Literature Uncut

There's this blog called 'India Uncut' by a guy called Amit Varma, that I have been following for a while now. Which means I go there every once in a few days and read up some of his more interesting posts. He's a pretty good blogger, and some of his posts are just great. I like his sharp wit and quite readily relate to his attitude and approach to things in general. Or so I thought, till I came upon this particular post.

Apparently he's written a book called "My Friend Sancho", and in this post he shares his perspective on various topics relating to journalism, blogging, writing a novel, etc. in the form of an FAQ to questions that, presumably, he is being asked these days by various people whose copies of MFS he is signing. Now Amit's blog does not have a comments section, so you can't comment on any of his posts. A rather inconspicuous 'contact me' button at the top right corner of his blog is a reader's only hope to get across to Amit if you have something to say. A few weeks ago (before MFS), I wrote to him wondering why he did not allow comments on his page. I'm still waiting for his response. I guess he's busy launching his first book and becoming an acknowledged novelist in the literary world. Good luck, Amit, I wish you the very best!

So here's the bit (in his post) that I wanted to comment on, and would have if he had enabled comments:

On why I gave up journalism

I felt that writing a novel needed me to devote myself to the fictional world I was creating, and weekly deadlines for columns and suchlike got in the way. I had to make a choice, and so I chose to give up journalism. The process of writing MFS confirmed to me that writing fiction was my natural domain, and I don’t intend to return to journalism now.

Also, writing columns and op-eds require a different mindset from tackling literature. In opinion pieces, one is expected to pass judgments on things, to paint the world in black and white. Literature gives us more scope to acknowledge the real world’s complexities, and to explore its ambiguities. I rather prefer the latter—you won’t find me passing judgement on any of my characters in MFS, or in future books. No matter who the character is, there but for the grace of the FSM go we.

On why my blogging and journalistic concerns are not reflected in my novel

I blog a lot about economics and politics, and my columns were also on those subjects. But you will not find me talking about these subjects in MFS. Indeed, reading MFS will tell you nothing about my ideology or my political leanings, which is as it should be. Literature is about human beings, and, to use a much-abused phrase with a pomposity alert, the human condition. A book that pushes an ideology is, in my view, not literature but propaganda. You won’t find any of that coming from me.

And my comment would have been:

Amit - I am not so sure that a piece of writing, to earn the right to be called literature, must necessarily abstain from any kind of ideological exposition. Agreed, there's (what you seem to call) propaganda (e.g., Das Kapital), and there's (what is generally called) literature (e.g., Pride and Prejudice) but there's also a whole lot in between these two apparent extremes. Just to illustrate, there's a whole bunch of existentialist writing - from Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, Kafka to Sartre and Camus. Perhaps even Hemingway. Of these, Sartre's work comes closest to being an ideological articulation and formal definition of existentialism. Per your definition that would be propaganda. But the others? They've all produced some great literature (including Sartre), though the existentialist ideology shines through clearly, in their writings.

For someone who does not want to pass judgment on things (when writing 'literature') and does not want to paint the world in black and white (when writing 'literature'), you just did that, with these two neat boxes - propaganda and literature: never the twain shall meet. Moreover, I think I detect the faint but distinct whiff of moral righteousness here ... as though (what you call) propaganda type of writing is a 'bad' thing, and literature must stay away from it to be 'good'. Au contraire, I am tempted to argue that good literature always carries a fairly clear message and makes a statement about things. It may not be an ideology, it could just be a personal philosophy or approach or attitude. Just like your blogs. There's usually a quantum of social and/or political commentary embedded in good writing. While this element is not a necessary condition for literature to be good, its presence does not make it bad literature either. I hope to read MFS at some point, but I can bet that your next novel will be much better if you were to set aside this notion of propaganda and let your opinions and views reflect in your writing.

Having your own blog space lets you comment on other's posts even if they don't have space on their blogs to accommodate your comments. Thats a good thing about this whole medium. A great thing indeed!

Posted via email from HyperActiveX's (Pre)Posterous Posts