Critique

Arundhati Roy has dedicated her writing career to politics and social causes and is a vehement critic of neo-imperialism and globalization. Her analyse, How Deep Shall We Dig? was published in a national Indian report The Hindu on 25 April, 2004 against the backdrop of the 14th General Lok Sabha Elections in India. In her essay she attempts to submit the harsh conditions prevalent in the entire India due to unjust laws and an increasingly fascist approach towards regime by the ruling parties and stresses upon the need to bring about a revolutionary change in the country.Roy presents her occupation effectively with the use of banter, chaff and rhetorical questions complimented by a well supported and organized promotion of ideas. However, her occasional arrogant tone and fallacious reasoning diagnose the referee question the credibility of her case. Roy cogitate the violent situation of Kashmir to the entire Indian state by highlighting unjust laws, adverse impacts of priv atization, force play in various states and insensitivity of the ruling parties.She presents strategies of resistance and civil noncompliance as the totally federal agency forward to a radical change in the country. Roys mastery over raillery and irony helps to depict the true picture of Indias stability and politics in the current era. Her use of sarcasm at various instances in the essay plays a pivotal role in helping the reader to identify the reality juxtaposed against the false picture of India presented by the government.For example, Of course there is a contrariety between an overtly communal party with fascist leanings and an opportunistically communal party (5) captivates the readers lodge in and helps to emphasize her point that there is no difference between the mandates of the two current ruling parties of India and uncomplete will be boffo in bringing a change to the country. Similarly in the line, Therell be no to a greater extent criminals therefore. Only te rrorists. Its kind of neat. (2), the writer effectively conveys her disapproval of the POTA (Pr eventidetion of Terrorism Act) through with(predicate) sarcasm and enlightens the reader with the devastating consequences that could take fleck by the integration of this Act into criminal law. Along with sarcasm, the causation makes effective use of irony and refers to the op takeed as gangsters (1) and their killing by the police as eliminated on orders (1) in order to illuminate the reader about the reality of violence and ruthless killings taking place across the country.The use of words in quotation marks such as free press (3) and Creating a Good Investment Climate (3) highlight the various instances of irony used by Roy to tap the misleading externalize presented by the ruling parties of democracy and privatization in the country. Efficient use of sarcasm and irony throughout the essay allow the reader to critically analyze the image of the Shinning India presented in the in ternational association and check off to the origins point of view in this context.Along with irony, the strategic placement of rhetorical questions through the course of the essay plays an essential role in the effective communication of the writers ideas and descents. The subject field How deep shall we dig? itself is a manifestation of a rhetorical question put forward by the writer to make the reader reflect upon the stance taken by many Hindus over the Muslim invasion of the subcontinent, more than a millennium ago. With this single question the writer conveys the importance of the Muslim community to India and makes the reader analyze the subjections face by them in states like Kashmir and Gujarat.The clever placement of questions such as So how can ordinary people counter the assault of an increasingly violent state? (5) make the reader stop and reflect upon the causes presented by the writer and unconsciously agree to them. Similarly the use of instant questions and epiphora during the discussion of fascism in the essay lay emphasis on an important point of the wrinkle and convince the reader to agree to the authors claim. On a similar note, Roy has capabilityened her argument with ingenious organization of ideas and effective support of incidents and statistics from credible sources.She first establishes the problems faced by the country and then smartly connects them to the policies of the current ruling parties and fascism. With this link and the repetition of the problems in the middle of the essay she creates an image of a violent state requiring urgent action. After setting up the stage, she proposes her solutions and effectively convinces the reader that civil disobedience in the current election scenario is the only possible way out of the volatile situation of the country. Her crystalline flow of ideas is complimented by statistics and allusion to credible sources.Reference to facts such as According to the records of the Asso ciation of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP) in Kashmir more than 3,000 people have been killed in 2003 (1) and Utsa Patnaik, the well known agricultural economist. . calculates that in the period between the former(a) 1990s and 2001, food grain absorption has dropped to levels lower than during the World War-II years (2) validate the claims do by the author and play a pivotal role in bringing the reader in symmetricalness to the writers point of view.Hence, the smooth flow of ideas and strong support make the paragraphs coherent and the essay powerful. Despite presenting a well structured case, the arrogant tone used by the writer while referring to the middle straighten out in the essay depicts bias in her argument. In paragraph 11, she mentions the middle class as the only sect of the country that accept India as a legitimate democracy despite the widespread violence in the country while at the end of the essay she arrogantly refers to them by saying Not because of that m iddle-class squeamishness politics is dirty (6).With a sweeping generalization and a supercilious remark about a group that forms more than fifty portion of the essays earshot, Roy has well damaged the credibility of her argument. Moreover, at the end of the essay she addresses to the Indian people and calls for a change in the system by massive non co-operation but by offending a class that represents thirty percent of the Indian population (Lanzeni, The Middle Class in India), Mrs. Roy might not be very successful in achieving her aim.Along with an arrogant tone, the presence of fallacious reasoning at certain instances in the essay deteriorates the strength of the argument. While discussing the privatization of state institutions and referring to the power these private companies hold, the author goes too far by saying in India a few of these CEOs are more powerful than the Prime Minister (3) and thereby commits a analytical fallacy called the slippery slope. It is true tha t the heads of private companies running state assets hold a gage of power but it is illogical to conclude that they possess more authority than the head of the state- the Prime Minister.Similarly, the writer while emphasizing on the need of enhancement of benignant race rights in the country, illogically concludes that Indias new-fashioned abstinence from voting for a human rights resolution in the U. N. will lead to an assault of human rights in the country. The author fails to explore other possibilities that could have led to Indias abstinence and makes a sharp conclusion which compels the reader to question the reasoning of the author and weakens the overall strength and impact of the argument.Concrete examples of violation of human rights by the government at this point in the essay would have consolidated the argument and made the claim of the writer more viable. Despite its shortcomings, Roys article highlights important issues like privatization and lack of lore comm union with the public which are pertinent to developing countries. Privatization of national institutions is a problem prevalent even in Pakistan and has been openly criticized.The recent privatization of KESC (Karachi Electricity Supply Corporation), Pakistan Telecommunications (PTCL) and Railways in the country has sparked extensive debate since the expertness of these institutions has depreciated tremendously and the government has lost control over crucial state machineries. This can be exemplified by the long power breakdowns faced by Karachi at the hands of the privatized KESC which is not accountable for its inefficiency to anyone in the country.The fact that the economic capital of Pakistan can be held hostage by a private electricity high society supports the argument laid down by Roy that privatization leads to the deterioration of a state. Along with privatization, lack of intelligence sharing over matters affecting the public is another roughhewn aspect between Pakist an and India mentioned in Roys article. The inside reading of the attack on Mehran Base in May, 2011 and the abduction of Osama bin Laden from Abbottabad are sensitive issues about which the harsh man knows nothing beyond the immediate videos shown on television.These incidents had a huge impact on the image of Pakistan across the globe and affected the lives of its citizens but Pakistanis were not given any narration regarding the events by the government or the army. As Roy states, the common man was forced to believe that lack of information sharing is a poisonous brew which is stirred and simmered and put to the most ugly, destructive, political mark. (1) Therefore, the two major issues of privatization and hiding information from the public highlighted in Roys essay not only exist in India but also have strong roots in other developing countries like Pakistan.The author mentions the adverse effects of growing tempt of nationalist groups like Sangh Parivar (6) and the ext remist teachings given in their schools called shakhas (6) in Northern India. The situation in Pakistan is surprisingly similar where the Taliban extremist group represents the Sangh Parivar of India and their madrassas provide a face of the shakhas mentioned by Roy. The lack of proper governance in the northern areas of Pakistan has led to a growing influence of the Taliban in the region and an unmonitored expansion of their schools called madrassas. These schools instill extremism into our young generation and serve to fulfill the deadly purpose (6) of spreading terrorism in our country. As Roy pointed out in her argument, the governments failure in fulfilling its responsibilities has led Pakistan into a volatile situation where like India it is battling out extremist groups and nationalist movements generated from within the country. Roy duologue about the oppression of the current government in India (which is similar to the policies of the Pakistani government) throughout the essay and cleverly compares it with the British rule to arouse emotion and patriotism in the reader.The writers analogy of the fortify Forces Special Powers Act with Lord Linthigows 1942 Ordinance has a strong impact on the argument while her reference to Dandi process (7) and civil disobedience (7) (a common term for protests during the British rule) generates nationalism in the emotional readers of the subcontinent. Like the Special Powers Act, Section 144, a law in the Pakistani constitution from the compound era (Warraich, In Pakistan, Zardaris Crackdown Betrays Weakness) has been repeatedly used by the current government to repress protests such as the lawyers long march, a strategy used by the British during their rule.Similarly, recent attempts of the Pakistani government to disseminate peacefully protesting crowds by teargas and stone attack provide reflections of the tyranny faced by the people of the colonial era. The ingenious link established by Roy between the curren t oppression faced by the people of subcontinent and the British autocracy makes us realize that there is a shocking need to bring about a change in the current system, launch another Dandi March and indulge into yet another civil disobedience.Roy successfully evokes emotion with this analogy and makes the reader agree to her argument that the limit to repression has arrived, Enough is Enough. Ya Basta (5) On the whole, Roys effective use of literary devices, rhetorical questions and an ingeniously structured argument captivates the readers interest and despite its shortcomings in terms of reasoning, it eventually persuades the audience to give in to the view presented by the writer.Articles of this genre in the past have influenced Indian history and it is their growing popularity and recent impact on politics that has led to an immense support by the common people to revolutionary movements like the anti-corruption campaign by Anna Hazare. Therefore, Arundhati Roys How Deep Shal l We Dig? not only serves as a critique on the current political system of India but has far scope consequences in terms of awakening a nation from ignorance and directing it to a path of revolution.