AP
Review
An Ode To Myself
So he is no critic, but wish the object of Tharoor's admiration was someone else, not him
Search:
Bookless In Baghdad: And Other Writings About Reading
Bookless In Baghdad: And Other Writings About Reading
By Shashi Tharoor
Viking/Penguin
Rs 325; Pages: 248
Q: Lay a lot of columns end to end and what do you get?
A: A lot of columns laid end to end.

Technically Shashi Tharoor's collection of occasional pieces is a book. It has a spine and hard covers with 236 nicely printed pages in between. But is it 'a book'? The truth is, it's one of those ghastly things, 'a made book': the product of an unholy union between a publisher keen to beef up the frontlist and an author eager to squeeze more mileage out of his backlist.

The opening scene is of amar chhota Shashi at home in '60s Bombay, devouring the works of Blyton and Richmal Crompton, Tintin and Tenali Raman.

 
 
Tharoor writes breezily when talking of favourite authors a la Wodehouse. His targets, however—Churchill, Nirad Chaudhuri—are too obvious. v
 
 
Even when tackling 'adult' writers, his tone is that of a book enthusiast rather than a literary critic—all very well for the newspapers and magazines for which these articles were intended; not so great for a book.

Four of the six essays in his first section (Inspirations) are about his own books: The Great Indian Novel, Show Business, Riot and a eulogy to Kerala (with M.F. Husain), God's Own Country. The rest of the book has phrases like "as I point out in my book". He doesn't actually say "available in all good bookshops", but it's there.

One of the longest essays is dedicated to his first and most famous book, The Great Indian Novel. "What, I asked myself, would a twentieth-century Ved Vyas tell about his India, about the great events of his times? So I used the great epic as the framework for a satirical reworking of the major Indian political events of this century." I remember reading this novel, and quite enjoying it, but despite its title, heroic aspirations and historical sweep, it was, and still remains, a minor Indian novel (in English). Somehow, one wouldn't mind reading Rushdie's thoughts on the birth of Midnight's Children, or Arundhati's on God of Small Things, but Tharoor is not Vyas and his novel is not the Mahabharata and no amount of explanation by the author is going to alter that.

It's fine to be a fan rather than a critic, but it works so much better if the object of your admiration is someone else. His essay In Defence of the Bollywood Novel turns out to be less a championing of a genre—small though it is like Shobhaa De's Starry Nights, Hero by I. Allan Sealy...er...Justine Hardy, anyone?—than a defence of his own 'Bollywood novel', Show Business. "The book was reviewed on the front page of the New York Times Book Review and enjoyed raves elsewhere, but in India the disappointment was palpable." Tharoor leaps at the chance to set us straight. Ironically, he narrates an incident later in the book, in a piece called How Not to Deal With a Bad Review, in which the famously pugnacious author Norman Mailer counter-attacked a critical review published in the New York Times. The moral he draws from this tale of literary fisticuffs—"A review, good or bad, is a transient thing; a book, if it was worth writing, will endure long after the review is forgotten"—is one that he fails to learn himself.

Tharoor the Fan writes breezily and easily. With authors he admires, such as P.G. Wodehouse, he positively bounds around like an Alsatian pup. He seems almost prouder of his former post as president of the St Stephen's College Wodehouse Society than his current one as Under-Secretary-General to the United Nations. Even when he attacks, like Don Quixote tilting at windmills, he goes for targets—Winston Churchill, Nirad Chaudhuri—that are almost impossible to miss.

In his essay on Salman Rushdie, Tharoor writes that "as an Indian novelist, I can only repeat what Waugh said of Wodehouse: he is the head of my profession". The essay is more than a love letter to Salman, however: it is a plea for a new India, no less. Addressing the question that has foxed high school examinees through the ages —"What is an Indian?"—Tharoor's clarion call is for an India in which "people of every imaginable colour, creed, caste, cuisine and consonant can live and strive and triumph together in one gloriously mongrel nation". Inspiring rhetoric indeed, but give me the edgy vigour of Suketu Mehta's Maximum City or even the unflinching searchlight of Naipaul any day. Tharoor's paean to a rainbow-coloured melting pot owes more to airy UN aspirations than to tough Indian reality.

The piece from which this book takes its title is something of a misnomer. The equivalent of Calcutta's College Street, Baghdad's book souk is a veritable "cornucopia...for the indiscriminate reader". Bookless it ain't. But then, perhaps it's not so inappropriate after all. This book-lover's book about books, with a book on its cover, is not much of a book either.

 
Daily MailPublished
COLLAPSE COMMENTS :
HAVE YOUR SAY
Mar 30, 2005 12:00 AM
6
Anita Roy writes:

>>Tharoor’s clarion call is for an India in which "people of every imaginable colour, creed, caste, cuisine and consonant can live and strive and triumph together in one gloriously mongrel nation".

I like the reviewer's dissatisfaction with this point because Tharoor never explores or suggests an idea or set of ideas that bind or should bind this "mongrel nation."

>his tone is that of a book enthusiast rather than a literary critic

I don't see that as a contradiction. Criticism, whether in literature or other discipline, has to do with evaluating and judging: the good, the bad and the ugly. Being a book enthusiast is bad only if it interferes with such criticism, which doesn't always have to be negative.

While the review is not up to New York Times Book Review standards, it is still a welcome improvement over the usual tripe.
Old Mac
???, United States
Mar 30, 2005 12:00 AM
5
what kind of a review is this? a classic nitpicker's task of book reviewing. when she believes that one of Shashi's novels is "minor," there’s no intelligence evidence for it? Breezy seems to be a buzzword for her writing too. It’s preposterous to compare novels and moreover weighing one against another with no damn similarity except for the genre is even more ridiculous.

and a blurb after all has to help fast page-turners have a snippet about the book; not frighten them even more. Just get it straight and sensible.

the reviewer chould have made a passing reference to the review of the book by Shashi himself in the newspaper, for which he regularly writes a column. Got to be reading other book reviews too Ms. Anita. And finally, this isn’t a book review either Ms. Roy.

Sharat shastri
Hyderabad, India
Mar 12, 2005 12:00 AM
4
But you all should give 'bookless in baghdad' a read and find out how true roy's review is..i am a tharoor fan but what roy writes for 'bookless' holds true (the canine reference nothwithstanding), he does seem a bit full of himself in this compilation..the cover mentions its about writings on readings and you feel it will be somethling like amitava kumar's 'bombay/london/new york', it is so not so!! rather it reads more like 'cliff notes to tharoor'....everyone has something on their resume' they should forget about, maybe this is thaaroor's.
aneela z babar
melbourne, australia
Mar 11, 2005 12:00 AM
3
A book review is by a "person" so I guess the inadvertent biases and prejudice should be acceptable. But Anita goes far personally maligning a pretty decent author like Tharoor. Moreover readers would do well by reading the book themselves rather than relying on reviews by somebody else. It's like watching a movie, the whole world might not like the movie but you might do. Therefore go ahead and read the book though I have not read it myself.
yugal joshi
delhi, India
Mar 09, 2005 12:00 AM
2
Anita Roy's review reads personally biased. In total loss of objectivity she has exceeded professional restraints and has gone very personal. I am not very sure if Shashi Tharoor deserves it. He does not seem like such a bad read to me. The review is below par and the personal tone is pretty evident - its just not good to have such an attitude while reviewing a book.
a.s.kumar
dakar, Senegal
Mar 07, 2005 12:00 AM
1
Anita Roy’s review of Shashi Tharoor’s ‘Bookless in Baghdad’ was in very poor taste. The reviewer has proceeded to trash not only the book, but also the author in a manner which makes the reader feel that she has some sort personal axe to grind. Phrases such as ‘he positively bounds around like an Alsatian pup’ are derogatory and demeaning; not only to the author being written about, but also to Outlook and the reviewer herself. Please spare us such reviews in future.
Dr. K. Uma
Bangalore, India
COLLAPSE COMMENTS   
Post a Comment
You are not logged in, please log in or register
ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISING RATES | COPYRIGHT & DISCLAIMER | COMMENTS POLICY