The simple language and writing style drew me to the book. The illustrations are eye catching, though some appear amateurish. The author has simplifieThe simple language and writing style drew me to the book. The illustrations are eye catching, though some appear amateurish. The author has simplified the complex epic into less than 200 pages - a difficult task, and crafted it to be readable by the young and grown-ups alike. That should have made this an excellent title. Unfortunately, the book is riddled with errors. For instance, Satyavati's foster father the fisher-king is equated with her biological father, the king Uparichara Vasu. In the very first page is another blatant error - the author states that the Kuru kingdom flourished on the banks of the Yamuna. Hastinapura, the capital of the Kuru kingdom, was on the banks of the Ganga. It was Indraprastha, which was granted to the Pandavas, that was on the banks of the Yamuna. And the author repeats common misconceptions - that the Mahabharata was originally called "Jaya" and was much shorter in length, referring to Ganesha as the "elephant-god" and so on. All these make the book a less than delightful read. A little bit of research, a reading of good abridged/unabridged translations of the Mahabharata would have helped make this a good book. Conclusion: Avoid. There are better books narrating the Mahabharata story in simple language for children and grown-ups alike....more
The rating of 2* is for this translation and not for the Gita (which is beyond rating in any case). Most of the criticism of this particular translatiThe rating of 2* is for this translation and not for the Gita (which is beyond rating in any case). Most of the criticism of this particular translation centers aroud the "ISKCONisation" of the Gita with undue focus on the messenger rather than the message. That is not my grouse - the Gita is presented through the looking glass of the Krishna Consciousness Movement is lesser complaint. There are three problems with this translation: first, it takes a very narrow, and at times, incorrect meaning of several sanskrit words. The most glaring is the translation of dharma as "religion". This is not only incorrect, it is misleading. Dharma, now a word listed in the Oxford Dictionary, is difficult to translate into English. In a broad sense, it can be understood as "that which is right" or "righteousness", with a connotation of duty. Therefore, a statement "do your dharma", which actually means "do (your duty) that which is right", gets mis-translated to "follow religion". See the glaring difference? In fact, there is nothing in the Gita that is about "religion". There are other such errors of translation. The second issue with this translation is that it jams a monotheistic Abrahamic mold on to the Gita. Maybe it made sense considering that this translation was written when Srila Prabhupada was spreading the message of Krishna Consciousness in America, a country with a predominantly Christian faith, for whom an Abrahamic monotheistic template might have been easier to digest. The Gita drives home the message about Brahman, which is all pervasive, formless, genderless (the Sanskrit word is of a neuter gender), causality of everything. This, is seriously twisting out of shape the character and the message of the Gita. The third flaw with this translation is that it focuses almost exclusively on bhakti or bhakti-yoga, the path of devotion. The Gita on the other hand, has three parts to it: the first six chapters are on karma-yoga - the path of action without attachment to rewards, the next six chapters are on bhakti-yoga - the path of devotion and the last six are on jnana-yoga, the path of knowledge. Srila's translation gives a bhakti colour to all the three sections and this, is limiting the message of the Gita. There are other quibbles too, the biggest being the translation and the purport being contradictory and at cross purposes in several instances. Sometimes, it almost feels like the translation was done by one (ore more) persons, while the purport was written by an entirely different set of people. From some of the correspondence available on public sources, I have gathered that this was indeed the case: several people worked on the translation and purports (atleast two) seeking guidance from Srila Prabhupada. This is not to say the translation is not without its merits (and hence the 2* and not 1*). First, the production quality of the book is very good: durable hard bound volumes, on good paper, reasonably priced. Second, the presentation format: the shloka in Sanskrit and an English transliteration, followed by the pada-chhed - the splitting of compound words with their English meanings, a simple translation of the verse followed by a detailed purport, drawing references from other scriptures such as the Shrimad Bhagavatam, vedas and puranas. The language used is lucid, simple and free flowing. In many instances, the quality of translation (and in some the purport as well, if once can see beyond the Krishna Consciousness messaging) are superlative, and I have these marked out. However, I would caution beginners without a knowledge of Sanskrit from starting with this translation, for it may be misleading and give the wrong meaning about the Gita. It would be best to start with a simple English translation (sans any commentary or interpretation), and then follow up with a commentary as the next step. The ones by the Gita Press, Gorakhpur, Ramakrishna Ashram publications etc., are excellent in this regard. Overall verdict? Good as a companion reference for the discerning and advanced reader and not for a beginner. Or, if you are a ISKCON follower, an indispensible book. Not otherwise....more
Mahabharata from the narrative of its lesser written about women: Ganga and Satyavati. A fascinating premise for a mythology based book. UnfortunatelyMahabharata from the narrative of its lesser written about women: Ganga and Satyavati. A fascinating premise for a mythology based book. Unfortunately, does not live up to the promise of the premise. First, there is little about Ganga the woman in Part 1 of the book. Part 2 on Satyavati is better in that it mostly focuses on her. The part on Ganga has narratives on the capture of Meru by the Celestial Folk (Devas) from the dark skinned ones, betrayal of Mohini, a dark skinned belle by Vishnu, the secret of the Celestials' long life, Bhishma's quest for a salt mine. And yes, inbetween we also read about Ganga. The only good bit (a few lines) was Ganga's agony when she has to drown her seven new born infants. The storyline is weak. The characters inconsistent and weaker. And please, promiscuity does not an empowered woman make. Satyavati is portrayed as overtly promiscuous: she chooses a man to bed every now and then, has amorous thoughts about Bhishma (and this after she is the mother of Chitrangada and Vichitraveerya), Ambika has lustful thoughts about Bhishma, Vedavyasa performing niyoga is described as an act of lust... Vedavyasa is also described as a dirty, stinky sage (smelling of cadavers, feces, dried sweat), graying broken nails, yellowing teeth. Why? How does it add to the narrative? A forest dwelling dreadlocked sage ought to be scary enough for a dainty palace bred princess - what was the need to make him repulsive? Because the storyline is weak and badly woven, we get nitpicking. There is a difference between simple english and poor english. CB writes simple english. This book is bad english. And then come the grammatical, editorial errors. There are very many inaccuracies: Gandhara is "north east of Hastinapura", there are mangroves at the base of Mount Meru, there are even oak trees in Meru and whats more, they sway in the wind. Overall, a poorly executed book based on an excellent premise. Think I will avoid the next one....more
Bar room banter does not a good book make. The book is neither funny, nor fresh. The humor is forced, the wit is stretched and both break before they aBar room banter does not a good book make. The book is neither funny, nor fresh. The humor is forced, the wit is stretched and both break before they achieve their purpose. Take out the irrelevant pictures and illustrations and blank pages, the book reduces to half its size. A 45 minute read, there is little that elicits a laugh. No....more
The contents of the 5000 odd page series re-arranged for ease and reviewed: Volume 1: A description of the raiment, armour, sigils and banners of everyThe contents of the 5000 odd page series re-arranged for ease and reviewed: Volume 1: A description of the raiment, armour, sigils and banners of every single king, lord, knight, soldier, farmer, small folk of the lands and kingdoms of Westeros and Essos. Volume 2: A description of every meal partaken by every single king, lord, knight, soldier, farmer, small folk of the lands and kingdoms of Westeros and Essos. Volume 3: A description of the interior and exterior of every building standing, collapsed, demolished, ruined, disappeared, of the kingdoms of Westeros and Essos. A description of the geographies of the said lands would occupy a third of this volume. Volume 4: Went up the mountain, went down the mountain, went up the mountain, went down the mountain, went up the mountain, went down the mountain, went up the mountain, went down the mountain. Some three sets of characters do this pretty much throughout Volume 4 of the series. Oh and not to forget, A highborn maiden of three and ten, fair of face and auburn hair (borrowed from j - /review/show...) Volume 5: Part 1 - The story of Bran, who we follow throughout the series in the fond hope that he will do something worthwhile sometime. Part 2 (about two thirds of this volume) - everything of interest that happens across the series, primarily populated by the Lannisters and sometimes by Ned Stark and Robb Stark....more
I should have abandoned this after reading the introduction, but still had enough gumption and resolve to read to the last page. In the introduction, I should have abandoned this after reading the introduction, but still had enough gumption and resolve to read to the last page. In the introduction, we are made aware that Vyasa is the son of Satyavati and Parashurama (confusing Parashara and Parashurama is not a done thing). Also comes the startling disclosure that Shukracharya (the preceptor of Devas, father of Devayani) is the son of said sage Vyasa (mixing up Shukracharya and Shukadeva). For good measure, the author makes Vidura elder to Dhritarashtra and Pandu and Yuyutsu's mother is married to Dhritarashtra (second wife). I do hope this is a case of creative license (a little too much though) and not poor research. Now for the rest of the review. First, the title of the book should have been 'The Rant of Duryodhana', for that is what the book is, in the first 200 pages. Don't even get me started on the glaring inaccuracies - and no these are neither printing errors or imaginative interpretations. They are plain inaccuracies. And why are there bullet points in the narrative? In one particular place, the author lists "ten" points. The language is absolutely juvenile - in an effort to sound cool, he turns out totally uncool. So while in one place it is a 'bandana' that covers Gandhari's eyes, in another it is a 'hankie'. Sorry. Not done. In contrast, the author uses complex vocabulary in other places. For example taxophily for archery. What's wrong with archery? The book could also have done with a good editor. There are unnecessary descriptions all over. While the listing of the names of each every one of Duryodhana's siblings is still ok, the half page description of how the children's game 'I spy' is played is not. And the concluding line of that passage takes the cake: ...the sought would become the seeker while the successful seeker joined the ranks of the sought... For a moment I thought I was reading Deepak Chopra! There is also a 5 page monologue (not exaggerating) that Karna delivers during the show of skill. It is neither inspiring nor moving. And the final kicker. By about page 297 we have reached the game of dice and the shaming of Draupadi. For reasons unknown the author abruptly ends the book here, with Duryodhana making a statement that whatever happened thereafter was a foregone roll of events that is well documented in a million versions of the epic! And to think I pre-ordered the book!...more
I give this 1 star and I also give this 5 stars. Why? Because not only is the whole world divided into "Like Chetan Bhagat" and "Dislike Chetan BhagatI give this 1 star and I also give this 5 stars. Why? Because not only is the whole world divided into "Like Chetan Bhagat" and "Dislike Chetan Bhagat", I am divided too! Let me explain. Why the 1 star: 1) the plot is simplistic, in fact, all too simplistic 2) formulaic - you have read one CB book, you have read it all. All CB books have the following, all of it and nothing else: - forbidden love (and in most cases, forbidden sex as well), puppy love - extremely pretty girl - happy go lucky-street smart boy - the girl is a rebel - boy-girl can't get together for various societal reasons: rich-poor / smart-dumb / north-south etc., - fetish for the lips or some other part of the body - page 20 (or thereabouts): boy and girl meet - page 70 (or thereabouts): they have sex - page 90 (or thereabouts): they have sex again - page 150 (or thereabout): they break up - page 225 (or thereabout): they come together again - page 250 (+ or 1 10 pgs): the book ends The only exception in this book is that they don't have sex until page 245. 3) cliched - everything about it is cliched (like every other book)- hostels, Rajput College vs Model School, how our villages are, romanticized rural life etc., etc., If you are nodding your head to all of this, DO NOT pick up the book. If you gave a 1 as well as 5 starts to his other books, read on.
Why I like CB books: 1) They are entertaining 2) They simplify life. Something I wish I could do 3) There are happy endings. Always 4) The characters are ordinary. Very ordinary people. People like you and me 5) The characters lead very un-extraordinary lives. Just like you and me 6) It tells us that men are idiots when it comes to women. Men like to believe that deep inside their hearts 7) It also tells us that while women act mature and uppity and all that, they are soft like clay inside. And as stupid as men are when it comes to women. Women too like to believe that deep inside their hearts 8) I don't have to think about it after I am done reading it. Heck, I don't have to think even when I am reading it!
But that is not why I admire CB. The reason I admire CB is because: 1) He told us that we don't have to write for a western audience when writing in english in India 2) He told us that it is ok to be ordinary, to be stupid 3) He brought pride into ordinary, stupid, silly Indian english writing (I am NOT being sarcastic here) 4) He got thousands of Indians to read english novels
Mahabharata from Duryodhana's eyes! What a refreshing thought. The thought itself held so much promise. And so it was that I proceeded to buy the bookMahabharata from Duryodhana's eyes! What a refreshing thought. The thought itself held so much promise. And so it was that I proceeded to buy the book against sage advice from those who had read the author's previous book, Asura.
The best thing about the book is the promise of the premise - that of the view point of the vilified, the Kauravas. The worst thing about the book is that it is an opportunity squandered. A glorious opportunity squandered.
To be fair to the author, he makes several good points, several relevant points. The exploitation of the downtrodden, the untouchables at the hands of the higher castes are very valid points. Had it been a fictional account, or even historical account of these aspects, it would have been a good read. However, in Ajaya, we have these societal aspects mingled with the story of the Mahabharata with Duryodhana as the protagonist.
There is nothing wrong in that. Except that it would have been better off as two books - one a book about the exploitation of the downtrodden and how a prince, against all odds, stands up for them and is ultimately vanquished by those wanting to uphold their false sense of the ancient order. The second book should have been about Duryodhana and trying to interpret the events of the Mahabharata from his point of view - why he did what he did.
Unfortunately, this was not to be. So we have a book where Duryodhana is the epitome of all that is good, is manipulated by his devious uncle Shakuni and the Pandavas are cast as evil (with the inexplicable exception of Arjuna). Aiding them, or rather driving them is Krishna who is stripped of his divinity (that is not what my complaint is) and is a conniving schemer working his own agenda.
Unfortunately, simply reversing the roles of the good and the bad IS NOT Mahabharata from the view point of the vanquished. No character in the Mahabharata is clearly black and white. That left so much to explore. Ajaya simply casts Duryodhana and co. in pure white and Pandavas and co. in pure black. Shakuni is painted an extra shade of black. While this makes it very easy to glorify Duryodhana, for those who are familiar with the story of the Mahabharata, it is wholly unconvincing. Further, in order to paint the characters in his choice of colours, the author has twisted events to suit his purpose. That takes away from what the book could have been.
Making matters worse is poor execution. The language itself is simple and contemporary and this is admirable. However, narratives do not flow smoothly into each other, there are gaps in and mixing up of timelines, disjointed narratives etc., The worst part is the inconsistency in characterisation. For example, Subhadra who is deeply in love with Duryodhana, begins to hate him and falls in love with Arjuna. The reason? Because Duryodhana crowned Karna as king of Anga and thereby insulted Arjuna!
This is compounded further. There are events that are inconsistent too! For example, Drona orders Duryodhana to conquer Panchala and capture Drupada. Duryodhana does not wish to wage war against a friendly state. So he goes to Kampilya with only a few divisions of the army and conveys to Drupada the reason for Drona's anger and a repentant Drupada sends gifts with Duryodhana. He also appreciates and admires Duryodhana for his handling of the event. So far so good. An annoyed Drona orders the Pandavas to capture Drupada. Inexplicably, the entire Hastinapura army accompanies the Pandavas! Further, Arjuna captures Drupada and his sons Shikhandi and Dhrishtadyumna (there is an error here but more later) and presents them before Drona. Strangely, this angers Drupada and his sons against Duryodhana! Now why would Drupada get angry against one who treated him with respect and not one who insulted him? Furthermore, it is only now that Bhishma, who is running the affairs of the kingdom himself, comes to know of the mis-adventure of the Pandavas and comes to apologise to Drupada! So what was the Grand Regent who would have overseen the army doing while first Duryodhana assembles a few platoons and marches to Kampilya (as per the narrative, the whole exercise would have taken the Kauravas a week) and then the Pandavas mobilise the whole army and march off to invade a neighbouring kingdom! The author also mixes up the timelines. A couple of instances: in this book, Duryodhana arrives at the rajasuya yagna AFTER Shishupala is killed by Krishna. This is incorrect. Duryodhana was appointed as the person to collect gifts from visiting kings - a very high honour. Therefore, he was present when Shishupala was killed. This is a glaring inconsistency in the book. Another instance: the book states that Arjuna bound Drupada, Shikhandi and Drishtadyumna in chains and presented them before Drona. This is incorrect. Drupada, captured by Arjuna and insulted by Drona, performs a yagna to get a valiant son who will avenge him. Drishtadyumna (fully grown) emerges from the fire of the yagna as a result. The supernatural theme notwithstanding, this means that at the time of his defeat at the hands of Arjuna, Drishtadyumna DID not exist as a son of Drupada. He may have been adopted later or may have been the son of a close relative who was later adopted for his valour, but clearly, he was nowhere in the picture during Drupada's defeat. There are also instances - important ones - that the author skips completely. Yudhishthira was crowned as the crown prince soon after the show of skill (when Karna makes his appearance) but BEFORE they proceed to the house of lac. This is a critical event that the author has completely missed. In summary, this books over dramatises, twists events simply so that the Kauravas can be painted as righteous (I am not saying they weren't) and the Pandavas as evil (again, I am not saying they weren't), is marred by poor execution, inconsistent characterisation, errors in the story etc., The only silver lining is the depiction of the plight of the untouchables and the downtrodden - that is deserving a book in itself. There is little in the book about Duryodhana himself - most of the times he is depicted as a clueless fellow who lets himself be manipulated easily. Had the title of the book been Mahabharata - the untold story of the downtrodden AND did not have the errors and inconsistencies mentioned above, it could have been a much better book. I really, really wish the brilliant opportunity to tell a good story not been squandered....more
Shallow. Eg., opening sentence - "The Mahabharata is the story of a futile and terrible war..." Futile? How? Another eg., pg 7 which tries to analyse Shallow. Eg., opening sentence - "The Mahabharata is the story of a futile and terrible war..." Futile? How? Another eg., pg 7 which tries to analyse why Yudhishthira played the disastrous game of dice.
Inaccurate. Eg., Pg xvi seems to indicate that Pandu waged wars after his sons were born and then left for the forest! It's the other way: he waged wars, went to the forest and then had sons. Does not talk about the second game of dice that the Pandavas lost and as a result had to go on exile. Pg xviii first line: "...the kingdom of Virata where they have perilous and hilarious escapades." Hilarious?? Pg xix: "...Bhishma begins to decimate the armies of the Pandavas..." Inaccurate - infact, Duryodhana actually rages against Bhishma for not doing enough damage to the Pandava armies. During the leadership of Bhishma, the Kauravas suffer greater losses than Pandavas. Pg xix: talks about chakra vyuha, in the form of a lotus like circular array. The learned author is confusing chakra vyuha with the padma vyuha! Pg xxi: states the Pandavas choose Bhima to fight the last duel with Duryodhana. Actually, Yudhishthira offers to Duryodhana to choose any of the five brothers and Duryodhana chooses to fight Bhima. Pg xxix: According to this chronology, Mahabharata is composed after the death of Mahavira and Buddha!
Repetitive [whole passages are repeated]. Eg., Pg 1, first paragraph.
Refers to Western scholars' translations/interpretations more than Indian ones. Prefers van Buitenen to Kisari Mohan Ganguli. This is not understandable.
Pg xliv: Refers to the Mahabharata as a wacky story - it is about a war between the children of a blind pretender fighting the sons of a man too frail to risk the act of coition. This is tantamount to dismissing the Odyssey as the wanderings of a king too foolish to find his way back home. I don't know if this is what comes of reading western renderings of the Mahabharata, but honestly, one would expect better. Pg xlv: "The Mahabharata is a profoundly ironic text with a very modern sense of the absurd."!
Loading...
