In her article Power Politics (November 27, 2000), Arundhati wrote how she felt a "stab of shame" at call centres; they were for her a humiliating subjection to western capitalism. I felt a similar stab of shame when she accepted the Knight of the Order of Arts and Letters from the French ambassador. For a person who so publicly expressed her outrage when India went nuclear, accepting an award from an established nuclear power is baffling.
N. Puri, New Delh
Why is that your Glitterati pages carry photographs of scantily-clad women and little else?
M. Kumar, New Delhi
In the article Rich Man’s Law (June 4), R.K. Anand has been misidentified as A.S. Anand. The error is regretted.—Editor
While I sympathise with the men whose cases have been discussed in Hearthless Homes (May 21), usually, no matter what the causes might be, people tend to blame the woman than the man for any failure in making a marriage work. Men are automatically protected by a chauvinistic outlook and are pitied rather than being pilloried. But the fact is, no one willingly goes for dissolving a marriage if it can be saved. Their situation has to be seen in proper perspective—a bad deal between two otherwise splendid people who weren’t mutually compatible.
Kamalini Mazumder, on e-mail
I’m aghast at Khushwant Singh’s churlish and insensitive writing (Blue Hawaii Yoghurt, May 28). He hints that RK wouldn’t have been a publishing marvel without the help of Greene or The Hindu. He should shut up. The Hindu published some of his short stories and early works. That’s all. True art, since the times of royalty, has ben published under royal patronage. All of Arundhati Roy’s works and Singh’s vitriol gets published in your magazine and other north Indian dailies. And even before the Naipauls, Singhs and Roys had learnt to spell their English, Narayan was mapping the issues of women’s emancipation, politics, the dramaless existence of our lives—the first existential writer of our times in Indo-Anglian fiction.
Vachala Gopalratnam, Kentucky
I entirely agree with Khushwant Singh’s assessment of R.K. Narayan. My wife and I published several ‘middles’ in various newspapers some years ago and sent copies only to a few, including RKN. While Khushwant and Natwar acknowledged receipt, there was nothing at all by way of acknowledgement from Narayan even though copies were sent to him twice. Of course, this is not to belittle the achievements of the great novelist. But it’s also good to point out the foibles of such greats once in a while.
G. Sundaram, on e-mail
Khushwant Singh should at least give up vilifying people. Whatever his opinion or experience of Narayan, he should understand that Narayan remains one of the few gentle giants of English Literature India’s produced. Singh, for all his bluff and bluster, just has his Train to Pakistan to stand in comparison with Narayan’s vast body of work. Anyone reading his subsequent novels—especially Delhi—can clearly see how he has degenerated into a third-rate peddler of sex and smut.
Surajit Frank Agarwal, Makati City, Philippines
The sardar does it yet again. This time while appraising a literary giant like R.K. Narayan. Why should he have been surprised if Narayan—contrary to his expectations—agreed to come along with him to see a blue film? Was it because he had a preconceived notion of how a south Indian Brahmin would behave? And trust Outlook to have highlighted just that. Guess you love to attract controversy and lots of letters. Here’s obliging you.
Mahesh Krishnan, Mumbai
It’s an insult to R.K. Narayan to pass off Khushwant Singh’s farcical, blasphemous piece of writing as a tribute to that literary great. He should at least have had the grace not to be critical and judgmental, particularly at a time when the great man has passed away. It was a complete contrast to the piece Ranga Rao has written in the same package. What literary merit does Singh have anyway to pass judgement on someone of Narayan’s calibre?
Sudarshan Jayaram, Chennai
Does the result of the TN poll mean that we Indians have lost the moral right to carp about corrupt politicians (JJ and Her Technicolor Cape, May 28)? So it would seem, but the truth’s otherwise. Perhaps the majority of voters aren’t concerned about venality anymore. This segment may not have heard of Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau or the Social Contract. All they want is a better deal for themselves, and to hell with how it’s obtained.
Aminuddin Khan, on e-mail
The EC’s decision to debar Amma was in consonance with the provisos of the Representation of People Act. The governor’s constitutional decision to invite the elected leader of a political party too is beyond judicial review. The legal complications will arise only when Amma files nomination from any constituency to get elected. The reasons, based on which her papers were rejected, will remain. It’ll be interesting now to see how she’ll bypass these legal tangles.
Praful Bhatnagar, on e-mail
It’s surprising and ridiculous to see the recrowning of JJ, the air-conditioned politician in her land of heat and dust. This can happen only in India where we, the tools of these politicians, foolishly believe ourselves to be carrying the torch of democracy of a western style when all we’re doing is holding the lantern of mobocracy of an eastern style.
K.S. Joshi, on e-mail
If three special courts in four years can pronounce judicial verdict in only two of the 11 cases, does one need say more about the functioning of our "criminal justice system"? As for the claim that the results have been an "acquittal before the people’s court", does it imply that the law of the land does not apply to "criminals" once they win at the hustings?
Cpt (rtd) H. Balakrisnan, Chennai
The electorate of Tamil Nadu is so immature and naive that it gives a massive mandate to the most corrupt as well as convicted political leader.
A.P. Thadhani, Ahmedabad
Jayalalitha’s win in Tamil Nadu suggests only one thing: that the voters there were not convinced of the corruption charges against her and believed them to be just an act of vendetta by the dmk and former chief minister Karunanidhi.
P.K. Srivastava, Ghaziabad
The latest Internet joke on the assembly polls: Mamata, Sonia and Jaya are on a plane, talking among themselves when Mamata says: "I have this 100-rupee note. If I drop this, and one Indian picks it up, I’ll make one Indian happy." So Sonia pulls out two 50-rupee notes and says: "If I drop these, I’ll make two Indians happy." Not to be left behind, JJ pulls out 100 one rupee notes and says: "If I drop all these, I’ll make 100 Indians happy." At this point, the pilot can’t resist himself and pipes up: "If I threw all three of you out, I’ll make a billion Indians happy."
Murali Duggineni, Hyderabad
Buddha’s smiled yet again. First at Pokhran and now in Bengal (Red and White). Mamata’s slogan of bodley deen, paltey deen fell on deaf ears. The Communists are back in power, leaving her red in the face. She’s clearly paid the price of playing Brutus with Vajpayee and Basu-bashing.
S. Balakrishnan, Jamshedpur
Apropos Enron Unplugged (May 28), like the Mughals of yore handing over the dewani of the land to the East India Company, Maharashtra’s very own neo-Mughal, Sharad Pawar, has virtually mortgaged the future of coming generations to Enron. But of course, one can hardly blame Enron; it’s the failure of our leaders and our own system of unaccountability that’s doing us in.
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
Apropos The Real Story of Dabhol (April 30), it’s not as if Madhav Godbole’s recommendations are impossible to implement. Just that one will have to call a non-profit-making organisation to operate the Dabhol power plant. Or Prayas and the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch—with the active support of the Mumbai Grahak Panchayat and individuals like Abhay Mehta as trustees—should be given the responsibility to operate the power plant and supply completely subsidised power to the mseb and in turn to the people of Maharashtra and India.
Shrinivas Tendulkar, Mumbai
Of all the ‘pillars’ of our democracy, the judiciary is the worst (It’s Autocrazy, May 28). With cases dragging on for years on end and undertrials languishing in jail for durations more than they’d have been had they been convicted, can there be a worst form of the rule of law? In the instant case, I can only hope Shiv Basant, who pointed out that his ministry had not agreed to the demand from SC judges for Balenos, doesn’t get hauled for contempt of court.
P.M. Ravindran, Kalpathy
The Indian judiciary has become highly powerful in recent years. Maruti Baleno is a small price to pay if they can restore our faith in the government machinery; I won’t even oppose a Mercedes for judges of the higher courts if they can live up to what’s expected of them.
Rakesh Sharma, on e-mail
Apropos your cover story The Triangle (May 21), support on the nmd issue is the first positive and intelligent move towards strengthening our relationship with the US. A relationship with China has no future—the country cannot be trusted at any cost.
Deepika R., Mumbai
Outlook seems lost in the process of fixing political villains only, continuously ignoring the biggest of ’em all—Veerappan. Where are the follow-ups on him? Or will it take another kidnapping to set things in motion?
C.D. Bhat, on e-mail
Apropos Granaries of the Despair State (June 1), will the present government of the traders, by the traders and for the traders ever pay attention to those unfortunate souls who aren’t traders but have the right to life, and food, and not just food for thought on Ayodhya.
Ahmad Zeeshan, Allahaba
Kuldip Nayar’s is indeed leadership by example (Money for Jam Sessions, May 28). The others’—especially Najma Heptullah, Amar Singh and Kapil Sibal’s—is hifalutin waffle. And the bjp’s Goel is right: their "paltry Rs 500 a day" is chicken shit for most politicians because we all know far higher stakes are involved elsewhere for most MPs.
Brig. F.F.C. Bulsara, on e-mail
Of the opinions expressed by various politicians on Nayar’s gesture, the most astonishing has come from Arjun Singh who says: "It is not the responsibility of the members that the House transacts business." If not of members, whose responsibility is it then? Whatever the provocation, there’s no justification for Parliament hold-ups and uproar which does no credit either to the parliamentarians themselves or to the nation.
Amba Charan Vasishth, New Delhi
Inivite Musharraf if you have to—even if it’s for the sake of a new beginning diametrically opposite to our previous stance on the issue—but at no time forget that this same man, in an interview to M.J. Akbar a few months back, justified the killings of Hindus by terrorists while pointing out the futility of killing Sikhs. That’s the mindset we’re dealing with; we can ignore it only at our cost.
Manish Maheshwari, New Delhi
