us. She uses it to > vent, > and senselessly at that. > > Not knowing much about legal history, I am not touching this one. :) > > I would love to see her write a decent book. Really, would. > > You should read GOST. Again. > > You know, in every debate, there comes a point when people are arguing for > arguments sake. You know those endless debates we had as kids about Is > there a God? I think, at least with me, this topic is getting to that point. > > Listen: I get what you people are saying. You guys have a point. I hope > you see mine-- at least a little bit. > > Methinks the gentlemen doth protest toooo much. > > > Regards, > Nikhil > > And kind regards to you too!! > Shoba > >
