|
Her
reputation preceeds her. She is bold, provocative, scathing
– tells it like she wants to and doesn't mince words.
And yet, when I met Shobhaa De, variously described as the author
of the Jackie Collins-style "racy and raunchy" novel
and the gorgeous columnist "with a pen dipped in poison,"
I was pleasantly surprised to find that she is far from the
battleaxe the Indian media has made her out to be. Intelligent
and blunt and at the same time, emotional and pragmatic, she
comes across less as a feminist and more as a well-rounded,
progressive woman who knows where her priorities lie.
In
Karachi for the launch of Nadya A.R.’s debut novel, Kolachi
Dreams, Shobhaa De chats with Newsline about her books, Indian
celebrities, her family and more.
Q:
What made you choose to write raunchy novels?
A: Actually, it’s not something I had planned.
Many people are not aware that I have also written non-fiction,
and that certain novels are non-racy. Only three of my 14 books
are racy novels, the remaining, whether fiction or non-fiction,
are provocative, have attitude and are up-front in what they
are saying, but cannot be described as raunchy or racy. I think
it is true of any writer that they do not choose their genre,
the genre chooses the writer because of the way he or she is
wired.
Q: But, your writing, by and large, tends to be controversial.
Do you agree?
A: Yes, I don’t believe in safe. The only
thing is that when you decide, or even instinctively, write
something that is deemed controversial, you have to be able
to substantiate what you are saying and have a track record
of credibility. There has to be some sense of responsibility
and you have to take what comes your way too. There have been
enough controversial things said about me – one cannot
afford to say, “I am the one who has the privilege to
say something, but will not accept any criticism or reaction
to it.” Dissent is a very good thing in any society and
keeps everyone on their toes, including me.
Q:
How do you react to being called the Jackie Collins of the East?
A:
I don’t identify with it in the least and I’ve
outgrown that label a long time ago. I was quite surprised to
find it in your papers – I think someone must have just
got it off the net and thought it a convenient tag to put on
a woman. This sort of stereotyping is typical – I thought
I had left it behind.
Q:
Do you see yourself as part of Mumbai’s ‘high society’?
A: I don’t regard myself as part of it.
It’s not just a feeling that you belong to high society
– it’s your circumstances – which you don’t
engineer. I’m very much a by-product of my city. With
30 years of writing behind me – having edited magazines,
been a columnist and an author – it is inevitable that
you are identified with the elite. But, it doesn’t add
value to my life – nor does it take away anything from
it. If that’s how it’s perceived, so be it. But,
it would be fake and hypocritical to claim that I belong to
any other segment – if at all one is to slice up society.
I feel no reason to explain it or apologise for it.
Q: You say that you maintain a ‘glamour girl’
image at all times simply because it is expected of you, even
though you often find it tedious. Isn’t that in a way,
being fake?
A: I have to do it as it’s part of my professional
obligation. For example, if I were to go for my own book launch,
I think it would be insulting to the readers, organisers and
my publishers if I were to go in a scruffy pair of jeans and
uncombed hair. And I think each one of us, whether we realise
it or not, tries to dress appropriately for the occasion. But,
what I find intrusive is that even at times when I just want
to hang out at an ice-cream parlour or I am holidaying somewhere,
I have to maintain a certain image. Sometimes it can get to
you, but even then, I feel that any person who is a public figure
owes that much to the public – to be courteous at all
times; to never, never rebuff someone who wants to speak to
them about their work or be stand-offish or hostile to a person
who might want an autograph, because without those people they
would be nowhere and nothing.
So,
when movie stars say they can’t stand it when fans bother
them, they have no business to be in show-biz because the up-side
is so phenomenal – they are getting paid a lot of money
to live up to people’s fantasies and expectations. If
they are in show-biz, there is no excuse for bad behaviour.
For instance, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt behaved disgracefully
when they were shooting in India. As international public figures
they did owe their host country some grace and ‘tameez’.
Q: There has been a drastic change in Mumbai society
from the days when society ladies dressed in silks, chiffons
and pearls. How do you react to today’s casual dressing
style?
A: It’s a global phenomenon. Mumbai, more
than any other city in India, has always reflected global changes.
I think the younger generation is much more laid-back and casual
on one level; at another level they are completely label-obsessed.
The biggest brands in the world are available in India today
and there is a lot of conspicuous consumption. Discreet is no
longer in – it’s all about bling. It’s part
of change and one should accept of it. I am sure the chiffons
and silks, which are classics, will come back – eventually,
everything comes back full circle.
Today, it is more
important, I guess, for a young Indian to be completely in tune
with what is happening with their counterparts in Milan, or
Paris or New York. They want to be global citizens – therefore
the obsession to carry the latest Fendi bag, and have the latest
shades and chains. However, I see this as a temporary phenomenon.
I have just launched my own fashion label and am beginning to
understand the whole consumer mentality and the retail game.
To be able to understand the psychology of the new buyer –
the nouveau riche, and the young in general – is quite
fascinating. The kind of money they spend on a Chanel tote for
instance, would have been unthinkable ten years ago. For a young
adult to spend Rs 80,000 on a handbag – parents would
never have endorsed such an act, even if they had the money.
There’s a lot of pressure on teenagers today to be hip,
cool and happening – and apparently all that is defined
by the latest designer accessories – I really feel sorry
for them.
Q: You were quite emotional when speaking about your
husband at the book launch. How understanding has your family
been about your provocative writing?
A: I tend to become very emotional when I think
of my family and what we share, and I just feel very fortunate.
I think they are very proud of me. We live in the twenty-first
century and my racy novels are just one aspect of my professional
life. I enjoy doing certain things that are very meaningful
to me and my columns are not at all racy – they are just
consistently provocative. I write for television and reach out
to a lot of different constituencies in a way. Also, I don’t
think there is anything that shocking at all, even about my
racy books. This is the biggest shock-proof generation, in any
case. What is there in my novels that they cannot access with
the click of a button – in cyber world you can access
anything you wish to. I’m tired of having to explain or
defend my work because I don’t think a man in my position
would be asked to do so.
Q: Is it is because you are a woman, and that too
from the subcontinent, that you find yourself in this predicament?
A: There are at least ten women authors in India
from my age group whose books are far stronger in terms of what
they are saying – whether it is incest or homosexuality
or what-have-you. There is no such thing as a taboo subject
left any more. Even in The God of Small Things, the central
point of the whole book was incest.
Q:
Do you find any commonality between your book and Nadya’s?
A: Well, my first book, Socialite Evenings was a very truthful
representation of a certain segment of Mumbai society, with
its underlying hypocrisies, and in that sense I think Kolachi
Dreams is also holding up a mirror to Karachi society -- and
it is not a very pretty face that is reflected in it. I am sure
that Nadya is aware that her book is likely to cause ripples
and she is prepared for that.
Q: How do you feel about the fact that some of your books are
part of course studies in certain states in the US?
A: Also, in the University of London, where four of my books
are being taught. There are 80 to 100 dissertations on my works.
On one level I feel surprised and on another completely delighted
that someone spends so many precious years getting a doctorate
and probably seeing a lot in my books that, on a conscious level,
I may not have been aware of when writing them – especially
the strong elements angle since all my books have female protagonists
who don’t see themselves as victims or door-mats, and
eventually come around and take charge of their own lives. Most
of the dissertations are based on the feminist angle.
For
me, it is a very touching moment when someone visits me because
they need a short interview or some clarification prior to submitting
their dissertation. A lot of them are women and professionals
teaching at universities, and they often come with their husbands
who are not really aware of my work. On one such occasion, a husband
who had sat quietly throughout, said to me before leaving, ‘We
have lived with you these past three years like a member of our
family, while my wife has been working night and day on her thesis,
and we have helped her gather cuttings and information on you.
My attitude towards my wife and women in general changed when
I read her thesis.’ They come with so much respect that
it makes everything worth it.
Q: Why is it that the titles of all your books, save perhaps
one, begin with the letter ‘S’?
A: It just works for me. I like the ‘sh’ or ‘s’
sound – there is a certain resonance that can’t
be explained. And, since it has worked for me since the time
I was editor of Stardust and Society, till my last book Spouse,
I feel why knock it?
Q: You have been a king and queen-maker from the time of Stardust.
Over the years, who would you personally rate as an indisputable
star?
A: The era of the big star is over. I think it’s such
a shame because mystique is a very crucial aspect of stardom
and today most of the stars have forgotten that. You don’t
want the star you fantasise over on the big screen to be the
girl-next-door. You want the aura. I think Rekha is the last
of the Miss Mystique’s left; she is very aware of the
fact that she needs to preserve that at all costs for her own
survival, and she is very good at it. But, if I were to think
of someone with great star presence, someone whose presence
sends an electric current through the room, I think it would
be Sanjay Dutt to a very large extent. Plus, he is adored by
the public that is willing to forgive him anything.
Of course, Amitabh Bachchan is larger than life. Sri Devi, in
her time and even today, certainly has star power. Madhuri Dixit
– elusive, beautiful, talented – is definitely one
of the greats. Shah Rukh Khan, one of the smartest, most intelligent
persons I have ever come across – and I have met many
– has manufactured star quality. It is a very conscious
construct. He has actually worked on compensating for what he
may not have in his own personality. He is one person on the
screen and quite another when you meet him.
I
think Aishwarya Rai is quite a star. Sushmita Sen is a star. When
she enters a room, you notice. Rani Mukherjee, Preity Zinta,
Priyanka Chopra, Kajol, are not stars. Hema is a star, with
extraordinary presence and a lot of dignity and grace. She is
very much her own woman and is coming into her own fantastically
– she will be sixty this year. She is definitely one of
my top five favourite women.
Q: Where do you think Bollywood is heading?
A: The sky is the limit. It’s finally found its groove,
understood its own potential – and with the corporatisation
of Bollywood, they are putting in systems they should have 20
years go. Today, with the business models they are following
in terms of distribution, marketing, promotion, set-up and financing,
it is obvious they are going about it in a very smart and systematic
way. This means that they will be able to penetrate markets
they haven’t so far – which they are already doing
very successfully. Now, they have to seriously work on content.
But, the good thing is, that with the multiplex culture coming
to India in such a big way and so many cinemas coming up, the
smaller budget films, which used to be called art films or alternate
cinema, are getting a boost. There is more dynamism and better
leadership within Bollywood today, and Bollywood is being looked
at the way it deserves to be – as a conglomerate.
Q: You’ve done so many different things over the years
– which of your achievements are you the proudest of?
A: The strange thing is that I don’t look at them as ‘achievements’
and am always a little suspicious of that word. I just feel
blessed that I’ve done what I enjoy doing with all my
heart and have never looked at life as a series of milestones.
I’m very much a creature of the moment and live in the
today and the now. So, it’s difficult to answer a question
like this truthfully for what I say may sound like a cliché,
but it’s the truth – that nothing else gives me
the satisfaction and sense of fulfillment as when I watch my
kids. It’s not related at all to their achievements but
to the fact that they are good human beings with the right values,
are happy, and in such a dysfunctional world we have managed
to be there for one another and enrich each other’s lives
in our own way. Nothing can compete with that or give me more
pleasure.
At the end of the day, success is a very cold word – you
can’t take it to bed or cuddle it or hug it, and I really
could walk away from it all without a second thought. My highs
come from very small things. Things that seem insignificant
to people could be of tremendous joy to me. I hope my curiosity
for everything stays with me always for if I lose that side
of my personality, I will probably die of boredom.
Q: Are there any causes you espouse?
A: Yes, several. But, I just feel it’s so unnecessary
to beat your little drum about it. I think it’s demeaning
to do that. I just do what I have to do and what my conscience
tells me to do, and I do it with all my heart and sincerity
and leave it at that. But, I am willing to support any cause
anywhere in the world that involves women and children, and
cancer.
To
me it’s very important to speak up on behalf of the voiceless
– even if it’s a man -- and that is why I write my
gender column. For those of us who are in the media and have a
platform, to not speak up is to not respect our position. I think
of a column as a sacred space that should not be abused or taken
for granted.
Q: Have you read any other Pakistani writers – besides
Tehmina Durrani and Nadya?
A: Only Bapsi Sidwa. Tehmina’s book, My
Feudal Lord, like Kolachi Dreams – and even more so in
a way, because of her circumstances and the person she was married
to at the time – was a gutsy book. Her second book, Blasphemy,
didn’t impress me as much. She also sent me the book she
did on Edhi. I liked My Feudal Lord and thought she was certainly
breaking the mould. It needs a lot of courage in a conservative
society to go public with your wounds as she did. I enjoyed
meeting her and thought she was a very beautiful, fragile, crushed
bird.
Q: Are you afraid of old age?
A: Never. Age is a non-issue for me – something that has
never pre-occupied me. I’ve enjoyed each facet of my life
in different ways and for different reasons. Now I’m looking
forward to becoming a grandma, but none of my children are willing
to oblige and get married. I think you look as good as you feel,
so if you have led a life which you feel is fulfilling and feel
good about yourself, chances are you will look good, and that’s
the best cosmetic in the world.  |