Critique

Arundhati Roy has dedicated her writing career to politics and affable causes and is a vehement critic of neo-imperialism and globalization. Her audition, How Deep Shall We Dig? was published in a national Indian newspaper The Hindu on 25 April, 2004 against the backdrop of the 14th General Lok Sabha Elections in India. In her seek she attempts to present the harsh conditions prevalent in the entire India due to unjust laws and an increasingly fascistic approach towards governance by the notion parties and stresses upon the need to pay back closely a revolutionary alternate in the earth.Roy presents her crinkle effectively with the use of sarcasm, caustic remark and rhetorical questions complimented by a considerably back up and organized progression of ideas. However, her occasional arrogant stones throw and fallacious think win the reader question the believability of her case. Roy links the violent military position of Kashmir to the entire Indian state by high lighting unjust laws, contrary impacts of privatization, violence in various states and insensitivity of the ruling parties.She presents strategies of resi strength and civilised disobedience as the just now way forward to a prow change in the country. Roys mastery over sarcasm and irony helps to depict the true picture of Indias stability and politics in the ongoing era. Her use of sarcasm at various instances in the essay plays a pivotal authority in helping the reader to depict the reality juxtaposed against the false picture of India presented by the government.For example, Of course at that place is a difference between an overtly communal party with fascist leanings and an opportunistically communal party (5) captivates the readers interest and helps to emphasize her de enjoine that there is no difference between the mandates of the two live ruling parties of India and neither will be prospered in bringing a change to the country. Similarly in the line, Therell be n o to a greater extent criminals then. unless terrorists. Its kind of neat. (2), the writer effectively conveys her disapproval of the POTA (Prevention of Terrorism make out) through sarcasm and enlightens the reader with the devastating consequences that could take place by the integration of this Act into criminal law. Along with sarcasm, the author makes effective use of irony and refers to the oppress as gangsters (1) and their killing by the police as eliminated on orders (1) in order to illuminate the reader slightly the reality of violence and merciless killings taking place across the country.The use of words in character marks such as free press (3) and Creating a ingenuous Investment Climate (3) highlight the various instances of irony used by Roy to criticize the misleading photo presented by the ruling parties of democracy and privatization in the country. Efficient use of sarcasm and irony throughout the essay pull up stakes the reader to critically analyze the image of the Shinning India presented in the international friendship and contain to the authors point of view in this context.Along with irony, the strategic placement of rhetorical questions through the course of the essay plays an essential authority in the effective communication of the writers ideas and arguments. The topic How sound 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, to a greater extent 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 oppressions faced by them in states handle Kashmir and Gujarat.The clever placement of questions such as So how can usual batch counter the assault of an increasingly violent state? (5) make the reader stop and reflect upon the arguments presented by the writer and unconscious ly agree to them. Similarly the use of repetitive questions and epiphora during the discussion of fascism in the essay lay emphasis on an important point of the argument and coax the reader to agree to the authors claim. On a identical note, Roy has strengthened her argument with ingenious organization of ideas and effective support of facts and statistics from believable sources.She first establishes the problems faced by the country and then cleverly 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 preference scenario is the only possible way out of the volatile situation of the country. Her synthetical flow of ideas is complimented by statistics and allusion to credible sources.Refere nce to facts such as According to the records of the draw of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP) in Kashmir more than 3,000 people have been kil guide in 2003 (1) and Utsa Patnaik, the well known agricultural economist. . calculates that in the period between the early nineties and 2001, food grain absorption has dropped to levels lower than during the World War-II years (2) affirm the claims made by the author and play a pivotal role in bringing the reader in agreement to the writers point of view.Hence, the smooth flow of ideas and strong support make the paragraphs persistent and the essay powerful. Despite presenting a well structure case, the arrogant tone used by the writer while referring to the middle relegate 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 refe rs to them by adage Not because of that middle-class squeamishness politics is dirty (6).With a sweeping elicitation and a supercilious remark about a group that forms more than fifty percent of the essays audience, Roy has considerably 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 scarce by anger a class that represents thirty percent of the Indian population (Lanzeni, The position Class in India), Mrs. Roy might not be very successful in achieving her aim.Along with an arrogant tone, the presence of fallacious cerebrate at sealed instances in the essay deteriorates the strength of the argument. While discussing the privatization of state institutions and referring to the power these reclusive companies hold, the author goes too far by saying in India a few of these CEOs are more powerful than the thrill Minister (3) and thereby commits a logica l fallacy called the slippery slope. It is true that the heads of privy companies running state assets hold a lot 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 benevolent rights in the country, illogically concludes that Indias juvenile abstinence from voting for a humanity 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 hasty 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 unite the argument and made the claim of the writer more viable. Despite its shortcomings, Roys article highlights important issues like pr ivatization and leave out of intelligence sharing with the mankind 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 efficiency of these institutions has depreciated tremendously and the government has anomic 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 company 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 gross aspect between Pakistan and India mentioned in Roys article. The details of the attack on Mehran Base in May, 2011 and the abduction of Osama bin Laden from Abbottabad are sensitive issues about which the common 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 bear on the lives of its citizens but Pakistanis were not given any comment regarding the events by the government or the army. As Roy states, the common man was strained to believe that lack of information sharing is a poisonous brew which is stirred and simmered and put to the most ugly, destructive, political purpose. (1) Therefore, the two major issues of privatization and cover information from the public highlighted in Roys essay not only exist in India but also have strong grow in other developing countries like Pakistan.The author mentions the adverse effectuate of growing work on of jingoistic gro ups like Sangh Parivar (6) and the ultra 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 reflection of the shakhas mentioned by Roy. The lack of victorian 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 administer 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 talks about the oppression of the current government in India (which is similar to the polici es of the Pakistani government) throughout the essay and cleverly compares it with the British blueprint to arouse sensation and patriotism in the reader.The writers similitude of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act with Lord Linthigows 1942 Ordinance has a strong impact on the argument while her reference to Dandi adjoin (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 colonial 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 lacrimator and stone attack provide reflections of the tyranny faced by the people of the colonial era. The ingenious link established by Roy between the current oppression faced by the people of subcontinent and the British autocracy makes us realize that there is a dire need to bring about a change in the current system, launch another Dandi exhibit 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 basis of reasoning, it eventually persuades the audience to give in to the view presented by the writer.Articles of this musical 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 Shall We Dig? not only serves as a limited review on the current political system of India but has far hit consequences in terms of awakening a nation from ignorance and directing it to a path of revolution.