[Reader-list] SAGARIKA GHOSE INTERVIEWED ARUNDHATI ROY

[Pheeta Ram]

The interview has, very interestingly, revealed how DUMB these media people
can be. Its Sagarika Ghose
who has been exposed instead. She asks such dumb questions; it made me laugh
at both Sagarika and the
TV channel she represents. No doubt, the media have been sold out to the
corporates. There's another guy, much
admired in the 'interview circles', more i think for his impeccable English
than for his interviewing skills, called Karan Thapar.
The video is available on Youtube. Just look at the way he embar-asses
himself. For a change mute the video and concentrate
on his demeanour: anxiety is writ large over his face, he is too much aware
of his hollowness. Frankly speaking, Arundhati Roy has dealt a tight nice
slap on many people's faces with her essay in Outlook. I don't need to name
them, their cheeks are still burning. It won't be easier to appropriate
Arundhati anymore. Alas, she is standing alone, though evermore stronger,
among these celebrity writers!

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Nagraj Adve <nagraj.adve at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't necessarily agree with all of what Arundhati wrote in Outlook,
> not do I hold a brief for the Maoist movement, but for someone to say
> that Arundhati's sincerity and intellectuality (whatever that latter
> means) have been exposed is just ridiculous. And in the guise of being
> sharp and critical, the interviewer came up with shallow, unthought
> out statements like "Growth is something the country needs". Really?
> I in fact thought Arundhati said something very important when she
> said, "I would say that I don't believe that the imagination that has
> brought to the planet to this crisis is going to come up with an
> alternative."
>
> And re your response Rakesh, I see your point, but a clean divide
> between violent and non-violent movements probably needs more
> stratification. Between struggles that are militant but not violent,
> those in which violence becomes a part, those in which armed tactics
> and squads are retained for purely defensive purposes, and lastly
> those in which armed struggle is more central aimed at the takeover of
> state power. Obviously, the Maoist movement falls in the fourth
> category, and in my view, will not work. The problem begins when
> movements begin to generalise from what works in their area. In
> practice, different strategies work in different contexts and for
> different issues. The Maoists have little to offer for urban areas.
> Though they have had some history of work in a few urban areas, they
> have nothing unique to offer that makes them different from other
> formations there, and have in fact I believe withdrawn from urban
> areas after the merger of PW and MCC. I think it will be more useful
> for us to think about a multiplicity of movements in different areas,
> employing different strategies and as part of a broad democratisation
> of society which at least minimizes the ravages of industrial
> capitalism.
> Naga
>
>
>
> On 18 April 2010 10:56, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Bipin
> >
> > How many journalists have dared to go to the jungles of Dantewada where
> the
> > Naxalites reside and tell their story as to why the tribals are now
> > increasingly joining the Naxals? Arundhati Roy has been one of the very
> few
> > to do so.
> >
> > And I have seen this interview. She is against the state, but I feel in
> this
> > interview at least, she has been less a Maoist sympathizer than a critic
> of
> > state-led development paradigm.
> >
> > The reason why there is violence is simple. That's how our governments
> tend
> > to take notice. Look at the Narmada Bachao Andolan. What happened?
> Nothing.
> > Why? Because they didnt' resort to violence. If they would have done so,
> the
> > politicians would have been forced to stop the Sardar Sarovar dam project
> > and think about the tribals. But since this has not been done, nobody
> > bothers and the rights of tribals are trampled upon as if tribals were
> > insects, not human beings.
> >
> > Look at the Gujjar-reservation issue. The Gujjars were agitating
> peacefully,
> > yet nobody bothered even to explain to them why reservation was not being
> > done to them. It's only when they unleashed violence that suddenly the
> > entire nation saw them and decided to solve the issue.
> >
> > The fact is that in this country, unless you don't organize violence,
> nobody
> > hears you or even bothers about you. Indians have a great tendency of
> > working only at the last minute, when the fire reaches the ass. Till it
> has
> > burnt your legs, nobody cares.
> >
> > Change this tendency and fight it, and automatically things will move for
> > the better. This means ensuring that NREGA, Forest Rights Bill are
> properly
> > implemented, the Right to Food is enacted soon in its' comprehensive form
> > and implemented well, and most importantly, development as sought by the
> > tribals is given to them, not introducing mining which is unsustainable
> as
> > being done in Bellary. Don't turn Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand into another
> > Bellary.
> >
> > Rakesh
> > _________________________________________
> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > Critiques & Collaborations
> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>