I have just finished reading a book by Harishakar Parsai and while every single story/essay in the book is brilliant, the one that stays with me is his thoughts on the biographies of 2 bestselling authors - both women.
And this is my safe space where I can come and talk about this.
This is what he says:(I won't name the authors involved)
The autobiography of one is a series of her physical affairs with men. She has no emotional connect with any of them. Its a series of sexual adventures - from one bed to the next.
The autobiography of the other, better known author, is even better - its a record of her emotional relationships with men - first her father, then an imaginary lover, then Sahir, then Imroz, and finally, when she mentions her children, she mentions the son more than the daughter.
These are progressive women setting the stage of thoughts for other women. Is this really how progressive women should view themselves? In reference to context of the men in their lives? Is that all that they want to tell about their lives? Was their writing process, their frustrations as authors, and other things related to their craft, or even the daily humdrum of existence as an author (a profession that pays for the bread, but cannot afford the butter) not a part of their lives at all? Where were they living? On some cloud?
When a reader picks up the autobiography of an author, they pick it up for the "author". Is it not a fair expectation of the reader that their lives as authors will be represented in the book?
If you pick up the autobiography of a scientist, and all he writes about is that the samosas in this place are lovely, this cafe in Paris has great coffee, and the buffet at so-and-so is to die for, is that what one expects from the autobiography of a scientist?
**********
Of all these, the line that struck me the most is this - Is this how progressive women should view themselves? Through the context of the men in their lives?
