Each time Rohinton fails, I have found myself asking some questions. Has it anything to do with the judges who are of course all very learned persons in the field of literature? Or is there anything patently wrong with his works? Or is there any third and extraneous factor, which stands in the way of the coveted award?
If you take to reading one of Mistry’s novels, you will come across plenty of Indian words, even swearing words, which he never really bothers to explain. Salman Rushdie also uses such words, but he would immediately get them translated them for his readers. It is my suspicion that Mistry’s foreign readers, our judges included, suffer from a communication gap. Do our esteemed judges, for example, get the right images of Madhiwalla Bonesetter or Tehmool-Lungraa as Mistry describes them? Can they understand the grim and fun part of these expressions? I have strong doubts whether they are able to grasp and get the hang of complexes and nuances of Indian realism as Mistry portrays in his fiction.
Then, like any great writer, he always writes from within, and explores the newest and ghastly human conditions people are being constantly dumped into. India’s politics keeps coming back to his fiction over and over, often as the backdrop, and in a somewhat direct way. This may not be exactly to the refined tastes of our judges. It might be hard even as a judge to encounter such depressing truths as Mistry would like them to take notice of. Mistry, as a novelist, is a hard-core realist, and despite the fun and vibrancy of his works, he plumbs the murkier depths of life like any great master of the past. Some judges may view it as dark and anachronistic in today's "positive" thinking world.
Mistry’s fiction has message, and this is not always palatable. In A Fine Balance, for example, he had a masterly and poignant take on common men in Bombay under Mrs. Gandhi’s emergency. Though it portrays a layered account of a wonderful relationship among four different persons from different background in times of upheaval, it is essentially an authentic document of human condition during a particular political regime. Who knows some of these judges might have fascination for Mrs. Gandhi (she had great charisma) and may hate politics as a subject.
Go To Page: 1 2
