If I ever get to “chill” with Arundhati Roy, then I will certainly let her know about the gup shup ( gossip ) skipping around York U. There is a certain critique that is making much about her works and she should have warned her readers about the smallness of the small in The God of Small Things.

These small little things are actually supersize and apparently adds unwanted fat into the minds of readers, much to their not wanting it. Many readers feel like they are taking on unnecessary weight with reading her debut novel and in a world where readers follow strict diets, Roy is being branded as unhealthy. All this for not warning them – Roy Reh, Kai Ko Reh? ( Roy, Why? )

Recent discussions in the classroom have brought me to meet with students who simply cannot let go of the weight Roy got them to put on. They believe that she has forced fed them a diet of fattening words and that her plot contains ingredients that they never knew of. Students accept the point of the plot and they realize the need for society’s unfed and uncared to finally receive their due right; however, all this should not be at their expense and the capacity of the reader.

The belief is that Roy could have said what she wanted to say in a more simple style and she did not have to throw out an elaborate spread of words and worlds in order to get the reader to read and listen. Truth be told, there is nothing to deny that Roy has taken on a narrative that few care to take on. Roy owes it to her training in architecture but many see her as taking on a style that she thought might sell, sell the minds and bodies of the readers for her own profit. In fact, I even heard someone accuse Roy of spewing out a simulacra, a mere copy of celebrated novelists before her. The readers do not see any joy in Roy. All this for not warning them – Roy Reh, Kai Ko Reh? ( Roy, Why? )

But in asking this question I think I see why Roy took on the risk of no joy. There is no joy in Roy and is this not precisely the point? Isn’t Roy’s work a reflection of the world which catches us without warning? Isn’t she not presenting a world which feeds us everything but what we have made? Isn’t she not right in twisting and teasing the word for it is the way of the world?

  I agree that she assumes an ownership over time but her narrative is nothing but a reflection of the rotation we find stability in. Indeed her work is not easy to work with but that is precisely the juncture at which we meet with the experience she is trying to narrate. The experience of being dressed as a nonhuman human is certainly beyond ordinary narratives and Roy had to assume a complexity to narrate a situation that few might ever pass through. Our lives have gained shape and size but when this structure is forced upon us we all take offence. It is not easy to have a shape and size forced upon you and just like my reading friends did not enjoy the weight Roy get them to put on, similarly Velutha, nor Rahel nor Estha are able to relax within the frames they are contained in. I am not going to take my conversation with Roy any further. I think she has questioned my questions and brought the answer out of me. I too spent a month or two forcing down some Roy and now I see the point of the force.

So to all my yaars and dildaars ( near and dear ones ), do think again about Roy and if there is no joy then let it be so boy. But just remember that it is this lack of joy that is the result of hearing a voice with its own agency, a voice that speaks its own last words.

If you still do not get Roy, then I see no season of doom and gloom. Relax and in the words of Dr. Murli Prasad Sharma ( Sanjay Dutt in the Bollywood Comedy Munna Bhai MBBS ), “ Tension Nahi Leh ne Ka” ( Do Not Stress ).

 Author: Ali Abbas