Reading a collection of essays on a diverse set of subjects is a bumpy enterprise unless one is happy to surrender to the writer and his whimsies. One has little control over where the book will wander off next, and the author’s attempt to couch the piece in some ‘themes’ is always a transparently half-hearted effort. For the reader, such a book is often a tedious project to go through for the assumption that all the scattered ideas that have occurred to the writer at different points of time must necessarily possess value is often incorrect, sometimes acutely so.
Fortunately, when the writer in question is Mukul Kesavan, it is quite easy to get taken for this ride. The book under review, Homeless on Google Earth, is really ‘More Stuff Mukul Kesavan Is Interested In’, and those who have his read his earlier collection, The Ugliness of the Indian Male and Other Propositions, will know that his interests are wide, though not obscure. Barring cricket, which for some curious reason is not represented in this book (the essay on Azhar in Moradabad doesn’t really count), Kesavan traipses through the fields of personal memory, cinema, books, politics, travel and culture with wit, insight and a felicitous use of language, while refusing to take himself too seriously. The result is a book that deserves to be read with an essay or two at a time. A dogged attempt to read the book in one sitting or in sequence might diminish the pleasure that can be derived from it.
There is one quality in particular that stands out as one reads these essays—the ability to speak to the sanest, most rational part of any argument and to do so without the sterility that usually accompanies such a pursuit. Kesavan is able to do this in essay after essay, as he offers a counterpoint to what is commonly accepted wisdom, but does so in a way that seems both obvious and easy. A case in point is his contention that it is a mistake to think of Guru Dutt as someone who showcased Waheeda Rahman’s talents as an actress, arguing that “her role in his films are circumscribed by his narcissism” because in many ways, “the real love of his life, his grand passion, was Guru Dutt himself”. While doing so, he takes down Pyaasa from its pedestal, calling Vijay, the protagonist played by Guru Dutt, “an infantilised man who can’t make ends meet or feed himself but who believes the world owes him a living”.
His piece on Varun Gandhi’s speech (Vox Pop and Varun Gandhi) is similarly pointed in its ability to make us see the larger issue that lies below what appears on the surface. Kesavan sees Varun’s speech not merely as crude rhetoric, but indicative of a deeper, more cynical understanding of the country. Varun’s defence: the off-the-record one where he justifies his remarks because he wanted to reassure Hindus in his constituency in the local idiom that would connect with them. “You are accountable for what you say in English because English is the language of seriousness and modernity. Anything that you say in the vernacular can’t be held against you because the point of using an Indian language (such as Hindi that Varun Gandhi deployed in Pilibhit) is to establish an ‘emotional’ connection.” Kesavan goes on to say, “In Varun Gandhi’s mind, English-speaking India is a kind of off-shore tax haven, a place removed from the rowdy, no-holds-barred reality of the rest of the country”.
The other stand-out pieces in the book—the one that rescues the early Dharmendra from obscurity (The Jat Bhadralok, a personal favourite), a fabulously written account of a trip to Kruger National Park, an insightful, level-headed examination of Steve Jobs, and a piece on Mumbai and the role played by Hindi in creating a ‘culturally mongrel’ city. The pieces on cinema are particularly rewarding, for in many little ways he deepens our understanding of the form, without appearing to do so.
The anglophone’s view of India can be, to borrow a line from this collection, a little like ‘buying fish in English’. It can be too limited, or excessively self-conscious and stilted. Fortunately for Kesavan, this translates into an ability to stand apart from the reality of the country while being an unquestionable product of it. An insider’s detachment carries special value, for the insight that it generates is sharp, but never clinical. Homeless on Google Earth is a rewarding journey through the uneven landscape of today, as long as you are not too greedy.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
English is the language of the cultured.
Natives speak the 'vernacular'.
> " it is a mistake to think of Guru Dutt as someone who showcased Waheeda Rahman’s talents as an actress, arguing that “her role in his films are circumscribed by his narcissism” because in many ways, “the real love of his life, his grand passion, was Guru Dutt himself”."
An astute observation! Narcissists do become suicidal if their ego is hurt, often surprising those around them who think that the individual seemed too well adjusted to commit suicide.
> "Varun Gandhi ..... wanted to reassure Hindus in his constituency in the local idiom"
Hate speech is hate speech in any language!
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT