no terror

Music Playlist at


same old crap

what is this 55?

Thursday, June 5, 2008

a critique

not that i have any problem with upper crust [in terms of money] of the society producing people good at art. it is just that when some study such as "the waffle of the toffs" by n. prabha comes before me, my faith is reinstated.

it is a critique where the author is trying to drive away a point that most of the gifted authors are from poor backgrounds and spend their lives in poverty and neglect. while those who receive all the medals receive them for the contacts they or their families have in the conferring institutions. she has picked indian writing in english as a subject. the funniest part is that the study itself is publish by some non-descript publisher. i got it as a gift.

in one of the comparisons, it shows how premchand with much more social relevance was nearly convicted for writing stories as compared to tagore who was decorated by the british empire for his socially useless, even anti-independence literature. and it is not just about the social relevance, she has compared the quality of literature as well. an eye-opener for sure.

do read it if you can lay your hands on it.



Blogger Chakoli said...

whats the name of it??

and money has power.... no body could ruin it:-))

6/06/2008 09:32:00 AM  
Anonymous burf said...

chakoli - the name is in the post

6/06/2008 10:10:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

donno if all great authors are poor...hv seen quite a few super-rich ones as well..

6/06/2008 10:57:00 AM  
Anonymous burf said...

churning - no no, what she is trying to say is that those who are from poor backgrounds tend to sketch much quality picture of social scene hence resulting in much better quality product. also, because they couldn't adopt writing as their primary profession, hence the drive to produce writings translate into much higher degree of quality

6/06/2008 12:25:00 PM  
Blogger Chakoli said...

oops I missed it:-)))


so what hindi leterature are u reading nwadays?

6/06/2008 12:27:00 PM  
Blogger rantravereflect said...

yehhh man, sometiem back ya had abishekbachchan showing off 'his painting'n it getting eyealls!
imenannn abishek bachchcan; man does money n fame make ya great at whatever ya doooo!!

shit-arsed concept!

6/07/2008 10:08:00 AM  
Anonymous geet said...


6/07/2008 11:12:00 AM  
Anonymous innocent bystander said...

hmm... personally, i check out the reviews on TIME's 100 greatest novels since 1923 list as a starting point... and research further on any book i feel like reading next before eventually picking it up...
peer reviews help too (to a small extent).

I guess most avid readers follow something similar.
So in the bigger picture, awards and all that dont really matter dont you think?

Somehow got the feeling from your review that the book treats awards as the central concept in the scheme of things.

Most people (me included) cant even name all the books that won the Pulitzer since 2000. and that's not too many books right?

6/07/2008 02:56:00 PM  
Anonymous innocent bystander said...

pulitzer for fiction i mean
all categories IS too many books :)

6/07/2008 03:07:00 PM  
Blogger manuscrypts said...

hmm, should try seeing salman khan's art in a new perspective now :)

6/08/2008 11:43:00 AM  
Anonymous burf said...

chakko - hmm

rrr - lol, yea i know :D

geetu - hmm

bystander - but the problem is many gems don't even see light of the day let alone pulitzer

manu - which art of his?

6/09/2008 10:05:00 AM  
Blogger Sam said...

As the saying goes: its money honey!! ;)

6/09/2008 12:04:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home