Mythological Fiction Readers Club

lolaveri

coolveenu19 4-6-2018 08:02 AM
Krishna Coriolis series by Ashok Banker seemed promising in the beginning. But I soon got bored coz  ...

I actually really liked the first 4-5 books, Banker's descriptive language appeals to me and in terms of staying true to the basics of the story, he did a much better job in this than in his Ramayan. It lost me from book 6 onwards not because of the pace, but because of the reliance on sci-fi tropes that felt out of place in this genre. Banker and his vortals

divey

Have you tried Anand Neelakantan, his telling of myths from a different perspective is quite good and refreshing. Even Ashwin Sanghi has written few in Mytho fiction genre but his last book Keepers Of Kaalchakra was a bit too loose

divey

Meself 30-5-2018 08:27 PM
I really dislike Neelkantan. He justifies the atrocities of all his villainy protagonist just to m ...

Villiany like good or bad is a subjectivce term. As they say one man's revolutionary is other man's terrorist. We have been ingrained with certain stories and aspects for so long that it gets difficult for us to see what happened to the other side.....As they say history is written by victors. You may see Ghengiz Khan as a person wo caused great bloodshed but he was also a guy who united warring tribes to make largest empire ever seen
Though there are points which we may disagree on like treatment of women but to completely disregard an author just because he is trying to presrnt the other side would be unfair.....

Meself

divey 5-6-2018 01:31 PM
Villiany like good or bad is a subjectivce term. As they say one man's revolutionary is other man' ...

It's not that there haven't been POV novels that talk about a certain villainy. "Vayam Rakshama" is a prime example of that. Aacharya Charursen wrote this novel back when myth-fic wasn't even a thing. His protagonist is Raavan in all his technical glory of knowledge and villainy. And people loved it because it never painted Raavan into being someone he was not. Or didn't belittle other characters because Raavan was in the centre stage. This is what a POV novel should be about.




If I really have to diss out Neelkantan, then his problem is that he tries to paint his protagonist a blinding shade of white and push the others into the pitch black. This is where he goes wrong. Mahabharat is all about sailing in the grey areas. Even the master villains have something worthwhile in them. This is what makes this book appealing even after some 5000 years. Neelkantan repeatedly painted the Pandavas as black, Draupadi as shrewd and didn't bother much with Duryodhan and Kauravas because he was going by the rule that if A is black then B will automatically turn white. It just left such a sour and bitter taste in the mouth.




Duryodhan is a prime example of complexity of a character. Even in the canon, he is somewhere between a deliberate villainy and vilified victim. There is a certain ambiguity in him. And certain deliberate evil. That is what made him interesting if not appealing. Neelkantan killed that very aspect that made people atleast take note if him. He just went ahead and made the Pandavas as some sort of lust fed masochist, thereby justifying even the most henious actions of the Dyutsabha. That was one reason why most of the readers called out to him.




Even Asura which I believe was his debut novel practically degraded every character and emotion just to make Raavan look "cool". As I said there has already been a book on Raavan that dealt with him in a brilliant manner. The argument of one man's revolutionary being other man's terrorist doesn't hold true for Indian Epics simply because they don't deal with stark contrasts. It's always grey. Add to this the narratives of both are well known and can be verified from thousand sources, so twisting the facts just to suit ones narrative isn't going to help matters. Neelkantan did precisely the same with his rendition. Instead of focusing on the protagonist he decides to belittle the deutragonist and justifying the former. Honestly this is where he lost it .

Meself

viksorion 2-6-2018 06:30 PM
Those who liked the Krishna Udayshankar version of Ashwathama should also read the series Aryawarta  ...

I agree there. The Aryavart Chronicles is one amazing series. The fact that it dares to strip the divine of their mortal cover and assess them as mere humans is brilliant in every sense of the word. My only issue was the Udayshankar never explained the mechanics behind the Astras used. She very cleverly used the guise of "but it was a Firewright weapon". If only she explained it, the book would have been a complete package.

lolaveri

Meself 6-6-2018 12:14 AM
It's not that there haven't been POV novels that talk about a certain villainy. "Vayam Rakshama" i ...

Completely agree with every word of this. You can explain without excusing. It's always fascinating when literature gets inside the antihero's head, but erasing all his negative actions and making him a victim instead just completely changes the character and makes him a different person instead of the same person from a different perspective.

divey

Meself 6-6-2018 12:14 AM
It's not that there haven't been POV novels that talk about a certain villainy. "Vayam Rakshama" i ...

I completey agree with your POV here. And this is not just a problem with Nilekantan, but many others who see things and characters as White or black but actually no such things exist. These characters are as human as we are and we are never white or black but myriad shades of grey some time bordering on white others at black. Take for example Bhima who is such a powerful charatcter in Mahabharata but somehow is always overshadowed by his more glamorous brother Arjuna. How would he have felt blindly following an elder brother with whom he may not be in complete alignment and living in the shadows of younger brother who is always in limelight and favorite of others be his guru, or even Draupadi. A really nice book i stumbled upon on Bhima " A lone warrior by MT Vasudevana Nair" actually looks into this facet.

And look at Krishna who justified many things which can be said are against rules of warfare in Mahabharata, for gretaer good, what would we say to him was he good or bad. I think he was just doing what had to be done for the greater good,  transcending the concept of good and bad. Our Mythology is full of such examples where "good" people have resorted to things which may not be considered moral.

cynic

Interesting discussion . My two cents....

Every human, whether in mythology or in this day and age has a self-justification for his/her actions. Even psychopaths have it. The author does need to delve on that, rather than painting the character white to absolve him/her of the sins.

viksorion

divey 6-6-2018 09:05 AM
I completey agree with your POV here. And this is not just a problem with Nilekantan, but many oth ...

This is where you should read Aryavarta chronicles by Krishna Udayshankar......

viksorion

viksorion 6-6-2018 04:56 PM
This is where you should read Aryavarta chronicles by Krishna Udayshankar......

I realised for the first time that the author carries the name of the person she had laid totally thredbare and has de-godded (My word- Neologism, but then it fits so.....) in her series