Arundhati Roy: A Pamphleteer?

A pamphleteer! That is how an article in a well-known Indian magazine has recently described Arundhati Roy. The writer of the article, a literary reviewer of some standing, argues that Arundhati has now directed all her writing talent to writing articles championing the cause of the Left and the radicals, and is a “loss to the literature.”

How easily one takes on Arundhati these days! There are complaints’ galore against her from possibly all quarters. If you ever follow up on the readers’ responses after one of her articles is published in a magazine, you will find that almost all of them are against her. They lash out at her for a varied of reasons ranging from her politically incorrect views to her “defeatist and apologetic” worldview.

Her writing colleagues are not pleased with her either. Why is not she writing another novel, they ask. And why is she dabbling more and more in non-fiction? Like our esteemed reviewer, many indeed feel that she is wasting away her talent writing these “pamphlets”.

In view of the phenomenal success of her first novel GOD OF SMALL THINGS, she should have normally followed a different course of life. It was easier for her to write a second novel, to earn more money by writing and other ways (she was approached by a corporate house to sponsor one of its products) and live with great style like any other superstar.

But she opted for a different life style for a writer. Today she spends her days with the Narmada Bachao activists, away from the comfort of city life, and devotes her time to researching on and writing against dams, globalization and nuclear weapons. She has already ruffled the feathers of the country’s most powerful people, landed herself in myriad litigation and has, so to speak, a hell lot of trouble to face on a day-to-day basis.

So, why are some people angry with her? The establishment has reason to be miffed because she points out its gaffes and blunders in sharp unambiguous terms, never mincing her words. Her fellow writers –especially those who specialize in non-fiction - look upon her as a threat to their individual careers. In style or content, logic or analysis, they are no match for her. But I cannot help being amused at adverse responses from some of her readers.

Given that the editors would pick up mostly those letters, which are indignant and inflammatory, these letters in a way could be a pointer to Roy’s strength as well as her predicament as a writer. One of the common complaints against her is that she is retrogressive, and not hip! It requires little imagination to figure out that this shallow and sweeping opinion comes from the rich and upwardly mobile section of the society who have no real social concern and accountability for India. How could they bear with a writer who is not only knowledgeable about the country and its people, but who has rare feel for and insight into the living conditions of the majority of people?

Go To Page: 1 2

Articles in this Topic    Discussions in this Topic