Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.43 AVERAGE
3.43 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Ok to have a get a different perspective but thats about it.
challenging
dark
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Asura: Tale of the Vanquished by Anand Neelakantan left me profoundly disappointed and troubled. Despite investing significant time into this massive novel, it failed to meet even the most basic expectations. Its misleading nature is evident, particularly for readers unfamiliar with the Ramayana or its incidents.
The simplistic narrative lacks imagination, misrepresents critical aspects of the original epic, and disregards its philosophical depth. The book's central themes demonize North Indians and propagate historically unfounded notions about Asuras being the original rulers of India. These inventions lack justification and fail to align with established historical knowledge.
Furthermore, the novel perpetuates stereotypes, fuels biases, and worsens tensions between different regions and communities in India. The writing style is uninspiring, the plot lacks direction, and character development is virtually nonexistent.
In conclusion, it is a misleading and divisive retelling that fails to offer fresh perspectives or capture the essence of the Ramayana, and I would not recommend this book to anyone ever.
Must read the detailed review here - Books Charming
The simplistic narrative lacks imagination, misrepresents critical aspects of the original epic, and disregards its philosophical depth. The book's central themes demonize North Indians and propagate historically unfounded notions about Asuras being the original rulers of India. These inventions lack justification and fail to align with established historical knowledge.
Furthermore, the novel perpetuates stereotypes, fuels biases, and worsens tensions between different regions and communities in India. The writing style is uninspiring, the plot lacks direction, and character development is virtually nonexistent.
In conclusion, it is a misleading and divisive retelling that fails to offer fresh perspectives or capture the essence of the Ramayana, and I would not recommend this book to anyone ever.
Must read the detailed review here - Books Charming
Good concept, terrible execution. Pointlessly meandering and dogmatic. Not clear what the point of so much exposition is. The spelling and grammar errors become painfully frequent after a while as well.
To the author's credit, I've rarely come across as contemptible a character as the protagonist, though it's a little puzzling why Ravana is written like a little whiny bitch for much of the book if the point here was to attempt a counter narrative.
This book made me dread reading momentarily.
To the author's credit, I've rarely come across as contemptible a character as the protagonist, though it's a little puzzling why Ravana is written like a little whiny bitch for much of the book if the point here was to attempt a counter narrative.
This book made me dread reading momentarily.
Different perspective on Ravana n Ramrajya
Recently I saw that there is interest in Ravana. This is fourth (technically third) (as one book was part two).
All books tried to portray Ravana as intelligent, multitalented, and powerful king. However, he followed different path n finally got killed.
This particular book interestingly doesn't create a utopian sketch of Ramrajya. From protagonist perspective, he preferred Asura or Ravaan rajya.
That's a very interesting perspective.
Recently I saw that there is interest in Ravana. This is fourth (technically third) (as one book was part two).
All books tried to portray Ravana as intelligent, multitalented, and powerful king. However, he followed different path n finally got killed.
This particular book interestingly doesn't create a utopian sketch of Ramrajya. From protagonist perspective, he preferred Asura or Ravaan rajya.
That's a very interesting perspective.
This is Ramayana from the perspective of Ravana. A very unconventional book where we get to see the story from the losing side (Asuras). Definitely not the version that we heard or seen as Films in India (more of a south-east version). Bhadra's character is awesome which was there until the end and shows how Ravana started his journey from poverty to one of the greatest Asura kings. Portrayed how Casteism was under Deva rule. The writer gives us the definition of Dashanana, the 10 faces / heads of Ravana and also how he tried to write his own destiny without knowing that destiny is already written.
Asura was a book which has high hopes and a lot of perspective differences that were not explored before. But it surely is a misguided and a dangerous attempt.
I appreciate the story from dual perspectives and people being gray instead of black and white.
Though it was an adaptation I cant help being disappointed by the forced portrayals.
No one is completely good and survival takes the path. Here Ravana does the same but gets lost in the middle when he stops listening to his mind and his ego takes him.
Its saddening to see the characters like Soorpanagai,Mandodari, Sita, Kumbhakarna, being portrayed as such.
Because they were just reason for Ravana s behaviour.To show reality on Ravana side Devas were shown as barbarians. To show the downfall of Asuras women are shown as reason and All are selfish people except the poor.
Contrasting in each and every chapter the author succeeds in twisting history, mythology and brainwashes that poor are brave and true. Rich people are cowards and selfish.
I have no support for any one but telling the tale of the vanquished must show why,
not force feed its all because of Rama’s tactics and Vibhishana’s betrayal.
Inspite of this there were few good moments
1. Ravana telling the need to have the ten heads for they further ambition and mankind progresses.
2. Athikaya and Angadhan fight
3. Mandodari giving it back to Ravana on his wrongdoings.
And the most disappointing are the women’s characterisation in Asura. Its easy to find fault with her- Stiff, not graceful and dull Mandodari. Polygamous Mala and Soorpanagai without shame and self respect. Spineless crybaby Sita and even Ravana s mother switched sides very often.
Shows the author is either acting on a lot of wrath again women in showcasing them like this where the truth is Deva or Asura or Human, Women are always degraded and reason for downfall.
I couldnt go through the book but forced to read because I cant stop anything I started.
Finally, the book could have been named as “The trials and tantrums of a Reluctant Ravana and the world is to blame”
I appreciate the story from dual perspectives and people being gray instead of black and white.
Though it was an adaptation I cant help being disappointed by the forced portrayals.
No one is completely good and survival takes the path. Here Ravana does the same but gets lost in the middle when he stops listening to his mind and his ego takes him.
Its saddening to see the characters like Soorpanagai,Mandodari, Sita, Kumbhakarna, being portrayed as such.
Because they were just reason for Ravana s behaviour.To show reality on Ravana side Devas were shown as barbarians. To show the downfall of Asuras women are shown as reason and All are selfish people except the poor.
Contrasting in each and every chapter the author succeeds in twisting history, mythology and brainwashes that poor are brave and true. Rich people are cowards and selfish.
I have no support for any one but telling the tale of the vanquished must show why,
not force feed its all because of Rama’s tactics and Vibhishana’s betrayal.
Inspite of this there were few good moments
1. Ravana telling the need to have the ten heads for they further ambition and mankind progresses.
2. Athikaya and Angadhan fight
3. Mandodari giving it back to Ravana on his wrongdoings.
And the most disappointing are the women’s characterisation in Asura. Its easy to find fault with her- Stiff, not graceful and dull Mandodari. Polygamous Mala and Soorpanagai without shame and self respect. Spineless crybaby Sita and even Ravana s mother switched sides very often.
Shows the author is either acting on a lot of wrath again women in showcasing them like this where the truth is Deva or Asura or Human, Women are always degraded and reason for downfall.
I couldnt go through the book but forced to read because I cant stop anything I started.
Finally, the book could have been named as “The trials and tantrums of a Reluctant Ravana and the world is to blame”
More than anything, this book reminds me on the awesome Kamal movie Virumaandi. Knowing how we know Ramayana the way it is, this one from Ravana's viewpoint makes it a completely different story. With the Asuras as the good guys and the Devas as the bad guys. While I wasnt too convinced when the book started off, towards the end one could see the completely different viewpoint and reimagination that makes the book work. Ravana does come across as a sympathetic ruler though one prone to bursts of random outbursts and loss of self control. The writing is a bit frustrating with absolute gem of a sentence often sandwiched between paragraphs of functional and sometimes, wince inducing writing. A definite one time read
History is always written by the victors. Hence, if the vanquished are given a chance to tell their version of the story it will shake most of us out of our complacency.
I have grown up listening to the stories of Ramayan, Mahabharat and numerous folk tales. In my childhood tales Rama was always the perfect hero and Sita the perfect heroine. Hence when I first read this book 3 years ago, I was shocked to see that there may be something more to what have been presented to me until now. The story of the perfect man is not as straightjacket as have been hitherto fed to me rather there are different shades to it. I admire the author for the novelty of the story which he has presented for it must have taken a lot of courage and an enormous flight of imagination to upturn a story which has been etched into the psyche of every Hindu.
The "wretched demon" Ravana is the hero of this novel, albeit a flawed one. It presents the Deva and the Asura, the binaries of Indian mythology as two different cultures. The novel reverses the binary by portraying the Asuras as the oppressed class and the Devas as the tyrant oppressors. It doesn't vilify Rama but it surely portrays his army as unscrupulous cheaters.
When I first read this novel three years ago I was absolutely smitten by it rather than feeling scandalized though it challenges whatever I had hitherto believed. Because it told me a story that I wanted to listen. I, a first year undergrad who started realizing the moral lacunas of my religion and was desperately seeking something which will vindicate my disillusionment was ecstatic to find a story which promises an alternative to the Brahmanical tradition. Back then, I found this book to be perfect but today as I read it again I could see how problematic is this book itself.
I like that the author in telling the story of Asuras shuns the fantastic and humanizes it. Rama and Ravana are not God and demon here, rather they are mere humans trapped in the quagmire of life. The author rends the veil of fantasy thrown over the epic by the tradition. But my problem is that though the author claims it to be a retelling of the epic Ramayana from the perspective of Ravana yet he doesn't remain true to the source. I understand that he gives a free rein to his imagination but he fudges with the source material. Rather than 'retelling' he constructs a tale to suit his discourse of Deva bashing. His interpretation of Devas and Asuras as different cultures is impressive but his appropriation of it as the Aryans and Dravidians is problematic, specially when the Aryan invasion theory is discredited. The novel portrays the Asuras (Dravidians) as the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent. The author appropriates even the Harappan civilisation as the Asura civilisation. According to the author everything was hale and hearty until the Deva barbarians (Aryans) invaded. The author portrays the Asura civilisation of the yore as the epitome of equality and progress, which is a bit preposterous given the fact that ancient civilizations didn't view the concept of equality as we view it. The perfect Asura civilisation was thrown into disarray by the barbaric Devas and all the problems which plague the society are introduced by the Deva tradition. Isn't it really reductionist?
I also have problem with the choice of words of the author. He presents the story as set in the time frame of the original epic, that is thousands of years ago. Ravana, though a humanized hero is not a modern entity in the novel, yet the vocabulary which Ravana or other characters use is conspicuously 'modern' like engineer, Panchayat, Sarpanch (it's an Urdu word, and Urdu is a modern language), sexy, etc. Also, I found that the writing is very patronizing towards women, and sometimes presents them as sex objects to cater to the male gaze, the physical description of Mala and Vedavathi are the glaring examples. Also, I felt that though the narrative tries to sympathies with the black skin colour yet it couldn't break the fetters of the stereotype that black is ugly. The ugliness of all the black characters are emphasised, be it Bhadra, Soorpnakha or Athikaya. I also disagree with the author's description of humanizing the Vedic Trinity. As the author attempts to humanize all the Gods of the Devas such as Varuna, Yama, Vishnu, Indra, etc. I am intrigued because it will be a humongous task considering the crores of gods gracing the Indian subcontinent with their presence. Another major flaw in the narrative is that the author makes every Deva and north Indian character speak Sanskrit, which is a glaring disregard of the historical fact that Sanskrit was not the language of the masses. The author while describing Ayodhya through Bhadra says that there were signboards in Sanskrit all over the city which the hapless Asuras can't read. Well, it's a preposterous claim given that Sanskrit had no script of its own for a long period. The seeming immortality of Bhadra is another problematic issue for me. Bhadra is dirt poor and obviously he doesn't have access to regular meals let alone nutritious food. Throughout the novel, he is battered, quite literally yet he is shown as fighting, running, climbing till the end. By the end of the novel he happens to be around 90, yet he undertakes an arduous journey on foot to his native village on the banks of Poorna and on reaching his village, he dives into the river and swims for a long time. It defies logic, isn't it?
Rereading the book after 3 years, I was utterly disappointed with it. Rather than being an alternative to Brahmanism, which I so naively thought 3 years ago, this novel is simply a rant against it, sometimes irrational, sometimes preposterous but always replete with spice to cater to the masses. It is simply a Masala story for the masses rather than a masterpiece. The author uses all the popular tropes, which are sometimes absolutely unnecessary to spice up the narrative, despite it I feel the narrative dragging sometimes. It is not an intellectual alternative to Brahmanism, rather it is a novel take on the epic spiced up in order to make it palatable to the masses.
I will end the review with one of my favourite lines from the novel:
"There was no dearth of gods in my country. It only lacked men."
My rating - 3 ⭐
I have grown up listening to the stories of Ramayan, Mahabharat and numerous folk tales. In my childhood tales Rama was always the perfect hero and Sita the perfect heroine. Hence when I first read this book 3 years ago, I was shocked to see that there may be something more to what have been presented to me until now. The story of the perfect man is not as straightjacket as have been hitherto fed to me rather there are different shades to it. I admire the author for the novelty of the story which he has presented for it must have taken a lot of courage and an enormous flight of imagination to upturn a story which has been etched into the psyche of every Hindu.
The "wretched demon" Ravana is the hero of this novel, albeit a flawed one. It presents the Deva and the Asura, the binaries of Indian mythology as two different cultures. The novel reverses the binary by portraying the Asuras as the oppressed class and the Devas as the tyrant oppressors. It doesn't vilify Rama but it surely portrays his army as unscrupulous cheaters.
When I first read this novel three years ago I was absolutely smitten by it rather than feeling scandalized though it challenges whatever I had hitherto believed. Because it told me a story that I wanted to listen. I, a first year undergrad who started realizing the moral lacunas of my religion and was desperately seeking something which will vindicate my disillusionment was ecstatic to find a story which promises an alternative to the Brahmanical tradition. Back then, I found this book to be perfect but today as I read it again I could see how problematic is this book itself.
I like that the author in telling the story of Asuras shuns the fantastic and humanizes it. Rama and Ravana are not God and demon here, rather they are mere humans trapped in the quagmire of life. The author rends the veil of fantasy thrown over the epic by the tradition. But my problem is that though the author claims it to be a retelling of the epic Ramayana from the perspective of Ravana yet he doesn't remain true to the source. I understand that he gives a free rein to his imagination but he fudges with the source material. Rather than 'retelling' he constructs a tale to suit his discourse of Deva bashing. His interpretation of Devas and Asuras as different cultures is impressive but his appropriation of it as the Aryans and Dravidians is problematic, specially when the Aryan invasion theory is discredited. The novel portrays the Asuras (Dravidians) as the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent. The author appropriates even the Harappan civilisation as the Asura civilisation. According to the author everything was hale and hearty until the Deva barbarians (Aryans) invaded. The author portrays the Asura civilisation of the yore as the epitome of equality and progress, which is a bit preposterous given the fact that ancient civilizations didn't view the concept of equality as we view it. The perfect Asura civilisation was thrown into disarray by the barbaric Devas and all the problems which plague the society are introduced by the Deva tradition. Isn't it really reductionist?
I also have problem with the choice of words of the author. He presents the story as set in the time frame of the original epic, that is thousands of years ago. Ravana, though a humanized hero is not a modern entity in the novel, yet the vocabulary which Ravana or other characters use is conspicuously 'modern' like engineer, Panchayat, Sarpanch (it's an Urdu word, and Urdu is a modern language), sexy, etc. Also, I found that the writing is very patronizing towards women, and sometimes presents them as sex objects to cater to the male gaze, the physical description of Mala and Vedavathi are the glaring examples. Also, I felt that though the narrative tries to sympathies with the black skin colour yet it couldn't break the fetters of the stereotype that black is ugly. The ugliness of all the black characters are emphasised, be it Bhadra, Soorpnakha or Athikaya. I also disagree with the author's description of humanizing the Vedic Trinity. As the author attempts to humanize all the Gods of the Devas such as Varuna, Yama, Vishnu, Indra, etc. I am intrigued because it will be a humongous task considering the crores of gods gracing the Indian subcontinent with their presence. Another major flaw in the narrative is that the author makes every Deva and north Indian character speak Sanskrit, which is a glaring disregard of the historical fact that Sanskrit was not the language of the masses. The author while describing Ayodhya through Bhadra says that there were signboards in Sanskrit all over the city which the hapless Asuras can't read. Well, it's a preposterous claim given that Sanskrit had no script of its own for a long period. The seeming immortality of Bhadra is another problematic issue for me. Bhadra is dirt poor and obviously he doesn't have access to regular meals let alone nutritious food. Throughout the novel, he is battered, quite literally yet he is shown as fighting, running, climbing till the end. By the end of the novel he happens to be around 90, yet he undertakes an arduous journey on foot to his native village on the banks of Poorna and on reaching his village, he dives into the river and swims for a long time. It defies logic, isn't it?
Rereading the book after 3 years, I was utterly disappointed with it. Rather than being an alternative to Brahmanism, which I so naively thought 3 years ago, this novel is simply a rant against it, sometimes irrational, sometimes preposterous but always replete with spice to cater to the masses. It is simply a Masala story for the masses rather than a masterpiece. The author uses all the popular tropes, which are sometimes absolutely unnecessary to spice up the narrative, despite it I feel the narrative dragging sometimes. It is not an intellectual alternative to Brahmanism, rather it is a novel take on the epic spiced up in order to make it palatable to the masses.
I will end the review with one of my favourite lines from the novel:
"There was no dearth of gods in my country. It only lacked men."
My rating - 3 ⭐