Before I write for the link below, I question myself, why do I write?
The answer is difficult. Honestly, not for money or fame. But yes even not for people to come and read. But still I see my blog stats going up. From November 2010 till date the graph is going upJ
It gives me peace that somewhere something written by me will have a right impact on lives of few or maybe manyJ
Every writer has a vision and genre that he/she belongs to. The purpose of their writing might vary but there are few things or I must say traits that are same. Every writer is inspired by other writings and his own experiences add a cherry to his cake of writings. There is no writer who does not portray his experience in his writings. Depending upon his or her personality his experiences could be sentimental or practical irrespective of the gender ...the word I mentioned is ‘GENDER’. Shakespeare is a complete package as he wrote everything from Romance to Drama to Real Life. For me he is God of Writers and his writings are pretty much on sentimental side inspired by human emotions – the greatest of all – ‘Love’.
You must think why I am elaborating around – Writers and Gender. Read the following statement by V.S Naipaul that is a good piece of discouragement for many women upcoming writers. I have read his writings during my Graduation days (I was a student of English Literature). But when I read the following, I wonder what makes him so critical about women. I am disappointedJ
“V.S. Naipaul: No woman writer is my match
Nobel laureate claims he can tell a woman’s writing immediately — and says even Jane Austen is not his equal
BY EMMA MUSTICH
Women are “sentimental,” and their “narrow view of the world” makes them inferior writers. So, at least, says V.S. Naipaul, the prolific Nobel and Booker Prize-winning author whose works include “A House for Mr. Biswas.”
The Guardian’s Amy Fallon reports:
In an interview at the Royal Geographic Society on Tuesday about his career, Naipaul … was asked if he considered any woman writer his literary match. He replied: “I don’t think so.” Of [Jane] Austen he said he “couldn’t possibly share her sentimental ambitions, her sentimental sense of the world”.
He felt that women writers were “quite different”. He said: “I read a piece of writing and within a paragraph or two I know whether it is by a woman or not. I think [it is] unequal to me.” …
[He added:] “And inevitably for a woman, she is not a complete master of a house, so that comes over in her writing too.”
Two things to write:
Firstly, I agree that he could make it out while reading if the writer is a woman or a man. I guess this comes with age and experience. Secondly, there are certain sentiments that a woman can express better or maybe much more clearly. But the way he has quoted his statement makes me wonder why is he being so sarcastic about this whole thought. Appreciate!!
Secondly, I am shocked to read that he considers no women writer as par to him. Well, this is very much discouraging. I write this not because I am a woman but because I believe one should appreciate and encourage the people in his professional gamut. At least this much we can expect from experienced writers whom we have read in our younger days.
V.S. Naipaul: No woman writer is my match – I think when your readers will say that then you will acknowledge this more. So will others. It makes no difference to anyone when one appreciates himself. The essence of appreciation is when others appreciate you or your talent. I guess personal life and experiences are too much reflected through this statement.
I always say and write so will do it today as well – APPRECIATE AND ENCOURAGE OTHERS!!
CheerioJ
