Michael Roberts, courtesy of www.groundviews.org, under a different title, where you will see a throbbing set of comments of varying degrees of silliness and pertinence, one I have refrained from participating in [I dislike pseudonyms and nom de plume as a matter of principle]. The repetition here enables the insertion of illuminating photographs.
Niromi de Soyza’s so-called autobiography, Tamil Tigress, has received extensive coverage in Australia and has traversed the world now because of critical reviews by several personnel and devoted defence from others. It has been described as “part memoir, part compelling reportage, part mea culpa” by Nikki Barrowclough in the Sydney Morning Herald’s weekend magazine.[1] Gordon Weiss, the moral crusader, proclaimed it to be “incredibly moving” and considers it “a story of redemption” (as quoted by Nikki Barrowclough). This may well be one of the motifs that Robert Perinpanayagam, a perceptive commentator, sees as the potential crux of the book in his unelaborated blog comments.
Without denying that dimension of the book if one stretches a point and treats it as a “faction,” that is, a “fictional narrative based on real events,” rather than a historical account, its self-presentation as a memoir[2] and “true story” renders Tamil Tigress liable at the same time to the charge of deception (a combination stressed in my little-noticed third article on the topic[3]). Indeed, it is arguable that it could be subject to a legal charge for a misleading advertisement that deceives consumers.[4] Continue reading
