Inside Story | Martin Amis & Anil Dharker

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] hello and welcome to tata literature live the 11th annual mumbai international literature festival and the first one to be completely digital co-sponsored by tata steel and tata projects the following session is a conversation between martin amos and anil dharkar they will be speaking about the life and literature of martin amos martin amos is considered as one of the most influential and innovative voices of english fiction he is best known for his novels money and london fields anil dharkar is a writer columnist and film critic he's also the founder and director of tata literature live we welcome all of you to inside story hello martin how are you good uh last time we spoke uh you were in mumbai and now well now you're not yeah no that was in 2017 that's right yes indeed and since then you've produced this monumental book which i'm holding the inside story which has a couple of subtitles i was struck by the kind of similarity and covers in the style of the covers of this an experience which is an out and out autobiographical work uh what that plan already just happened by accident the similarities the covers um well hardly by accident i mean i i wrote a memoir after my father died now is the time to take a rest and and i felt i had almost a pro bono duty to describe what it was like to be the writer son of a writer father and i didn't know then how rare that was writer siblings are very common they're as common as muck you know compared to the parent the two generations which is very rare in in all literatures except just and alexander dumas um it's just a curiosity that um the the urge to write which i would narrow it down to um is in is not strongly inherited though it is inherited in across brothers and sisters right um and i think i'm the only case in any literature in the world where father and son are the same kind of writer social realism social realism very much occupying the same tradition i wonder why that is so because when you look at other fields for example an industrialist son becomes an industrialist or a doctor son or daughter becomes a doctor in in bollywood which which you know well uh and in bollywood uh act actors children become actors um so why not writers i don't know it's a curiosity and the more i look into it the more of a freak i feel i am because it is really very rare and well lit at all for for two generations to follow the same path yeah yeah also in other arts and this book inside story has on different pages different subtitles in right in the beginning it says inside story how to write and when you turn the page it says inside story a novel by martin amos now why is that did you want to have both or you couldn't make up your mind or what i i wanted to i wanted to have how to write on the cover but they the publishers said and even my my own daughters who said they said enough with the subtitles daddy because the subtitles tend to get you into trouble one way or the other but i i have this desire to impart another bit of information about how i want the novel to be read and um and it is it's a novel addressed to a reader a young reader and and all young readers want to be writers it's the same urge reading writer was the was the relationship i wanted to explore as well as all these other really tangible relationships with close friends and ex-lovers and so on yeah it was just a sort of to guide the reader it was inside information about how to write yeah both both books experience and an inside story are dedicated to isabelle fonseca your wife and i suppose you realize you've been married almost 25 years now it's 24 years now yeah i wonder though you have at some point called inside story a novelized autobiography it is really a work of memoirs and i wonder why you call it a novel and i think there's a central point which i want you to dwell on is it a way to protect protect the feelings of people by saying all right part of this could be fiction or is part of it really fiction because we don't know as a reader we don't know that at all where fact and fiction go where they separate where they separate yes i i couldn't have written this book unless it were was in another form done the memoir which deals with many of the same people and the same relationships but um make it challenging for me i had to make it a novel and that involved various it's a great slogan fiction is freedom and a memoir does not confer freedom um or indeed the very close autobiographical fiction the higher autobiography does not give you much freedom and even this book i felt denied me freedom because it was about real people let me just to put this in context uh writing about real people was unknown in serious literature until d.h lawrence at the turn of the last century um and he was hounded not only by by law enforcement not only for um obscenity as he's famous for but also libel and um the most distinguished and successful life writer the whole genre is known as life writing now and it's an enormous genre but sorbello my friends yes central character in the book um is the only writer i think who's ever got anywhere with writing about real people people don't belong in novels that um a novel will take a character and then transform them in accordance with the aims of that novel the artistic patterns of that novel um and sorbelo himself used to have very anxious nights before the publication of a novel where he would in the middle of the night he would take the proof copy and change someone's hair color or change their career or even their gender to protect himself from from libel and i'm i'm something of a purist when it comes to fiction and i think that's a rather worldly consideration to be taking on as you're finishing a novel in opposition to the life writing novel there is the art novel which is what i call it for want of a better word the the the traditional social realist uh novel where you're you're making you're dreaming up these people you're not trying to transcribe what they like to be with so it was i still think it's a very unsatisfactory genre life right i think that um injection from the imagination but also the unconscious yes which is the great arbiter fiction in my view my friend shashikapur the bollywood actor you might have heard of him he was part of the kapoor clan and really one of the best looking actors we had and he became a good actor towards the end of his career also so since i was a friend of says all the publishers wanted me to help him write his autobiography and he refused for the simple reason that he said if i'm honest i'm going to hurt a lot of people and if i'm not honest why do i why do i write it at all so and he loved to talk about all his reading ladies and i'm using his word he said they all wanted a poke which which is not a very gentle world word but uh so if i finally didn't write it we didn't do an autobiography has told two memoirs but your rachel papers are supposed to be again on a real character well i think that was my first novel published nearly 50 years ago and i think the young writer particularly one who starts here is forced into autobiographical fiction because he or she knows nothing else all you know is your own world your own experience your own self-communion [Music] and then as you find your feet as a novelist you expand you do a peer group you do a city you do a country you do compare one country with another your range and your span increases but you you you come out of this solipsistic existence which is the you know 22 three-year-old person and then you explore and that to me is the exciting bit of fiction is the exploration imagining yeah at one point when you're talking about how to write you you advise young writers to find an inner voice but again taking off from rachel papers and so on it seems to me that the writer really needs to have an interesting life himself or herself to be able to write an interesting book unless they have a very vivid imagination because if they have a boring life what are they going to write boring books or is that is that [Music] and have not had an exciting life then you have no business writing autobiographically at all um if you're a mountaineer who is also james bond and uh a superhero in his spare time then you might have an interesting thing to write but it's just the curse of writing is that there are no um car chases there are no shootouts there are no temptresses and distant castles um most lives in particular writers lives they're very dull and and solitary um so you have to look elsewhere for your excitement and it has to be kind of emotional intellectual excitement that's all you can aspire to um writing in writing fiction in my definition is freedom and once you confine yourself to your own life then there's a horrible restriction on your freedom and you have have to work around that as best you can right when you talk of saul bellow you make a reference to a phrase which i find quite intriguing which is moronic inferno can you expand on that it's what what what is the reference to and is that something which applies only to writers or that's something which goes through other people's lives he did define it quite carefully what the moronic inferno is and he was obsessed by this all his writing life um he said writers are expected to have quite an organized self uh one that can withstand the forces of modernity and these other forces that we barely understand the technological the the commercial the business forces uh and political forces but um but even writers he said are subject to the moronic inferno which is a phrase of wyndham lewis's who is this crazy anti-semitic um but not talentless writing in the 30s um but the moronic inferno is the the incoherent forces that we face every day and incomprehensible forces that play on us and you know as modernity accelerates become more and more and and is inescapable sorbello calls it elsewhere the forces of distraction how hard it is you know wordsworth's line lines the world is too much with us soon and late we expend our forces getting and spending we know not who we are yeah that's attitude that stillness that many writers believe is necessary for real creative thought drowned out by these other forces and and by politics i mean in the book i talk about israel and um ammo saws and um and uh a b yehoshua and joshua said in israel the world doesn't let you alone um you're being called to solidarity for various political and moral causes and um [Music] this is in a way um you could call it flattering but in fact it's just an attack on your on your integrity and your solitude and your uh so it's it's you against them you the writer against the chaotic forces of the society yeah i wonder if that call would now go to muslim writers it hasn't happened yet but islam is so reviled that muslim writers may find that they have to defend it defend the religion well early on in the novel i say there are certain things that the the novel can't do um three very obvious things that they can't do and um uh they are dreams yes tell a dream loser reader said henry james um sex that is the controversial one [Music] no one's written well about sex um g.h lawrence spent fifty percent of his um tragically short lived 43 years trying to write about sex not comically which can be done and um not uh plan gently as also can be done [Music] standard in his little essayistic book on love talks about what he gently calls the fiasco and i know what all men know exactly what is meant by that and and he describes it as a tragedy the fiasco the male fiasco and that's certainly what it feels like at the time but in fact the true genre of the fiasco is comedy i mean there are various very strong historical reasons why we can't write about sex we haven't yet learned how to write about sex i do remember ernest hemingway's famous phrase the earth moved but yeah good nice try that i mean it doesn't very much um we can't we can do satirical comical sex or above all failure which is the great but i disagree with you martin because you've shown yourself in this book when you talk of the young martin uh standing outside a telephone booth and phoebe is inside the boat making a call and what transpires afterwards you go to her apartment and so on now that is writing about sex without actually writing about sex i find that very very erotically charged whole sequence i thought it was brilliantly written and i said you're contradicting yourself because writing about the physical act of sex is comic as you say but you can be you can write something highly erotic the way you're done well i'm delighted that one reader feels that way but um but all one's imp impulses are deflationary what can't be done is what lawrence tried to do and many others which is to to write about the the inevitable ineffable qualities of sex i mean it is a very weird thing that the most potent force on earth eros the force that um people's the world is not accessible to writers certainly in at this stage in in but there are reasons for it i mean you know why didn't jane austen write about sex i always said that the only flaw in pride and prejudice is the absence of a 30-page sex scene between darcy and elizabeth was the end of the book but that's a sort of frivolous notion i mean until 18 1960 it was illegal to write about sex there was the knock of the policeman on the door centuries a couple of centuries of inhibition and slightly sniggering guilt about the whole process has built up all these inhibitions um and i i live for the day when i read someone who can write well about the actual act navakov said as a as a good general rule in writing he said but the bad sex awards i think brings up wonderful examples of how not to write about it and by the way lady chatterley's lover was banned in india till you have quite recently and if if i'm not wrong it's probably still on the prohibited list but of course it's freely available i know and yeah but it was found in england too um the famous lochen stanza which is sexual intercourse began in 1963 uh between the end of the chatterly and the beatles first lp um it began in 1963 which was rather late for me um but it i i think the year is wrong i think it was more like 1970 but it was you know historically the case that you couldn't write about it navigate as a general rule caress the detail but don't do that when you're writing about sex there's nothing worse than the mechanics of sex right well satirized in one sentence by parodied and satirized by kurt vonnegut whose example was [Music] she let out a cry of pleasure tough pain half pleasure bracket how do you figure a woman as i rammed the old avenger home you know i mean brilliant but that's when if you reveal anything about your own quirks yes uh your your polymorphis perverse um that is disastrous and i would say dreams sex and religion um because they're de-universalizing but religion you don't like graham green but i thought well gremlin is my favorite writer i've read everything that he's written and i wish i could have met him but you don't seem to like him well i loved him when i was he was the first serious writer i'd ever read and i thought he was tremendously adult and so on then i read him and met him and had that memorable time with him in paris on his 80th birthday and you began with a slightly strange sentence but the trouble with it is that it becomes schematic and you know when you're reading grain green you know that the adulterer must be punished for adultery that you know some statue is going to fall on his head or some trite punishment that's like hindi movies yeah yeah or other scarlet woman or anything like that yes yes and um it's i read at some point i read through the whole english novel when i was much younger but i kept noticing that there was a tremendous sexual yearning in those early writers i mean samuel richardson um henry fielding but he he's he rises above it smallit stern all all the others [Music] and it's all sublimated and dickens there's a marvelously revealing bit where louisa greg grind in hard times is being bullied by her father to marry a bumpus industrialist who's three times her age and it's the it's the dirtiest bit in all victorian literature [Music] um greg ryan says you seem uncertain louise you you're you're looking out into coketown this is industrial city as if you're consulting the chimneys of the industrial works and she says haven't you noticed father that all day the chimneys exude listless colorless smoke but at night father fire leaps out and thomas greg ryan who's a comic utilitarian says i do not see the application of that remark louisa significance of that remark um but this was dickens's rather cartoonish attempt to suggest sexual excitement in a young woman sexual sexual anticipation could you not uh write a novel which consisted of all these three things which you've said cannot be written about so you have dreams and you have sex and religion all in one book and just move yourself wrong completely a huge undertaking and one that i i couldn't look forward to i mean three impossible tasks um no other pens must deal with that i'm not looking for trouble when i i i found a very striking sentence in your book which says novels come from anxiety now what what do you mean i i thought novels came from imagination but why do you say from anxiety anxiety about what is it anxiety about death or is it anxiety about failure or is it anxiety about money or it depends um but the other necessary adjective to anxiety is silent anxiety um it's it's when you're worrying about something that you that is unconscious you don't know you've been worrying about it and when you discover it what it is you've been worrying about that is a novel that is something that you've done a lot of work on imaginative imaginatively and subconsciously fiction comes from the subconscious um and i was to give it an actual example um it's not often that a review makes you readjust your thought about anything a review of your novel but uh a very perceptive woman writer maureen freely said that my all my novels have these disappeared women in them these women that uh somehow sort of vanish and i realized that it had to do with this daughter i didn't know i had i mean i've got three daughters and two sons but the first daughter i did i wasn't aware of her until she was um 19 years old and already at oxford salman rushdie said that's the way to bring up children don't get to know them you can't simplify things very well right yeah but you you do seem to be involved in your in your children and they are bringing though which is quite different from the way your father brought you up um you'd think that would be very important but he and i've known writer fathers who've goaded their children into um attempting to follow in their footsteps with disastrous results this is this is a it's vanity in the parent to recommend you know have my life do my life it's it's um it's a narcissistic ambition my father who was always a very sweet father but but rather absent he was always in his study and um and to get his undivided attention was a great treat and a rarity but he had he knew what not to do and that was to to encourage me to be a writer so uh it never came up until i'd published um three novels and then he he accepted me as a sort of respectable interlocutor when it came to talking about fiction but never pressured me right when you when he read money i think he said he said i stopped reading you because you're breaking the rules buggering about the reader drawing attention to himself because you called a character martin martinez so but you continue doing that even in the present book you you refer to yourself as martin not i now both i and martin just to have the the modulation of going from the first person to the third and back again um but but in in the book he was talking about and dismissing yeah um he was more sort of post-modern playful um and he he said no you're breaking the rules where you suddenly you know present yourself the writer presents it himself or herself to the reader undisguised but that was a fashion of the time post-modernism and um although it produced very few obviously successful novels like philip roth the counter life john fowles the french lieutenant's women woman you know uh dondelillo white noise three masterpieces um in a whole generation long um experimental push is not a very high rate of success but it did turn out to be a dead end um and onanistic in a self-defeating way but it did have tremendously tremendous predictive power and the world we live in now is very postmodern and has been for two generations it does it did get something about the future yeah one has to respect that you despair of the world we live in especially because you've been living in the u.s with the donald uh being the president and now denying the fact that he is not the president um it who would have thought that america is one very brilliant historian said america the greatest adventure that human beings have ever attempted um to have a society that what didn't just emerge historically as as yours did as my my my own did being english existed for at least a thousand years but america was a an idea and that's what distinguishes it and what i think about donald trump is who would have thought that this enormous undertaking could be so damaged and almost who knows destroyed by a man of such uh such a flea weight intellectually i mean he's he doesn't exist intellectually philosophically he doesn't he doesn't even have the gronkin vividness of a dictator he can't he he's too lazy to be a dictator natural dictator when the covet um virus arrived would have seized control of the whole mechanism and said right national effort i think your mr modi would have made and has made know assertions of control but um trump trump folded his arms and crossed his legs and said you could almost hear him saying under his breath i didn't sign on for this you know this is more andrew cuomo this is more of an active politician i'm just a showman and a salesman and a cheerleader and um it's a misnomer used worldwide to say that he mismanaged the covet contagion he didn't manage it at all at all turned away from it when i heard him speak i i think my granddaughter was seven has a bigger vocabulary than he does i know he well we are now unhealed um we're sitting around here in new york humoring the president the whole country is humoring the president and taking him by the hand and with baby steps moving him towards the truth which is that he lost the election because the word loser as he might say doesn't exist in his vocabulary um but there it is and it's taking him what two weeks to adjust to this and make longer and he might try something even more outrageous than he's tried already but um [Music] he is he as you suggest he's like a child um and like a uh unusually uniquely charmless child and a malevolent child too and the idea that 40 percent or 45 percent of americans still think he's wonderful joy and love when they see him yeah pray for him and that's that's really what is disturbing i think for all of us looking at the the elections that he still has that kind of support and then we say my goodness this this is uh the most powerful country in the world so i think that leads to despair but enough about trump coming back to writing uh you were shortlisted for time's arrow and long-listed for yellow dog and london fields apparently there were two women judges who were very uh and to you because you you your women characters were very unsympathetic what do you think of the whole award scene are you bothered by it are you bothered by the fact that you've not won the booker um or are you pleased also that the time said that you are one of the most 50 most influential writers in the last uh half century years does it matter to you does it matter either way the the booker prize when i was young i thought it would simplify things very much if i won the book of christ because it puts you on i saw it when my father won it um it just it as and as john banville said it's not just the money it's the power you become a player in the literary world um but but i very soon dismissed that and um i don't win prizes at all the last prize i won was uh in 1973 in england for fiction um but i take that as encouraging that you don't want to create a consensus as a writer of fiction or at least not not for many years you originality which you hope you have as larkin said originality is poetry it's not just an element of poetry and the same goes for fiction um originality if you have it and if it's the same thing as talent then you certainly hope you have it but it's um it shouldn't be easy to digest and you're not gonna get all the same people saying this is what we want uh gently applauding it should be a bit more difficult to take than that anyway that's my rationalization for not winning any of these prizes when your friend salman rushdie's ex-wife or partner in her members said that whenever the nobel is announced and doesn't find his name that he goes into a fit of rage but you you never get angry about not being considered no you're saying it's encouraging that's a very hard thing to say but it but um there are ways to turn it to make it encouraging and anyway i might have worried about this uh a lot more when i was younger but i um i've long since even glanced at what the book of shortlist is because i know i'm not going to be on it and um and i you know what's the book of pride the the only prize on earth that has any legitimacy is the nobel prize for the simple reason that it's the same group of judges or solid sometimes adapting itself but you know people retire people die people are recruited but it's the same people with the other um prizes it's a rotating random no consistency you're saying but the nobel didn't give it to navakov uh they didn't they didn't give it to graham green was then considered the greatest writer so and then they picked very obscure people um they said if they they set out to pick obscure people but um i uh i implore you to believe me that um it occupies about one percent of my mind every few years um partly because um you knew it to disappointment and then you then you shrug off the disappointment you say and don't give anyone the satisfaction of upsetting you oscar wilde said a bad review should spoil your breakfast but not your lunch that you have to have your own independence and self-belief um john keats said he or what was said of him that he was killed by a review um and i i thought come on that that's pretty feeble to be killed by a review um more painful and durable wrongs have been withstood by many people uh anything a review can do to you is uh contemptible i mean that you should worry about it uh you have a very nice thing in the book we'll say uh imagining dropping in on anthony trollope or james joyce suppose we dropped in on martin amis what would we see it's there on the first page uh welcome exclamation mark um come and sit by the fire now what can i get you yeah a whiskey common sense in this one the mccannons the eight-year-old or the twelve-year-old you you you make the reader welcome uh and as i get older um i'm more and more committed to the pleasure principle which was formulated um three and a half centuries ago by john dryden the poet laureate of the time where he says the purpose of literature he called it posey for poetry was what he was mainly addressing but he meant that the novel didn't exist then 16 17th century he said is to give instruction and delight but delight has to come first because um literature only only instructs as it delights i think that has bought that has stood up very well as a definition of what writing is for before i go to reader's question just one last question you you lay a lot of importance on on writing uh the style the use of the language lot of novelists don't uh so do you think they are lesser because they don't use the language uh do you think do you think it's the primary duty of a novelist to use language well uh and the other things like plot and character and so on are subservient to language um i think there should be room for every kind of novel and all all writers um essentially and instinctively adore diversity this is the sort of life diversity um so i completely sympathize with the reader who is looking for plot character um psychological insight and actually i have far more sympathy for that kind of writer than i do to the ones like james joyce and others who whose joy is in the use of words i mean that is a marvelous thing when it's done as exquisitely as joyce does but things like the stream of consciousness is a is a ball and it's amazing that we put up with it for 20 minutes let alone 20 years um stream of consciousness is just a work in need of a third draft and a fourth draft it just isn't finished um we all have a stream of consciousness that's nothing um the the great challenge is to when you write is to find the right tone which sounds a simple undertaking but can be devilishly difficult um and to be convincing um and that applies to every kind of writing even to stream of consciousness right you have to you the the conviction comes from the writer knowing what he or she is doing and having complete control over the material um and discipline and structure and pattern and all the rest of it the the the only problem i find with good writing in the sense of using language originally is that it can't be taught it is it is either your it's part of you it's innate it's part of your genetic structure almost it's not something you can learn am i right well i think convenient to separate genius and talent genius being god-given nabakovian altitude perception and articulacy talent being knowing what what goes where and how to attract the reader's curiosity and um and i you can't be taught genius um nor would you want to be um but you can you can consciously improve your technique and your and that's what talent really is is arrangement of the management of a novel um i mean and you get with joyce as and with faulkner you get writers who are all genius and no talent you know they're full of inspiration but they can't commit you to a forward-moving narrative where you care about the characters which may sound a sort of primitive incentive but it's actually vital i think a couple of questions from readers from the rachel papers all the way to the inside story which of your books have you disliked after reading them later if at all um the rachel papers is full of unexamined cliches of feeling and thought i was very young when i wrote it but um but a writer should never never collude with the prejudices of his or her time and i found some very primitive and sexist um prejudices in the rachel papers not pretty well lazily accepted unexamined propositions that had inherited that were just present in the culture at the time and um that is a disgrace i think for a writer if you wrote it now would it be very different um you're almost operated the narrator is 19 years old yeah i i wrote it when i was 20 21 i thought i bet it while i remember what it's like now now it's an unbridgeable chasm between me and 19. and um let 19 year olds do it because and also that there comes this point as my father said to me when as you're writing trying to write about the modern world um you hear a voice in your head and it's a young writer talking in your head saying listen it's not like that anymore it's like this meaning the rhythms of thought have changed and um that's why i noticed uh with some embarrassment that four of my last five novels have been historical not not writing about ancient rome but writing about 1970 or writing about 1945 um recent history yeah and another question what is the writing process evoked now that we have had a year ravaged by a pandemic uh how was that how has house arrest changed you and will it affect your writing well i said when it all began that writers were the least inconvenienced people on earth nothing changed because you you never did anything anywhere you never social mixing yeah you alone you're quarantining all the time but now i do think it it inevitably has had an effect although it's too early to tell exactly what it is but um as a certain frustration of the social urges i mean what we all miss what has disappeared is society in the broader sense high society low society and everything in between this thing called society has withdrawn from us and i think that has has caused and will cause um a mild depression in the how would it affect your writing would you write a very very dark novel now no because you can't with fiction i mean zadie smith has just written a little book about the virus and and very truely she wrote essays not fiction um norman maylor said he wanted to begin a novel about september the 11th 2001 on september the 12th 2001 but he was very um uh savvy about fiction and wrote a brilliant book little book called the spooky art and he said i realized of course on september the 13th that it would take at least two or three years for this subject to to get itself into the area of what we call silent anxiety where you you don't brood about it but it's in your mind and bothering you and sure enough um in 2014-15 uh john de lillo claire massoud jay mcinerney all produced novels about september the 11th you couldn't have done that in september in in 2012 right um i mean 2002 yeah you have to sink go through your front brain into your back brain down your spine into your lines and then through your heart and that takes uh many months while researching foreign writing a rub of time were you disillusioned by your subjects in any way perhaps their inspiration for their way of life if i if i felt that happening i would swerve away you would not write it or you would change it i would lose the enthusiasm to write about that um again as you get older you less and less attracted to the negative and certainly no no glee in detecting um disillusionment in yourself so i would i would have bought a novel if i got that feeling from it yeah which leads to the next question how many unpublished and half-finished books have you got books you have abandoned um only i i made several starts at this novel and over 20 years um and then eventually things fell into something like an acceptable order but only one scrappy novella that i wrote when i was 28 have i ever known that i wrote a satire about islamic terrorism islamist terrorism [Music] and i realized something that i should have already inferred from literary history because you can't write about a menacing reality and i think everyone including 98 of muslims find islamists terror very alien and not in that personal tradition at all um but it has to settle and um and then you can begin to move out from it but it's a very um subterranean art it's the spooky art fiction and you lay yourself open in whatever you do much more than a poet does which is sort of strange because you think of the poem as being the creed occur but in fact the fiction is is not a critical but it's a um it's a mere culpa and look at the awful things i've thought and done but that's i think uh a wonderful way to end this conversation martin enjoyed talking to you and i think we could have gone on for another hour or two talking about about inviting and about literature and may i may i invite you to mumbai pretty soon for please it's possible and my wife wants to join me right so thank you again thank you so much we hope you enjoyed that session filled with insights and anecdotes we still have a lot of exciting sessions coming up later today at 2 15 we have book in focus a session on vikram states a suitable boy and at 6 30 the tata literature lifetime achievement award will be presented to our favorite ruskin bond hope to see all of you there [Music] do [Music] you

Channel: Literature Live! The Mumbai LitFest

Views: 29,918

Keywords:

Id: e8LcFkB3jXk

Length: 68min 45sec (4125 seconds)

Published: Sat Nov 21 2020