The Algebra of Arundhati’s Injudiciousness

On side note:-
Farzana dear
Becoming a writer looks like an easy thing, but to be a good articulate writer does not mean just writting correct words in place, writtings have to emerge deeper from your heart and soul.Your heart and soul should be in to it. You don`t have to push and force your self in to it.

This is exactly, what you proved yourself in this article, that you didn`t force your heart , you put your heart and soul in to it.

Congratulations. keep it up

``Out of Sight, Out of Mind``
Simple reason is that AR needs some limelight back on her.

Farzana Versey

`` Prize-winning author and activist Arundhati Roy has declined this year`s Sahitya Akademi Award, saying she cannot accept the honour from an institution linked to the Government whose policies she opposes.

Is this an unwavering stand or a whimsical sulk? For several reasons I have openly expressed my admiration for Arundhati Roy.

Today, I am completely pissed off. I have a few questions to ask of her: ``

She has a right to decline the award. You have a right to be pissed off at her.

=== Interact Removed ===

#19 by bbabu on January 23, 2006 1:28pm PT

arundhati should refuse to travel on a passport issued by a government she disagrees with...or drive on roads built by the government she disagrees with..

and if she doesn`t like India`s Kashmir policy, she should take a courageous stand and renounce her citizenship..

#21

Oh, she has said several times how she doesnt consider herself an Indian citizen but a ``world`` citizen. It is this cruel MNC controlled world that is denying her a ``world`` passport and forcing her to travel on the blue Ashoka lion one.

The article is pretty logical and makes the author`s views clearly. On the other hand, what exactly is the clown in post #1 trying to say here:

``too tangential and muddled for any clear thesis to emerge without great effort on the reader. The arguments and counterarguments are not delineated clearly ``

He he he he

Hamzaad and Dotty,

Whenever I read your comments, I merely consider the source from whence they sprung...or oozed...

---

I`ve been looking for the reasoning and logical argument presented in this piece. Briefly, the piece states that Roy:

1. should accept Sahitya award because it was good enough for the other anti establishment writers to whom it was awarded

2. the judges of the Sahitya award committee are now embarrassed because Roy refused their largesse

3. it is good manners to accept awards

4. it is good manners to accept awards from the Indian literary establishment so that other anti establishment writers can also be awarded in the future

5. It is a sign of maturity of accept awards

6. The recipient of awards must have complete transparency and consistancy in terms of the awards they have accepted, the histories, policies, funding sources and ANY other economic or political dealings with other organizations.

Just sorting the first part of this piece out. to be continued...

correction:

6. The recipient of awards must have complete transparency and consistancy in terms of the awards they have accepted from each institution including the histories, policies, funding sources and ANY other economic or political dealings with other organizations of these award giving institutions.

Farzana, {``I think the Akademi has expressed more grace than the lady in this particular context.``}

Farzana,
Again, a superb article written with very light criticism, getting the point across very gracefully. I was rather surprised to see this viewpoint expressed by you, but then your objectivity and 360 degree vision is the essence of your credibility. Good job.

When it comes to these celebrities of international ``goody goody two shoes fame,`` why is it that they acquire the despicable myopia of the very institutions and people against whom they have been struggling? Why is it that they have to be more stubborn and more asinine than the ones they accuse of inflexibility and cruelty? Maybe the answer is that these people have become so negative in their outlook, that they fail to see any good anywhere, unless it comes from their own external (western?) sponsors and masters.

Thank God there is no such confusion in Pakistan. From the President, down to the PM, to the Information Minister and the state institutions, all functionaries speak with one voice. No one is going to get an award for criticizing any part of Pakistani society. That makes so much sense, if one can criticize anything in Pakistan, then there is no Paki left in the land. One God, one Prophet (PBUH), one book, one religion, one people, one president, one PM, one voice, and no dissent. It is unpardonable that one part of the Government of India is the victim of Ms. Roy`s rhetoric and the other part rewards her for this disloyalty.

#25 Saminah, it is AR who brought this issue up. Now if she is going to refuse an award by:
- a respected literary Academy of her own country,
- which has honored and had members on the executive and juries from writers belonging to various languages of her beloved country
- some people who has done more for people of her country than she in her elite sensational style will ever do

she refuses the award because Akademy is funded by Government. That is height of chutiyapa... I don`t know about her but most of Indian people:

- go to schools funded by the government
- ride on buses partially funded by government
- get electricity partially funded by government
- drive on the roads funded by government

so it is fair to point out that she associate herself or deal with people who never touched any government funds ever if one ahs to follow her argument for refusal...but we all know about her photo op with famous terrorist trainer ISI honcho Hamid Gul...she was fine with that. one assumes Sahitya Akademy has more credibility than Hamid Gul.

this woman is full of her elitism and self centered behaviour. Farzana is right in pointing that out.

#27 dullabhatti
Very well said

#26 Salim_Chauhan
I agree with your point of view. Thanks for bringing it up.

Part II

When looking at the writers who, as this piece points out, have accepted the Sathiya Award, the point seems to be, why is Roy refusing to accept this award when other anti establishment writers have?

In the absence of an explication of WHY Roy might have refused the Sathiya award, I offer my own speculations:

1. Refusing an award given by a government funded institution does not necessarily reflect badly on past recipients who have accepted the award; it just draws a line in the sand for that individual. Clearly Roy felt that accepting the award was unacceptable for her. I can only hazard that accepting it may have been too problematic. In many ways, Roy, like other anti establishment WOMEN writers have the right to be wary of national awarding institutions. I find it rather amusing that given the amount of rightwing whining about Roy`s considerable abilities and razor sharp critiques of objectionable Indian policy, that the cabal of rightwingers are now demanding that she be grateful for being offered a symbol of governmental acceptance.

To what extent does Roy legimitize the Indian government by accepting this award? I guess that should Roy accept this award, the patina of respectability might be lent to the government whom Roy critiques. One cannot bite the hand that feeds one with equanimity. Since we are discussing writers and not actors, (if one did, please bring up Brando) or statespeople, several writers have refused to participate in Laura Bush`s poetry shindigs at the White House in protest of the US invasion of Iraq. Sharon Olds and Sam Hamill have penned some fairly eloquent positions on their refusals. Does that mean that the poets who did accept Laura`s fete are selling out? No...I believe there are poets who attended the White House function and were comfortable in making their skepticism of US policy clear. But then, their political affiliations are more moderate.

If Roy decides to meet publically with individuals declared by the Indian govt as ``enemies of the state``, that is, as an independent, intelligent, individual possessing free will, HER perogative. I am surprised that when political writers choose to meet with ideological figures, it is considered some kind of crime when such expectations are based on little logic. As Roy has continually affiliated herself with the ``enemies of the state`` of India, why should it be a surprise that her choices in what she accepts and does not accept?

No doubt she is a great writer but that does not mean she is free of faults. There has been a long leftist tradition in India that has produced hundreds of writers in various languages in India...some of them actually were from the oppressed and down troden people she claims to defend...and remained so all their lives...even after getting Sahitya akademy awards...but they had the grace to differentiate between government and insitutions funded by government.... they kept writing for the problems of their people and worked for their betterment.

it is also true that Akademy has faultered many times as has any other instituiton - governement or private - in India but mostly it does have the credibility and respect of most of the people.

similariy AR can be excused of faultering too..everyone does once in a while...but she seems to claim a patent on attention seeking behaviour that is going on for too long. People have right to point that out to her that princess has no clothes on sometimes.

samina, you confusing the issue....Roy did not get award from a politicallly controversial figure A or B. If she had to refuse any award, invitation or honor from say...Vajpayee, the PM of India, of even present one, it would be totally understandable. I will understadn that. I will also understand if she refused this award arguing that she thinks Akademy is a PR branch of political figure A, and I oppose figure A hence I don`t accept the award. Fact is she refused it saying it is funded by government. Tell me what big institution in which country is not funded partly by government or another business, social organization or a wealthy individual?

e.g. since you oppose Bush policies, it would make perfect sense if you were to refuse a jacademic award given to you by a school solely based on the fact that the school is partly funded by Bush`s business money....but refusing it saying it is funded by American government will be ridiculous. I am sure your present job is partly...even if slightly....funded by some american government or public money. is there any conflict in getting your pay check from that money because you oppose Bush? No I don`t think so.

Also awards like Sahitya Akademy is one time payment and can`t be taken back...so how is it the case of can`t bite the hand that feeds you? She has been already biting..err..cutting the hand with knife:-) that feeds Sahitya Akademy..and Sahitya Akademy still felt honored giving her this award...is anything missing here?

as for some one declaring some one enemy of state..I assume you mean my mention of Hamid Gul...may be you should hear or read this nutcase some time and see if it is just a case of someone declaring him enemy of state. I am pretty sure you will remain 100 yards away from him let alone posing for a photo op. and if you did pose, salim will beat you to death on unplugged.:-)

btw hamid gul came into equation because she does not want to do anything with an institution that is funded by a government yet photo ops with a guy who was more than funded by a government.