Response: One or two senior writers saw the editorial as a slight on Anglophone writing in general. One question asked by everyone was whether, being an Anglophone writer myself, I was not being ‘hypocritical’. Should the editorial not have been ‘self-reflexive’?
Reply: As an Anglophone writer I am alarmed by the prospect of what emerging writing in English might do to Indo-Anglian literature, as it has been. My position can perhaps be compared to a practicing Hindu’s alarm at Hindutva, which has tried to appropriate Hinduism for itself. Just as Hindus would do well to distance themselves from Hindutva, the Anglophone writer who respects his vocation and the language should distance himself/ herself from much of the writing in English emerging in India today.

Response: If English is the language of opinion, then it makes sense for people to want to write in it, but why particularly write novels? The novel is not typically known to be a vehicle of opinion even though authors have opinions and these often find their way into their works. There are a number of choices for anyone who wants to, consciously or unconsciously, ‘register’ herself as an English-speaker and English-writer.
Reply: English is the language of opinion which does not mean that the novel in English is a vehicle for opinion. The fact that English is the language of opinion only means that those who have learned it are empowered in India – i.e. their opinions will be heard. It would be useful to make it known (or be ‘registered’) in social circles that one is a user of English and producing a tome is the most reliable way. The disadvantage with non-fiction of the usual kind – as a way of registering oneself – is that one must have ‘knowledge’ of some kind. If one were to write about dogs, for instance, one might need to be acquainted with canine diseases, municipal licenses, dog breeders and veterinarians who could be reached as well as know something about dog food. Writing novels does not pose hardships such as ‘having to know’ such things. While the better Indian novels demonstrate ‘knowledge’ of various kinds ‘knowing’ is not obligatory. It is enough to be aware of one’s own ‘feelings’ for the kind of novels written today – best described as ‘self-expression’.

Response: One is not sure the ritualistic aspects of chanting mantras can accurately compare to writing novels. What are the ‘ritualistic’ aspects of writing novels?
Reply: Publicly reciting mantras in Sanskrit could have been a way of claiming power for oneself in a society in which Sanskrit was in the custody of the few. I have already brought out the relationship between English as the language of opinion/ power and writing English fiction in India. By writing a novel, one is perhaps making a similar claim upon informal power in a society in which the English language is in the custody of the few.

Response: The relationship between blogging and novel writing is not clear.
Reply: I agree that blogging is a completely different activity from writing novels. But blogging makes ‘writers’ out of those who have never written and also finds readers. It erases the distinction between writers and readers. It is because the distinction is erased that so many people have the confidence to become writers although they hardly produce literature – in the non-trivial sense. To use Roland Barthes’ terms, blogs perhaps assist in the creation of the most ‘readerly’ of literary texts.

Response: It is incorrect to say that there is no generic differentiation in Indian fiction in English.
Reply: To approach this issue from another angle, a visit to a large local bookstore revealed that foreign fiction was classified under romance, crime, thrillers, fantasy/SF and classics, there was only one category in Indian fiction: called ‘Indian fiction’ although the collection was huge. Booksellers are perhaps the best judges of whether the generic differentiation is significant.