There's a certain kind of American leftist that *adores* Roy. A year or so ago I sat in the WBAI studio as a fundraiser was drawing to a close, and they started running one of her talks. The phones lit up like I've never seen before. I managed to evoke something remotely similar by starting a Noam Chomsky interview, then stopping it and saying I'd only resume it if the phones started ringing, starting, stopping, etc. But Roy's pull was 150-200% of Chomsky's. I'm sorry to say this, but I think it's because she plays the role of an emotional third world woman that certain Americans find irresistible.
that last point i am afraid applies to her literature too. it is disappointing to me that the english-speaking west is unwilling to treat indian authors/novelists seriously but require some cute trick prose. the same applies for her politics. lewontin wrote a strong critique of vandana shiva (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=14298), which right or wrong, was at least non-patronising. for roy, is this the best we can get from the west: http://www.powells.com/review/2002_05_23.html?
i found it sad to see her blurbing chomsky's new book. for one thing, they are about as dissimilar as you can get, within the left. one a retiring, extremely analytical/logical academic, the other a grandstanding (if well-meaning) [among other things] multi-million dollar media creation. for another, if at all noam chomsky should need an introduction, i would hope to hear from someone with at least half his credentials and intellect.
all that said: i used to think of roy as the bono of india. perhaps she is better thought of as the michael moore of india. they have good hearts, i think, and are on the right (i.e., left) side. more, they do more for left causes than i do. ultimately, i am glad to have them on this side.
--ravi
