Please go through my review written on my blog: http://shaanzworld.wordpress.com/2012...Ramayana Redux is what I might call this - in the “Lord of the Rings” format with a “Clash of the Titans”-ish lore. Its a heavy-duty remix of all Ramayana’s written till date (as Banker writes in his epilogue), with a very widened touch of his own visualization of this epic. The dramatization of the events are invigorating (some of them were good to note – as you will read ahead) – and not like the Ramanand Sagar’s episodes of his version of the same epic. A story retold – but makes for one good reading.In fact there are a good many things, terms etc that I got to learn from this book, thanks to Banker, I am slightly more educated. Also The Seven Sages or Seers - by the way they live long – seven thousand years on last count for Rishi Vashisht!!! I desire to learn that trick!!I love mythology – I am also a firm believer that the myth is actually true!! Rama is not my favorite historical character, but I loved the flavor of his character in this book. A human being, destined for greater glories for the betterment of mankind..we have heard this idea for ages now, but the commencement of the story with a focus on the evil lurking around – making a Demi-God or Avatar feel uncomfortable and mortal - is slightly offbeat. Ashok Banker says that the original story has not been told properly, i.e. the Valmiki version, which has been distorted and culled and re-culled every time some one wanted to re-write Ramayana. Hence the various versions of the epic. I guess this is one more of the same.The differences are not subtle, they are a plenty. The arrival of Kala-Nemi too early in this book whilst in the original it was very late in the epic, Surpankha is also depicted early here – both of them spies of Ravana. Jatayu also comes in as a spy of Ravana. Ram and Sita were childhood friends and Ram secretly desires her, so much so as Laxman desires Urmila!!I am not reviewing this book critically, but I guess, I will point out a few things which I found were invigorating thoughts.Invigorating note 1 | The Initiation: The readers’ “initiation” to the story, through Ram’s dream was something of note. A different beginning, I shall say. The unfurling of the dream sequence, “physique-al” description of Ram, the gory details of the “rape of Ayodhya”..was quite a starter for an epic known for its portrayal of civility and nobility!!Invigorating note 2 | The Bitchiness of Kaikayi: Now, it has been told to us in bedtime and afternoon “dadi/nani” stories that that Kaikayi loved Ram more than her own son, Bharat. But it turns out, that she was a bitchy and conniving queen, hell bent on creating trouble for anyone coming between her and Dasaratha and her political aims. She is under grim influence of Manthara – who in this version turns out to be a follower and spy of Ravana !- strangely coincidental I guess, Ravana is referred here as the “Dark Lord” – akin to the “he-who-shall-not-be-named” in the Harry Potter series.Kaikayi also manages to boil up the atmosphere as the husband-usurping warrior queen. A real Vamp in this sense.Invigorating note 3 | The Sensuality and Sexuality: Never have we seen the Ramayana from the eyes of sensuality or lust. Its a family story without the sex and uncensored violence!! The details are still very restrictive, but the imagination is clear in the minds of the reader – or is it just me?There is not too much description, but as I said, the subtle lust does exist in the queen’s palace and in the depiction of the mannerisms of the “married” concubines. The way it has been written is sexy!! Got to read the other books to see how far this goes.Invigorating note 4 | Death of Laxman: So what if you are the brother of a demi-god and have been given the powers or strength to counter the vagaries of abominated beings (Rakshasas) - you can still die a horrible death! The poor chap did not know he died and was revived at at cost of giving up a Kshatriya oath - of not killing a woman !! This allows us to realize that all was not hunky dory as has been retold to us over the years!!All said and done, if you want to savor the writings in this Ramayana!! Forget what you read or have known earlier. You will see it in a new light! I have not read the original and have only made do with the epic serial on DD channel (during the pre-24x7 TV days) – I find this piece interesting to delve in. Classic Story retold in a Tolkien-ish manner with a large flavor of Banker – has worked hard!!Next book it is !!
Ramayana deals with the interpretation of Dharma as it was valid then and mostly how the character and life of Ram can inspire every living human being despite time lapses. When retelling such a tale the author has to be very careful about how he interprets the text and how he conveys it. This retelling by Mr. Banker lost my respect when he pretty much painted Ram as selfish in one of the books - Ram refuses to help Sugreev on the pretext that he has just ended a fight with 14000 demons and has to return to Ayodhya in a few months which might not be enough time to deal with Vali. He does not even meet Sugreeva despite Hanuman's request. Funnily enough he purposely seeks help from the same Sugreev when Sita is abducted and is ready to help him. Ram even manages to kill Vali in a few days time.This theme is continued throughout the other books where he refuses to lift the divine astras to protect the dying vanars and bears during the war on the pretext that this is a holy war and should be won fair and square. He, however, is quick to pick up the astras as soon as he sees Sita with Ravana. Some logic that is!There are so many factual and language errors that is takes just a few minutes of research on Google to find out, for example, that "Sitaphal, Cauliflower, tomatoes, and potatoes" were not even grown in India during the Vedic times;Coconuts do not grow in the Ganges plains; Malyalees and Tamilians could not have traveled to Ayodhya simply to sell their wares; Sumitra would definitely have never said "Jay Mata Di!."The author also writes several contradictory and disconcerting statements. For example,*Sita slaps Ram thinking that he is joking when he tells her that he has been exiled. Which honorable wife or husband hits their spouse...no matter what the provocation and in this case without any provocation?*Kaikeyi is never forgiven though the author states that when Kaikeyi asks for the boons she was possessed by an evil spirit and her spirit had actually tried to save Rama. Rama just seems too eager to be exiled.*In one book the author mentions that Mandodari was the most beautiful Rakshasi in the World. In the next book he writes that she was considered "mannish" and "unattractive" by the rakshasas. *Ram promises Sita that he will never exile her or her children for any reason and then goes on to do just that. Looks like only his father's "vachan" was meant to be kept and not his.The sorcery has epic proportions and I felt that the author has tried to create a Harry Potter like atmosphere to appeal to a younger audience. Even the dialogues are childish. Hanuman is happy because Ram calls him a Hanu "man." Really?!The book 'Revenge of Ravana' is so full of convoluted theories that you need to read another 2 books to completely understand it. In 'Sons of Sita'Ram has been reduced to a tyrant who does not trust his own brothers. Who believes in street gossip and is a pawn in the hands of evil ministers. Weak of heart and weak of ears! Ram rajya seems to be a bad period for Ayodhaya based on how the author has explained it. I skimmed through most of the pages and managed to just about finish the series. The only reason I rated it as 2 stars because it is Ramayana. However, the author has done a very shoddy job of recreating the persona and greatness of Rama. He has been unsuccessful in capturing the soul and ethos of Ram. Yes, he proves Rama to be an able warrior and dutiful son but that is about all. Ram's character just doesn't blossom despite all the words used.I am not touching another books of this author for sure.
What do You think about Prince Of Ayodhya (2005)?
Phew! Thank god it's done. Maybe it's me, but this book totally did not live up to my expectations - especially given that I've read loads of rave reviews! How? I guess it's just me. It was slow,slow, slow. It just did not capture my interest. The characters were all one sided -white or black with no shades of grey. i felt he tried to make a Harry Potter out of Rama, and the Asuras were all Voldermort's(Ravana) forces, of course. Kaikeyi was super evil, while Kausalya was all pure. I mean, in a retelling, one would have thought there would be more human elements(as in failings, shortcomines, grey areas), but in this book, it was all black and white - I think that put off - a lot. I know one thing for sure, I'm steering clear of this author - not my reading style at all. I've never been so glad to have finished this book and move on.
—Smitha
This book has rekindled my interest in Ramayana enough to look forward to reading its sequels too.Banker through his creative imagination and interpretations has added sub-plots and incidents not found in any of the previous versions of Ramayana and has described them very vividly. This has bloated the size of the book to 500 odd pages based on this outline. Yet not in any point of time while reading it I was bored. This itself speaks of the author's story telling prowess.Recommend this book for a light and entertaining reading. But definitely won't recommend it to highly religious and pious people who look upon Rama as a God. (Extended version of the above review athttp://bookwormsrecos.blogspot.in/201...)
—gramakri
Still no one is able to retell Ramayana in English properly. Always believed that Ramayana & Mahabharata have potential to outdo all Western mythological classics. Prince of Ayodhya is a good attempt. It suffers from meandering. The story could have been more compact or description of location more in-depth. The story progresses slowly & nothing much is happening in first half of the book. Get interesting in the second half. Here again there is lack of justice to the story as the battles could have been described more in depth. Overall a good story.
—Abhishek Narayan
