Aravind Adiga and Authenticity
I haven’t yet read Aravind Adiga’s ‘The White Tiger’, but reading this story, ‘The Elephant’ in this issue of the New Yorker, is making me somewhat sceptical. It does seem to be the kind of writing meant to “present” India to a Western audience and I think fiction that sets out to “explain” or “preach” loses something.
In the very first page of the story, we have a man whose “face was smeared with sandalwood” and “the fat elephant god, Ganapati.” Now, people don’t ’smear’ their faces with sandalwood, they apply a sandalwood mark or tika, and calling Ganesha ‘the fat elephant god’ sounds quite ridiculous. Later on, we have the rickshaw puller Chenayya telling a journalist, ‘Don’t patronise me’. Is that even an expression used in any Indian language?
One can’t help thinking (on the basis of this very limited evidence) that Aravind Adiga knows little about the people he writes about. There has been a lot of debate about authenticity, and though I don’t believe that you need to be a slum dweller to write about the poor, somehow there is very little empathy for the character, especially towards the end. I got the sense that he wanted to ‘write about poor people’ rather than ‘a’ person and his/her story. Those who’ve read The White Tiger, what do you think?
I did a write a review about the same. http://vectorgaming.blogspot.com/2008/09/white-white-tiger.html#links
I particularly did not like it too much. The way the book is written is more like an objective view of India, the culture and traditions followed. As you have said, he has written about the poor people, what they dream of, and want to achieve. Its certainly not about the one person, who is in a way weaved into the poor backdrop.
I have not understood why this book got the Booker! Maybe its a complete different style of writing. Its not meant to evoke any empathy, its just what the eyes see and the ears hear. This is my explanation!
I haven’t read The Elephant, though I will at a later time, so I won’t comment on that. However, I enjoyed The White Tiger immensely. The writing is quite funny and engaging. Many of the observations about India are revealing of the way systems of oppression infiltrate people’s daily existence here (e.g., the corruption in politics and business, the patronizing relationships between “servants” and “masters”, the cyclical nature of wealth and poverty, the powerlessness of the poor). It is entirely subjectively written from the perspective of the narrator, who is obviously crafted through the eyes of an author who does not have firsthand knowledge of that of which he writes. That being said, the narrator is believable and his journey is sardonically entertaining. He tells you from the jump how it ends. The fun part is finding out how it all goes down, how he gets away with literal murder. I was on his side throughout the novel, probably because I am predisposed to side with the underdog, especially if he/she rebels against their bondage. I don’t think it is the author’s intention to tell a “true” story or to do some sort of investigative analysis or documentation the lives of the poor in India; this is a work of fiction.
As Aathira points out, the only thing I found different about the White Tiger was its defiance of a style of writing that has come to characterize quite a bit of Indian writing in English. There are occasional flashes of spirit but on the whole the book seemed just ok(and definitely not deserving a Booker especially with Amitav Ghosh around).
The Elephant is in some ways a miniature version only that quite a few of the faults of the book are magnified. What was especially annoying was the whole ‘enlightened’ though suffering individual vs the ignorant louts around him. It is true that the medium of the short story provides less of space but the location of anger and discontent in this one individual is quite grating. Plus stories of a similar vein have been written by better authors for quite some time now.
India’ economic ’surge’ has created this new class specifically ’sensitive’ to the lives their fellow beings and looking for opportunities to discover the ‘truth’ about them. That’s Adiga’s goldmine. But I have a feeling it(his success specifically) won’t really last.
But then, I am biased
Prasanth
I had read The White Tiger, and since then have not stopped wondering how the booker landed at his table. Although I read it in one sitting, which means it was not boring, I cannot call it a good piece of work.When I read it first, I did not view it with the point of view of an Indian author selling the Indian misery to the west, but I just did not feel that he “felt” the poverty or the challenges of the other India. It felt like a rich boy, with his superficial research, writing about social justice in India. The sarcasm, which is the humour in this novel, is like that which comes out of a detached on-looker who cares a damn! I seriously, did not like this novel!!
I have not read Amitav Ghosh, but have loved Rohinton Mistry. He always missed the bookers. He has always written about the Indian misery, but not for a moment will you feel that he was writing, just to sell. The research that goes into his book is mind-boggling. I particularly remember a scene about a person writing with a Reynolds on a paper by placing it on the window sill. Since the cement on the sill in tends to be uneven, the person is not able to write it. This description, this habit, this reality cannot be written without knowing fully well, the life behind his story.This was missing completely in Adiga’s novel!
ALL - thanks for your views.
Aathira - if there is no empathy, it is difficult to relate to a character, no?
FR - like you, I am disposed to side with the underdog - I think all of us are! Looks like the White Tiger worked for you as a story as well…
Prasanth - yes, somehow the character of Chennappa with all the suffering + enlightenment concentrated in him, just didn’t work for me. The end especially, I thought was inexplicable. It was more in the style of “this is how a poor man would act”.
BD - I have heard this from a few others too, about a kind of superficial cleverness in the story. I actually haven’t read Rohinton Mistry, but yes, I can understand what you mean when you talk about certain small details adding up to something.
Bombaydosti writes: “I just did not feel that he “felt” the poverty or the challenges of the other India. It felt like a rich boy, with his superficial research, writing about social justice in India. The sarcasm, which is the humour in this novel, is like that which comes out of a detached on-looker who cares a damn!”
This is exactly the position Adiga is in, though. One cannot divorce him from the position that he occupies in the world. And given that writers who “make it” tend to come from privileged backgrounds, should none of them attempt to write about the poor because they lack authentic first-hand experience?
FR, I can’t be certain about BD, but for myself - the issue was not so much about a rich man writing about poverty. I believe that it is possible to transcend certain barriers, including class. Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath, for instance? I didn’t find this empathy in Adiga’s short story mentioned, which I guess is what BD is also saying, not that people from privileged backgrounds shouldn’t attempt to write about the poor.
Look, I am an Indian living abroad for many years now. But there exists a certain amount of loyalty to my country. But this should not make you blind to the faults of it. Adiga I find has written very well the situtation there. We don’t have to tell the westerners anything. You will be surprised to know that sometimes they are more aware of what is happening there than us. We can’t hide what is happening there, especially in this high-tech world. I have been proved many times wrong when I say that certain things don’t exist in our country. Now I am very careful with what I say. I find Adiga did a great job.
The problem with Adiga is that he only show the negative side of India in a negative way
Protagonist of his story is usually a poor person who just curses the ‘rich people’ all the day and has a tendency to betray his employer…That’s what I found common in Novel as well as in this short story. And the way he talks about god/goddess shows his narrow mentality
I enjoyed the book.
I think it is 80% true reflexion of India.
You cannot deny what he has written does not happen in India.
Well done Aravind.
India needs self examination to grow, every educated Indian should read this book.