Same-Sex Desire in Indian Culture Representations in Literature and Film, 1970-2015

"Oliver Ross brings fresh insight to the debates and texts he examines and undertakes some excellent exegeses of much-analyzed, as well as under-analysed texts. He bravely takes on the current received wisdom that gay identity is 'irremediably Eurocentric'; as he points out, practitioners of queer theory who propound this view exempt queer theory itself from Eurocentricity in a largely unexamined way." - Ruth Vanita, Professor of Liberal Studies, University of Montana, USA and co-editor of Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History

Reviewer: Ruth Vanita, Professor of English, University of Montana, USA

Report on 'Same-Sex Desire and Syncretism: Same-Sex Desire in Indian Literature and Film
Outline
This book situates itself as an intervention in the debate around whether identity terms like 'gay' are inappropriate or even neo-colonial imports from the West into India, and whether indigenous terms should be discovered or coined in their place. Ross proposes the model of what he calls syncretism, arguing that Indian activists and writers eclectically use English-language terms like 'gay' along with newly coined terms like 'kothi' and that thereby the English-language terms themselves morph and indicate identities that are distinct in some ways from their Western counterparts.
Ross then proceeds to examine a number of texts and films about same-sex desire, with a view to uncovering syncretic representations of same-sex desire in them. He employs strategies of close reading as well as historical and biographical criticism in his exegeses, raising questions regarding the intersection of various identities based on religion, caste and sexuality, and enquiring whether or not the representation of same-sex desire is imbricated with anxiety about the author's own identity or the reception of the work.
Strengths
Ross examines English-language texts on which many young scholars round the world have written and continue to write, and he thus covers well-trodden ground, such as Fire and the writings of Vikram Seth, Raj Rao and Kamala Das,. However, he does bring fresh insight to the debates and texts he examines. This is primarily because he is more skilled at close reading than most queer theorists. The book contains some good analyses of much-analysed texts such as Fire as well as of recent and less-analysed texts such as Neel Mukherjee's A Life Apart. Thus, Ross manages to balance appreciation for the intervention accomplished by Fire with a judicious assessment of its simplistic portrayal of Hindu thought, texts and practices. Likewise, he performs a good close reading I have seen of the Feroze-Maan relationship in Vikram Seth's A Suitable Boy (though somewhat marred by inaccurate comments on Lucknow's culture and the ghazal) and a thoughtful exegesis of The Sandal Trees.
Ross's main innovation is his challenge to the current received wisdom among queer theorists that gay identity is 'irremediably Eurocentric' (8); as he points out with understated irony, practitioners of queer theory who propound this view exempt queer theory itself from Eurocentricity in a largely unexamined way (p. 8). He also challenges the assertions of non-academic commentators like Jeremy Seabrook and Shivananda Khan that the deployment of terms like 'gay' by Indians is neo-colonial and retrograde. His model of syncretism is sensible and well articulated.
The book is clearly organized. Ross writes with an awareness of multiple contexts and hybridities. I list factual errors and over-readings in the Appendix.
Ross is capable of elegant writing; unfortunately, he muddies it with jargon of this kind: 'There emerges a diachronic approach to irruptive moments in Indian history and their syncretic overlapping with contemporary homosexual subjectivity and existence, but ambivalence predominates' (164).
Weaknesses
It is very important that the title of this book be changed. It performs the same hubristic move as Rushdie's infamous anthol