For the second online reviewer/blogger interro-view, I turned to one of my favorite people to chat with online, Aisha. Aisha runs the blog Practically Marzipan and is also a columnist/reviewer for a leading Indian paper, The Sunday Guardian. Time to see if the rabid squirrels who co-conducted this interview felt even a smidgen of pity or gave mercy to this intrepid interview subject:
You have a regular
column, "Left of Cool," in India's The Sunday Guardian as well as maintaining a review(ish) blog,
Practically Marzipan. What are some of
the differences you've noticed between writing for a newspaper compared to
writing for a blog?
With my blog I can assume readers who read the same sorts of
things as I do, or can take for granted that they already have certain sorts of
information. And there's also the option of linking to lots of things as
context and constructing whatever I'm trying to say on top of things other
people have said--which changes the whole tone of the writing from (I suppose)
statement to dialogue. Writing for newspapers or magazines has been great for
discipline--most of the time I need deadlines and wordcounts to get anything
done, and it's probably good for me not to be able to depend on other people's
writing. But I feel like I sound more like myself when I'm writing for the
blog. (But also I sound more myself when I'm writing for the regular column
than I am when I'm writing a review).
All this seems to indicate that there's a definite
separation between my writing for the blog and my writing for the column, and
that would probably be true if I was less lazy. As things are, most things that
get put up on the blog are versions of columns or reviews I've already written,
so there are no clear lines and you can probably ignore most of that previous
paragraph.
Seems like you have a
hard time deciding which has helped you develop more as a reviewer/critic. If you were pressed by a gang of rabid palm
squirrels threatening to nibble your toes if you didn't respond definitively,
which one, the newspaper columnist or the blogger, has given you the most
satisfaction?
Nooo, not the squirrels! The blog certainly gives me more
satisfaction.
What's wrong with
having rabid squirrels giving you their undivided attention?
That you have to ask this is itself a matter of concern.
Though, do I get a free pass if one of the only pieces of fiction I've ever had
published has a squirrel in it? Also one of my favourite Indian short stories
is about a squirrel. (I guess what I'm trying to say is please don't hurt me,
squirrels)
[Furious, frustrated
chittering is heard in the distance.
Aisha is spared…for the moment, with the understanding that she’ll
consider reviewing the upcoming Squirrels
movie.]
If I recall, you also
used to work as an editor for a children's lit publisher. What are some of the wonderful discoveries
you've made in children's/YA literature, both professionally and during your
personal life?
Professionally, not that much--because a lot of the editing
I did involved textbooks and while it's possible to make brilliant textbooks
(I'd like to think mine were pretty good) you can't really have very strong
feelings about them.
But my job meant being in a place where children's books
were accessible at all times, and I discovered I could really love books for
much younger readers. I've written more about things like picture books and
books for early readers in the last few years than I ever did before. Obviously
I can't read them as a child would (or even as a parent would) but the best of
them get down to the bare bones of language and story (and colour and line) in
ways that are fascinating to me.
Well, I've been an
uncle for nearly a year now and my niece already has shown a great interest in
picture books or anything in the shape of a book (OK, she tries to munch on a
few of them, but that is beside the point).
What books, picture books and on up through early readers would you
suggest that I (or any reader that has an infant/toddler relative) consider
buying for her? I (we?) need names!
Well there's an Indian publishing company called Tara Books
who do gorgeous things with traditional folk art, so I'd recommend pretty much
anything by them (look how pretty! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sP60hTjmZxI
). And I've fallen in love with Chris Haughton's books-- A Bit Lost has a baby
owl in it so it's clearly superior, but Oh No George! looks great too. One of
my favourite books from this past year was one called Virginia Wolf which is *sort* of about Virginia Woolf (there's an
artist sister called Vanessa, for example) but is mostly about depression.
Another I liked was something called The
Bravest Goat in the World, about a goat that sticks to her sense of self
and ... dies. It's more inspiring than depressing, I promise.
I'll take your word on it for now. So perhaps Indian children's/YA lit isn't as
depressing as say Charlotte's Web?
Well quite a few of those titles aren't Indian. But I think
most of the children's lit I like isn't entirely happy and uplifting--even when
there's a happily ever after at the end there's often this sense of a huge and
unknowable world. Think of something like Tove Jansson's Moomin books, for example.
What is the lit
scene, whether it's literary fiction, speculative, or works not otherwise
constrained by those two labels, in India today?
It's (I'm restricting this to English language only because
that is what I do almost all my reading in) growing faster than I would have
believed it could a few years ago; it's changed out of all recognition since I
started working here and that was only a few years ago. I think the most
important development has been the beginnings of a genuinely "popular"
literature--affordable books in English that the authors often claim is
accessible to everyone. I think most of it is dreadful (but then there are
writers like Anuja Chauhan, whose first book was very good and whose second and
third I'm told are wonderful), but it has opened up a space for genre fiction
and there's already quite a bit of it. It's mostly mythological fiction so far,
but that's partly because the breakout success in the genre (Amish Tripathi's Immortals of Meluha) was in that genre.
But there's also a visible divide between the literary and
the popular, with very few authors who seem to belong to both groups. I'm
hoping that as Indian sff develops it'll straddle that divide so that we can
have speculative writing that is also formally experimental; since we don't
have a firmly entrenched English language genre tradition to fall back on (*all
sorts of disclaimers here) we have a better chance at it than most places.
How
"accessible" (a word that I do dread using here but am failing at
recalling a more suitable synonym) would these English-language
"popular" lit books be for a non-Indian population? Are there elements that differ significantly
from literary tropes that populate Anglo-American literary genres?
It depends on the book, but I think most of them are pretty
accessible, or not less so than the more literary (a word I dread using here!)
sort of Indian fiction. There are a couple that even I found incomprehensible,
but that's a problem with individual writers (and, I suspect, no editing)
rather than an alien setting.
A lot of it is along the same lines as the Anglo-American
scene: there are romances, crime fiction, military novels, a bit of fantasy.
One significant difference is that we've got an entire genre composed of
semi-autobiographical stories about young men in college finding love (by young
male authors, mostly). I read something about the college novel being dead
recently, and I'm not sure what the people who wrote that would make of these.
Have you ever thought
about reviewing any of these "college novels" for your global
audience?
I've occasionally done some rather mean spoof reviews of
them (tagged "(sic)" on my blog; see what I said about the editing
above), but I'm not sure if a global audience would find them hilariously bad,
as I often do, or incomprehensibly so.
It's complicated though-- English, and the ability to speak
it fluently, can be intensely political issues in India, and it's easy to fall
into a sort of classism when mocking a badly written book. And these books
clearly do have an audience (a far bigger one than most mainstream literary
writers), and class and language politics play a big role there too. So I'm
trying to find a balance between righteous rage at books that are very bad and
classist snobbery. Or something.
You are very active
on Twitter. How has Twitter shaped your
reading and reviewing?
I suspect it has actively hindered them.
Twitter ought to be good for writers in that the 140
character limit should make us pare down out tweets for the minimum number of
words and maximum clarity. I haven't managed to get it to train me out of using
too many adverbs yet, so I don't know if that's true.
I follow a bunch of brilliant, incisive critics on twitter,
so I am mostly really intimidated by them but also pushed to be better because
you don't want to look silly in front of people you respect. But I think I'm
also learning to think I might have something worth saying because there seem
to be people who continue to be willing to read me and talk to me.
What's wrong with
adverbs?
Nothing, if they're used in moderation. But there's an
adverb in my blog name and one in my twitter username, so I suspect I will
never escape them.
Apparently not,
considering you used one in your response!
Does this dismay you or make you more accepting of verb modifiers in
fiction?
Absolutely not. (Um.)
As a reviewer, what
do you consider to be your strengths and weaknesses?
Lots and lots of weaknesses! A lack of intellectual rigour,
a fear of making sweeping pronouncements that leads to my often not saying
anything new for fear that I'll have to back it up. I'm not sure what my
strengths are, other than that I usually sound like myself (which is only a
good thing if you like what I sound like); I'm not sure why people are willing
to read what I write, and I'm pathetically grateful when they are.
Hrmm….so a relative
lack of confidence in your work, despite having accomplished more
professionally than most of us will likely ever achieve, is your biggest
weakness as a reviewer? It sounds like
you're a conscientious critic swimming in a sea of inflated self-opinions. Would this be a fairer assessment of your
strengths?
It would be a very flattering assessment of my strengths, if
it was true. I've been able to read and write for a living for a few years,
which is something most people don't get to do. But luck and circumstances have
been a huge part of that, and I read people who are far better critics than I
am every day. If I'm particularly conscientious it's natural timidity plus a
tendency towards academia (plus, I suppose, the social effects of being a brown
woman on an internet where the majority of voices are still white men-- there's
an added sense of needing to protect oneself from attack by never saying
anything that can't be incontrovertibly backed up).
I wish I could argue
your last point, but I understand a small part of the reality there. But have you ever been tempted to kick down
those sexist/racist doors and fight vociferously? Are there other bloggers that do this?
Are you trying to get me to talk about Requires Only That
You Hate? I don't think I could do what she does even if I was also blogging
anonymously, but I'm glad she exists. Or someone like Deepa D, whose style is
very different but equally welcome-- she had a great post recently where she
and some other bloggers picked apart and mocked a collection of short stories
that were (judging by the extensive quotes they posted) pretty terrible on the
race front in particular.
You keep getting people clutching their pearls over how
horrible and mean this sort of thing is; no one seems to talk about how
cathartic it can be. Things like casual sexism and racism in literature (in the
books themselves, in how they are received, in how fans react to them) make the
world worse in ways that affect me directly, casual classism, transphobia,
casteism, all affect people I care about. My safe spaces are not places where
everyone is required to be teeth-grittingly nice in the face of bigotry,
they're places where we can mock and rage at things that can hurt us and know
that the other people in that space have our backs.
(I'm still too "nice" to create that sort of
space, though.)
Word association
time: When you see/hear the word
"fandom," what thoughts/images immediately come to mind?
SQUEE
OR far too many things to name, many of them wonderful and
many incredibly frustrating and/or upsetting.
C'mon! There has to be something specific that
really appeals to you and/or makes you want to unleash your fury upon the
miscreant(s), right?
When I say fandom I mean about ten things, all of them
connected but not necessarily the same. I love that literature and movies and
music and tv can make communities, I love that fanfic can be art and politics
and porn at the same time, I love enthusiasm, I love love. I'm less enthused by
the sort of fandom that is not only uncritical itself (do that, if you want,
I'm not going to judge how you read/watch) but that denies other fans the right
to be. I hate the cult of nice. I hate that things like sexism and racism play
out in fannish communities, and that fandom is still assumed to be the preserve
of certain types of people in certain sorts of countries (queer women of colour
who don't live in North America are not among them). I hate being pressured to
feel grateful when a writer with a big fan following occasionally remembers
that people like me exist.
So -- no, I don't have much to say about fandom. ;)
Do you see these
reactionary elements of various fandoms changing anytime soon?
I don't know. It's a continuous process; it gets better in
some areas, worse in others, people push back against change. I think things
are improving, but there's so much left to do.
And finally, if you
could have a totemic animal represent you and/or your blog, what animal would
it be and would they be voracious readers and/or fierce attack creatures?
Owls! (everyone who reads my twitter groans on cue) They're
appropriately literary, very good at killing things, they're wise in English
and foolish in Hindi.
1 comment:
Another excellent interview. although I'm suddenly nervous about buying "The Bravest Goat in the World" for my best friend to read to her kids.
Post a Comment