Nobel disappointment: in India

       I mentioned Rajvinder Singh's ... misguided campaign, 'From patience to perseverance: Nobel for India, 2013', early last month, and now Singh follows up, post-Nobel announcement, to re-state his case (he's shooting for 2013, after all ...) asking in The Economic Times: Why competent Indian writers have been ignored by Nobel Prize selectors ? [Aside: the local writers may well be competent, but as to the copy/headline-writers .....]
       Yes, apparently:

one saddening fact looming over this uniquely diverse and rich laboratory of literature in the world is that competent Indian writers have been ignored from the Nobel consideration they so profoundly deserve.

       Just like last time I mentioned this, I note that it's not a question of competency; indeed, the idea with a prize like this is sort of to rise way, way up above that. Leaving that aside, however, I am fairly certain that Singh is wrong in this claim: I think it's very safe to say that quite a few Indian writers have been given extensive Nobel consideration by the Swedish Academy -- it's just that none have won the damn thing. Given the way nominations for the Nobel Prize work, it seems likely that India is, in fact, very well represented, at least as far as authors being in the very initial mix go -- certainly better than almost all other nations from what used to be called the developing world. I would be very surprised if there weren't a few that made it past the first or second cull, too.
       Still, Singh makes a few points that bear repeating:

Barring a few exceptions, Indian writers known in the world are all English language writers. Though we treat Indian English as one of our own languages, much larger variety of literature is being written in regional languages. That literature has failed to attract the attention it deserves from the world.

       As to his suggestions ...:

What is needed is to make these literatures visible like a coherent mosaic by putting forward an academically creative hybrid portrait of the literatures of modern Indian languages, which should help disseminate multi-layered knowledge about its richness as well as its distinctiveness.

       If I may politely disagree, I think that's really not what's needed -- though my actual reaction is simply a head-shaking huh ?!??
       Seriously: even just the mention of 'an academically creative hybrid portrait' is probably enough to turn off anyone even in the slightest way sympathetic to the cause. Sure, good translations, and the occasional context are welcome -- but seriously: the stuff has got to stand on its own, and not be propped up by ... jargon.
       I wouldn't put it as strongly as Singh does:

Why have the Nobel selectors been so blind to these excellent literatures ? Whether it is their ignorance of Indian-languages literature or a simple rebuff, it is by all means scandalous.

       For one thing, as I said, I don't think the Swedish Academy has been entirely blind to these literatures -- they just haven't felt any exemplar was superior enough, yet. But it is odd that Indian regional-language literature (by which I awkwardly mean everything other than English) hasn't gotten due attention abroad -- and even I, who fairly actively try to seek it out, have trouble getting anywhere near enough to form much of a picture of the local scenes and talent.