Onti, scroll down deepa and see please!

On 12/3/08, Deepa Mohan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 7:25 AM, Udhay Shankar N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Deepa Mohan wrote, [on Tuesday 02 December 2008 09:31 PM]:
> >
> > > By Kanishka Lahiri, a Bangalore-based professional in the
> > > semiconductor industry. To send him feedback, please email him
> > > directly at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > What a strangely fact-free piece of prose.
> >
> > Rather than (re)inflict my male opinion of Mlle Roy on the list, I point
> > you at an earlier message by one of our female members:
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silk-list/message/19343
> >
> > Udhay
> >
In these days of instant wisdom (whizdom?) where all haloed, hallowed,
hollowed & borrowed or ourtight 'maaro'ed' opinions are available at
the click of a mouse or a flick of the handset, anyone (including
misself) can have very erudite opinions on anything and everything, it
is besides the point whether one is thorougly and painstakingly
ignorant.

I have read Ma'am Roy right from her Anand Grower story to the
af-Frontline articulations. From a literary point of view there are
heck a lot of problems with her narratives and prose - but these would
pale into insignificance if one considers the integrity perspectives.

I wrote a long erudite rant on my misgivings - must have been a 7
years back when I was fresh from my NLP initiation - and was
astonished at the divergence between words and deeds *and* the
bawdylanguage of Ma'am Roy. It was so cute but my rant (fool of
footnotes and annotations and everything else) was too jaundiced I
felt, even by my own stundards. So in one stroke deleted it. Sadly so.
It could have provided some more ammo to Monsieur Lahiri - I fit into
a few of the metadata of his petpeeve-population - and his polemic
could have been taken to stratospheric heights, what the lahiri of
outpouring it could have been, propelled by selfrighteous angst!

But, just as Ma'am Roy has a right to her opinion, so does Monsieur
Lahiri. The only thing is that they (of course they include I) dont
have a right to be taken seriously. I think I have learnt to identify
polemic when I see (and ah, write) one - and apart from the sudden
urge to trash something, ably aided by my much abused adrenalin, there
is not much fun or learning in these transactions. I try not to take
part in these kinds of stuff, but you see, Ma'am Roy is a symbol of
convergence of quite few things that are wrong, just as the mention of
Oprah win frey my temper. :-(

> Did you send him the feedback?
> That's his opinion, why don't you ask him for the facts on which it's based?
> Deepa.
>
Again Deepa, no point in asking for 'facts' on which a Ma'am Roy or a
Monsieur Lahiri or yours truly, for that matter. Rashomon macht frei.
Or better still Shichinin no Samurai.

So ends this metarant, In which ramjee gives it those ones. 8-)
Ha.(actually grrr)
-- 
http://www.qsl.net/vu2sro/
The lyfe so short, the Craft so long to lerne.
-- Geoffrey Chaucer (The Assembly of Fowles)

Reply via email to