MyVoice: Views of our readers 29th September 2024

5 among 6 shortlisted for Booker Prize are women

The Booker Prize is a literary award given to a writer writing in English. Since 1969 it has been an annual affair and the winner walks away with a prize money of £50,000 at present. The winner is chosen from a shortlist of six writers selected from a longlist of 12 to 13 names from the year 2007.

Since the inception of the prize, 36 men and 18 women have won it and some of them have bagged it more than once. Coming to India, only five of our writers have won the prize beginning with V S Naipaul in 1971. Arundhati Roy got the prize for her maiden novel, "The God of Small Things," in 1997 and by winning the prize for her second book, "The Inheritance of Loss" in 2006, Kiran Desai achieved what her 87-year-old writer mother Anita Desai couldn't, albeit shortlisted three times for the prize!

The prize is in the news these days for two reasons. First, as is the vogue with the judges, they have announced the names of the six writers who have made it to the shortlist. Second, out of the six writers five are women, a record breaking feat of sorts in the 55-year-old history of the prize. Samantha Harvey (Orbital), Rachel Kushner (Creation Lake), Anne Michaels (Held), Yael van der Wouden (The Safekeep), and Charlotte Wood (Stone Yard Devotional) are the five women who are in the race for the prize to be announced in November.

The nationalities of these writers are as different as the themes of their shortlisted works, though their selection to the shortlist is a mere coincidence, as per the judges. Again the shortlisting of five women writers strongly supports the popular perception that woman is a natural story teller, ask your mother or grandmother for a proof or read the spectacular from rags to riches success story of J K Rowling.

The 18 women writers who have won the Booker Prize so far and the seventeen women writers who have won the Nobel Prize for Literature all tell us one thing for sure that woman as a writer has come a long way from the days of Mary Ann Evans(George Eliot) and Virginia Woolf.

Mary Ann Evans took up the pseudonym of George Eliot for many personal reasons and one of them is said to conceal her identity because in those days women writers were almost looked down and taken lightly. Woolf championed the cause of woman's right to express herself freely and made her point very clear by writing an extended essay titled, "A Room of One 'Own".

Seeing the resounding success of woman as a writer, both Mary and Woolf in their graves must be laughing to their hearts' content. Now whether one more woman bags the Booker Prize or Percival Everett, the lone man in this year's shortlist walks away with the cheque remains to be seen.

- M Somasekhar Prasad, Hyderabad

Even reputed pharma brands failing tests

It is a matter of serious concern that even some widely used brands from companies known as reputed ones fail in quality tests. There are already reports of lives lost by consuming some medicines exported by Indian manufacturers. Whenever news of this sort happens, the authorities and the government make statements to cool down the atmosphere but nothing tangible is done to avoid such repetitions. Every unit of medicine that is available in the market comes with self-certification and the department concerned does random tests which will be too small a number compared to the number of brands available. These medicines collected in random are sent to labs to get their quality tested and get results very late by which time the batch would have been exhausted even. The reason for this delay is the very small number of labs available in the country under the government control. The reason for weak control and monitoring from the stage of manufacturing to distribution is the gross deficiency of manpower in the department concerned. Also, it is to be cleared who should be accountable for misdeeds - Ministry of industries or health or chemicals?

If medicines from companies known as reputed ones fail in quality tests, how can a doctor or a consumer rely on the quality of the medicines sold as branded generics? The government is supposed to prioritise the functioning of pharma companies right from the licensing system to pricing to distribution system as this concerns the lives of the people directly. Ease of doing business should not be allowed to turn into ease of taking lives.

– A G Rajmohan, Anantapur

CBI must act impartially

Karnataka joins a host of states all ruled by non-BJP parties, in withdrawing the general consent given to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). This decision follows the adverse ruling of the Karnataka High Court in the land allotment case concerning the state's Chief Minister, Siddaramaiah.

Beyond the facts and claims of the case under scrutiny in Karnataka lies the fundamental question that half of the states in the country have raised by withdrawing general consent: the integrity and impartiality of the CBI, which is obliged to conduct investigations in a fair and non-partisan manner. The federal structure mandates the jurisdiction of the agency in such a way that it can step in to take over probes from state authorities, and, therefore, general consent is issued as a routine matter.

The integrity and impartiality of the CBI have come under severe strain as the agency went after or was sent after accused individuals in a selective manner to weaken opposition parties or bring down their governments. A CBI probe has been used as a strong-arm tactic for politicians and others to transfer their allegiance to the ruling parties of the day.

The central agency, like other agencies and authorities of the Union of India which hold immense power with autonomy, cannot allow itself to be used for political ends of the ruling party, whichever it may be. This cannot but lead to a trust deficit between states and the Centre. The time has come for a review and redrawing of the CBI's status and powers, as a parliamentary panel recommended last year.

– N Sadhasiva Reddy, Washington

‘Control majority, appease minority’

At a fundamental level, the concept of secularism hits at the integrity of the country. India is a land of many traditions, both Vedic and non-Vedic. The essential attitude of these traditions towards each other is "indifference." When they approach each other, there may be debates and syncretic interactions, but they never escalate into physical violence. The basic attitude of a tradition is "I am true, but you are not false.” This contrasts severely with the phenomenon known as "religions,” exemplified by Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. Religions differ from traditions in many ways in looking at the world, but the fundamental attitude is “I am true, and you are false.” There is an inherent intolerance in the configuration of religions, a trait not present in traditions.

During a specific period in the history of European ChristendomEuropean Christendom, where multiple denominations engaged in a struggle for supremacy, secularism emerged as a solution. This solution successfully separated the state from the church. However, a solution for an intra-Christian world could not be a universal solution to deal with multiculturalism of all cultures across time.

The influx of Islam into Europe and the problems of increasing polarisation along “communal” lines in India show that secularism in fact might be breeding fundamentalism, as Jakob De Roover shows in his book. He demonstrates how the concept of secularism is transforming our diverse and adaptable traditions into rigid, doctrine-based religions. This is increasing intolerance towards each other.

The traditional Indian solution to dealing with multiculturalism and pluralism was to "traditionalise religions." However, the reverse process of "religionizing traditions" is the root cause of the intense polarisation currently occurring in the country. We are moving from indifference and healthy interaction to intolerance.

One can be a part of Sanatani culture without acknowledging the importance or existence of gods. The enlightened monarchy, decentralised polity, and the intimate intermingling of the state and the temples all point towards a different configuration of culture that could better deal with diversity.

Is there evidence of India's rich traditional past, devoid of secularism, serving as a model? Yes indeed. We were the richest countries in the world, both in terms of spirituality and material riches. Everyone came to us to invade and prosper, not vice versa. The peculiarity of the Indian brand of secularism lies in its tendency to appease minorities while ignoring or rejecting the needs of the majority. The state seeks control, rather than guidance, of the Sanatani spirituality while submitting to the dictates of the "minority" religions.

– Dr Pingali Gopal, Hanamkonda

The best loved PM for honesty & simplicity

On October 2, the whole nation celebrates the birth anniversary of Lal Bahadur Shastri ji along with that of Mahatma Gandhi and pays glowing tributes to him, remembering his unparalleled, patriotic services to Mother India, as a noble freedom fighter and the most beloved Prime Minister of India.

Shastri Ji was a man of honesty and integrity and simplicity. A few incidents that happened in his life amply show how he never compromised in adhering to honesty and integrity. How he as the Railway minister anguished deeply at a train accident, resigned his ministership, accepting accountability for the mishap clearly testifies to his honesty and integrity.

One more incident in the life of Shastriji holds mirror to his honesty and integrity. Once, he visited a textile mill. He wished to buy a saree for his better-half. The mill owner, delighted so much at the visit of Prime minister, showed him special sarees priced at Rs 800 and Rs 500. Gazing at them, Shastriji said, "I am a poor man. I can't afford to buy these sarees." Surprised, at the words of Shastriji, the mill owner mumbled, "Sir, You are the Prime minister of India. How can you say you are a poor man? Smiling at the mill owner, Shastriji muttered, "Of course, I am the Prime Minister. But I can't buy these sarees beyond my income.” Pleased with the words of Shastriji, the mill owner said, "Sir, You need not pay for these sarees. I offer them to you as my humble gifts. I have had the privilege and honour of the visit of the Prime minister to our textile mill". But Shastriji rejected the offer and chose a low-priced saree for his spouse.

This incident is the testament to the simplicity, honesty and integrity of Shastriji and his unyielding nature even to gifts which, according to him, are tantamount to corruption. Always clad in simple kaddar clothes, leading a very simple life, Shastriji was the very embodiment of simplicity. Do we have such honest leaders nowadays in the country?

Not even a single honest leader of Shastriji's stature we can spot in the country. We see how our leaders in power, neck-deep in corruption, wearing very expensive dresses, living in posh, palaces, lead luxurious lives.

–Dr Venugopala Rao Kaki, Kakinada

Remove hurdles to Viksit Bharat

Prime Minister Narendra Modi seems to be very optimistic on every occasion while addressing 'Make in India' and a blog was also released to this effect. India is travelling towards esteem level in science and technology and at the same time many unholy happenings are threatening the nation. First of all, these devouring areas are to be under constant check to realise the dream of a developing nation by 2047 that is the 100th year of Indian independence. Cybercrimes, spoiling the modesty of womenfolk, murders, robbery and many other social evils including increasing poverty, unemployment, narcotic drug menace, etc., are obstructing the desired progress of the country. Incendiary politics, corruption and selfishness are, of course, perennial in our country. These hindrances are to be weeded out to see a real Viksit Bharat. Gaining high popularity outside India leaving burning issues inside can never make Bharat bright at any time.

– N S K Prasad, Hyderabad