Showing posts with label literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literature. Show all posts

Saturday, July 2, 2011

'Complayt, Comp. Lit or Complete' Or 'What the *#$% is Comparative Literature and Why are They Saying such Awe(Ful/some) Things About It?

The word 'complayt' is a colloquial Gujarati word which signifies perfection and completeness of the job done or to be done as in 'kaam complayt'.  The word, of course, is borrowed from English. I noticed the pun on 'Comp. Lit' and 'complete' ( in the sense of being finished), in the sly word-play of Jacques Derrida in his lectures delivered at Yale University in 1979-80 published as ' Who or What Is Compared? The Concept of Comparative Literature and the Theoretical Problems of Translation' in the Winter and Spring 2008 Issue of Discourse (translated by Eric Prenowitz). Derrida astutely points out the hackneyed and facile binary of' 'life' and 'death' seems to haunt the theoretical discussions on comparative literature. This was well two-and-half decade before Derrida's translator and postcolonial theorist Gayatri Spivak declared Death of the Discipline in 2004 and Susan Bassnett's contention that the emerging discipline of translation studies will eclipse comparative literature. Haun Saussy report on the health of the discipline in America in 2006 declares,"Comparative literature has, in a sense, won its battles. It has never been received in the American university ". Reports of the death or rebirth or renewal of the discipline are rather tedious, as is the agonized navel gazing regarding its own methodology. The skepticism regarding its foundations is as old as the discipline itself. Derrida's critique is aimed at the universalist- imperialist ambitions of comparative literature as manifested in its 'encyclopediac' nature, which he compares with the figure of Prof. Pangloss, an optimistic scholar, in Voltaire's Candide.

The earliest attempts to establish 'Comp.Lit' were often met with dismissive hostility. Rene Wellek cites Lane Cooper of Cornell University who said that Comparative Literature was a “bogus term” that “makes neither sense nor syntax.” “You might as well permit yourself to say ‘comparative potatoes’ or ‘comparative husks.’” Croce in 1903 saw it as a non-subject and the efforts to establish it as a separate discipline were futile. Croce saw it as methodology which was part of the effort to arrive at complete explanation of a literary work in the context of the 'universal literary history'. If something is a methodology, it cannot be a discipline in its own right. The skepticism regarding the discipline has persisted throughout the period of what Rene Wellek called the 'Crisis' of comparative literature. 


Personally, I don't think 'Comparative Literature' is either a distinct discipline or a distinct methodology. It is rather an alternative conception of literature. Instead of the mono-literary studies which see a single literature as something organic, static and autonomous, 'comparative literature'  conceives literature as essentially heterogeneous, dynamic and open ended cultural phenomenon, which can be understood only in the context of a complex network of historical relationships which cut across cultures, languages, places, periods and even media. Though comparative literature may be struggling to find itself as a distinct discipline, this alternative conception of literature has gained wide acceptance in serious literary research, thanks to the explosion of 'Theory' in the later half of the twentieth century. It is is in this sense, that Saussy feels that comparative literature has won its battles. Saussy feels that comparative literature is selfless, meaing that it has no unique or distinct identity as well as in the sense of its generosity. It doesn't, for instance, demand a small tax from English literature departments, every time they quote Spitzer, Auererbach, Wellek, Spivak or de Man. This discipline, Saussy thinks, is an 'anonymous universal doner' to mono-literary studies.


In the Indian context, scholars like Sisir Kumar Das, Amiya Dev, Chandra Mohan, GN Devy , Sujit Mukherjee and Avadhesh Kumar Singh have tireless promoted 'Comp. Lit' as the only true way of studying Indian literature in a multillingual and multi cultural context such as ours. I believe this is the only way you study ANY literature, not just 'Indian Literature', meaningfully in our country. Even when the Birje-Patils and V.Y. Kantaks of the yore wrote about Shakespeare, they were reading Shakespeare as Indians- they couldn't possible read him as native speakers. Consciously or unconsciously, they were already practicing comparative literature. When we 'teach' Jane Austen to the undergrads, we are actually doing comparative literature. How else can the things 'coming out' or 'curtsy' in Jane Austen make any sense to the Indians? Is not teaching of literature in India, an inherently comparative practice?


This year, when we at the Department of English of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda are introducing comparative literature as a core paper at the post graduate level for the first time, you-know- who will be the instructor. Susan Bassnett says that people start in different people but soon find themselves moving towards 'comp.lit' . Though my  journey towards 'comp. lit' as a discipline officially began with my doctoral research in translation studies at the beginning of the new millennium, I was already 'doing it' when I was translating excerpts from Macbeth and Savitri during my undergrad years. I was already 'doing it' when I was reading Alfred Hitchcock and the Three Investigators, Sherlock Holmes and Adventures of Tintin as an Indian teenager, from a specific cultural, historical and social location. Though it was unconscious, the location had distinctly shaped my perception and reception of these texts.  It was during my doctoral research into translation, where I translated poetry of a great Gujarati poet of the fifteenth century- Narsinh Mehta into English for my thesis-by-translation that I was 'self-consciously' a comparatistic. I remember Prof. Kimbahune who recommended Dionyz Durisin, a major Slovak comparitist and gifted me a photocopy of Durisin's important book Theory of Literary Comparatistics (1984). Prof Kimbahune believed, and quite rightly so, that the theories of the East European scholars like Durisin are more relevant to the Indian context. Durisin's notions of 'interliterariness' and interliterary processes provide a critical and more useful alternative to the influential positivist French School framework of ' influence studies' based on the 'binary' system.


Bassnett believed that translation studies would eclipse comparative literature. I, however, believe that translation studies should eclipse all literary studies in India . After all, I think, we as Indians are essentially translated people,living in a translated culture, eating translated food, wearing translated clothes, watching translated movies, studying translated texts and using translated ideas. Translation studies as a inter-discipline investigating the complex phenomenon and the processes  of intercultural transfer and transformation would be one of the most important disciplines in the age of globalization where the global and the local are continuously translating each other at a rapid speed. This rapid and mutual transformation would be resulting in a 'world culture' probably which would neither be fully global nor local  and connected by information technology networks and satellite media. Translation studies will be able to tell us how this world culture is shaping up and why.

Consider the case for the word 'complayt' in colloquial Gujarati. It is an example of what JC Catford in his famous A Linguistic Theory of Translation (1965) calls ' transference' , and a form  lexical borrowing which though is used in more or less same semantic field but in an entirely different register and context. These are the processes which make our languages. Languages, after all, are our cultures and are who we are. And then they are also who we can be.

In an era where the mourning for 'death of Indian languages' is quite intense, translation studies will demonstrate how new languages are being born everywhere. These new languages will be our languages of the future. As academicians mourn the death of Marathi or Gujarati or Bengali, newer and newer Marathis and Gujaratis and Bengalis are being born  outside the academia. What is translation, after all, but creation of a new language, a language which is neither the 'source/original' nor is it 'target'. As newer and newer languages are born ' between' languages- translation studies will provide us with tools to study contemporary cultures. I don't think the cultural studies will swallow translation studies, I am afraid, it will be the other way round. Translation studies will have to 'complayt' the work started by cultural studies,literary studies and comparative literature.........


Watch my video on comparative literature as research method


Thursday, April 21, 2011

समकालीन मराठी समीक्षा: काही प्रश्न सचिन केतकर

re
तुमच्या मते 


१) समीक्षा म्हणजे काय? समीक्षेच प्रयोजन काय व एकंदरीत साहित्य संसकृतीत समीक्षेचे कार्य काय?


२) स्वातंत्रोतर काळातली महत्वाची मराठी समीक्षा /समीक्षक/ ग्रंथ/लेख कोणते? व का?


३) इतर भारतीय भाषेत महत्वाची समीक्षा /समीक्षक/ ग्रंथ/लेख कोणते? का?


४) इंग्रजी सहित जगातल्या इतर भाषेत महत्वाची समीक्षा /समीक्षक/ ग्रंथ/लेख कोणते? का?


५) राजकिय भूमिकेतून लिहीलेली समीक्षा महत्वाची वाटते का?


६) ‘चळवळी’ आणि ‘समीक्षा’ मधल्या नात्या विषयी काय म्हणने आहे?


७) अनियतकालिक चळवळीतून समोर आलेल्या समीक्षेचे काय महत्व?


८) विसाव्या शतकाच्या उत्तरार्धात पुढे आलेल्या पाश्चात्य ‘सैद्धान्तिक’ समीक्षेचे (Theory) 
   आजच्या मराठी समीक्षेत स्थान काय?


९) जागतिकीकरणाचा आणि समीक्षेचा काय संबंध आहे?


१०) स्वातंत्रोतर मराठी साहित्याच्या (१९४७-२०११) ईतिहासलेखना विषयी काय वाटतं?


११) तुम्हाला समकालीन मराठी कवितेच्या बाबतीत कोणता सैद्धान्तिक अभिगम/ दॄष्टीकोन योग्य वाटतो?


१२) तुमच्या लेखनावर समीक्षेचा/समीक्षकांचा प्रभाव आहे का? कोणत्या?


१३) मराठीत आजच्या पिढीच्या समीक्षेबद्दल काय वाटते? 


१४) एकंदरीत मराठी समीक्षेची बलस्थाने व उणीवा कोणत्या वाटतात?


१५)  साहित्याच्या भवितव्याचा आणि समीक्षेच्या दर्ज्याचा संबंध आहे काय? आहे तर कोणता/कसा?




ह्या प्रश्नांच्या निवडक उत्तरांना बडोद्याहून लवकरच प्रकाशित होणार्या ’उंट’ ह्या अनियतकालिकात स्थान देण्यात येईल.


उत्तर sachinketkar@gmail.com हया पत्यावर किंवा
डॊ. सचिन केतकर, असोसीयट प्रोफ़ेसर इन ईंगलीश, फ़ेकलटी ओफ़ आर्ट्स, द महाराजा सयाजीराव युनिव्हर्सिटी, बदोदे, गुजरात,
३९०००२ ह्या पत्त्यावर पाठवावे.

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Inventing the Third Nation: A Brief History of Marathi Poetry of Past Hundred Years

Yesterday, I read my paper titled' Re-imagining the Nation in the Post Global Period:The Case of Post-Nineties Marathi Poetry' at the National Workshop on Literary Historiography organized by the UGC-DRS-I SAP Program and the Department of English, Faculty of Arts, The MS University of Baroda. 

I began my talk by commenting on how academia and intellectuals of this country are obsessed with the desire for mourning for 'dying languages' and cultures and are blind to new languages and cultures being BORN everywhere around them. My talk was about these 'birth' of new languages and cultures. The English which I was using in the seminar hall, I said, was a newly born language and not the older one by the same name which was born on the British isles one thousand years ago. The birth of new languages, like the language of Manya Joshi or Sanjeev Khandekar, is the focus of my talk, I said.

Using Benedict Anderson's theorization of nation as an imagined political community, I looked at how the nationhood was constructed in the Marathi poetry of the twentieth and the twenty first century.

I talked about how the invention of modern nation was possible in India in the nineteenth century due to colonial modernity , especially the rise of print-capitalism and colonial education system. This nation, as we know, was an orientalist construct which was elitist, upper caste,Brahminical, and masculine. It was based on the view of culture which was High Textual. This paradigm was radically questioned from within by Jyotiba Phule (1827-1890) and Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) in their distinctive ways. The impact of the print capitalism and the western education on Marathi language gave birth to new kind of Marathi which did not exist earlier. The birth of a new nation was actually a birth of a new language.

Marathi poetry of this period, as characterized by the poetry of Keshavsuta (1866-1905)and Balakavi (1890-1918)is reformist, idealist, and influenced by the Anglo American romanticism. The exception to this paradigm was the poetry of Bahinabai Chaoudhary (1807-1882), an illiterate genius whose brilliant works were unavailable to the 'community' as they were orally composed, and hence outside of the print-capitalism of literary culture of the time. 

The second discontinuity in imagining nation was after independence. This 'post-colonial nation' was a critique of the colonial nation. The attempts were made to democratize and open up the colonial nation. This was a 'demotic' re-imagining of the colonial nation which attempted to democratize both modernity and literary culture. The efforts to democratize modernity and literary culture resulted in the rise of 'little magazine movements'. These vision of culture and modernity which these magazines embodied was democratic, pluralist and anti-establishment. 

The avant-garde poetry of B.S. Mardhekar (1909-1956)is situated at the cusp of these two imaginings of nations and heralds a paradigm shift in Marathi poetry. His poems express despair resulting from World War II, growing industrialization, urbanization and erosion of traditional values. They mark a departure from the earlier practice of poetry and opens up possibilities for expression which did not exist earlier. Mardhekar’s attempt to integrate the non-conformist aspects of Bhakti poetics and native traditions with international modernist aesthetics is a significant characteristic of the post-colonial cultural tendencies. From 1955 to 1975, poetry which expressed this dissenting vision of life, culture and nationhood pervaded the little magazines. (Right: Pic of Maradhekar)


The ‘little magazines’ like ‘Shabda’, ‘Vacha’, and ‘Asmitadarsha’ had a distinct anti-Establishment outlook. Complex, experimental and challenging poetry of Arun Kolatkar (1932-2004), Dilip Chitre (1938-2009), Vasant Dahake (1942- ) and Namdeo Dhasal (1949- ) emerged from the movement. Their works bear a distinct influence of the international modernist and postmodernist poetry. The Dalit poetry or ‘the poetry of the oppressed’, influenced by the radically reformist philosophy of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar (1891-1956) and Jyotiba Phule (1827-1890), exploded on the scene in the same period. The poets like Dhasal straddled both avant-garde and the Dalit poetics. Feminism also started making its presence felt in this period. Malika Amar Sheikh (1957- ) writes vigorous poetry which combines feminism with other dissenting political ideologies. In the eighties, the tribal poets like Bhujang Meshram (1958-2007) started writing poetry which combined their quest for tribal identity with protest against the exploitative social system and the poets like Arun Kale (1952-2008) continued the tradition of Dalit poetry.

This alternative way of imagining a nation was also an alternative way of using language and so the language of post-colonial Marathi poetry was more inclusive, demotic and radical. This birth of new languages and new languages of literature is correlated to the birth of the new idea of nation.

The third shift in the way we imagine ourselves, I argued, takes place in the nineties, largely due to economic reforms, globalization and revolution in media. While the colonial nation was constructed by introduction of print-capitalism, national imagination today is shaped by satellite television ( news, soaps and reality shows), the Internet, cell phone revolution and the overwhelming power of market. The context of post-cold war geopolitics is a significant context to this construction of nation.

This new construction of nation can be theoretically analyzed in multiple ways. For instance, one can fruitfully combine Anderson’s theorization of nation as an imagined community with Howard Rheingold’s theorization of ‘virtual communities’ ( 1991/2000).A virtual community is a social network of individuals who interact through specific media, potentially crossing geographical and political boundaries in order to pursue mutual interests or goals. One of the most pervasive types of virtual community includes social networking services, which consist of various online communities. Following Toffler, one can also think of this new imagining of nation as the ‘Third Wave’ nation.

Following Raymond Williams (1977), I think we can in the year 2011 also think of the first construction of the nation as ‘archaic’, the post-colonial nation as ‘residual’ and the third post-nineties ‘nation’ as `emergent’. The critique of this 'global nation' ( an oxymoron)is only possible on globalized platforms. This contradiction- that globalization can be critiqued only on globalized platform-is the crucial aspect of globalization.

Marathi poetry of this period reflects this emergent nation in multiple ways. Poetic idiom was transformed in the nineties due to the social and cultural crises caused by these processes of globalization, technological revolution, and economic reforms. New little magazines like ‘Shabadvedh’ (1989-2009), ‘Abhidhanantar’ (1992-2009) played an important role by providing a platform for new voices to emerge.

Saleel Wagh’s satirical poetry mocking at the globalized urban culture and corporate world, Manya Joshi’s effort to convert the chaos of contemporary metropolitan culture into cacophonic music, Hemant Divate’s asphyxiation of living in a sham urban upper middle class, Sanjeev Khandekar’s prosaic caricature of disfigured human self in the world transformed by scientific-technological forces and the forces of global capitalism can be considered as a few representative poets of this period. The Dalit poetry of Arun Kale and Mahendra Bhavre rethink the Dalit politics and poetics in the context of the globalized world. The works of these poets also appear mostly in the new little magazines of this period. 

These poets I argued are inventing the language of Marathi poetry because the new Marathis are being born outside the academic world which is simply engaged in mourning the death of Marathi.

The discussions that followed my presentations were equally interesting. Deeptha asked me if the events like Babri Mosque demolition can be understood within this new idea of nation. I replied that the communalism of the late eighties and the nineties was not the same as the communalism of partition era. Even the  Naxal movement of the nineties and first decade of the twenty first century are not same. The altered context is what I was emphasizing. The altered context, I could not respond due to the lack of time, was the rise of 'new capitalism' of the nineties. There were questions about 'heterogeneous times', about multiple time frames inside globalization. I responded by drawing the attention to Raymond Williams' terms I mentioned in the talk. He talks about how the archaic, the residual and the emergent exist simultaneously in a single moment.

WORKS I CITED IN MY TALK:

Anderson, Benedict R. O'G. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Revised and extended. ed.). London: Verso. pp. 224.

Rheingold, H. (2000). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. London: MIT Press.

Toffler, Alvin. The Third Wave. Bantam Books, 1981

Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977, pp 121-6 


Tuesday, January 4, 2011

TOWARDS MASTERING ENGLISH

For Indians, probably along with sex, money and in-laws, English is associated with the greatest amount of misery and negativity. We envy those who speak English fluently, and we resent them for being snobbish and dominating. We feel neglected and inadequate in the presence of English. We feel ashamed of not knowing it. Often we hate English and blame it for destroying ‘our’ culture and languages. We deplore it for being the language of ex-rulers. We hate ourselves for wanting English and for being enslaved by the speakers of English. Yet the fact remains that along with sex and money, English is what we desire the most. Hence as a teacher of English, I would I would like to briefly share my views on how to master English.  My views are based on Steve Zaffron and Dave Logan’s powerful book Three Laws of Performance (2009).(Read my review of the book by clicking here) The ideas presented here may not be ‘new’, for there are hardly any ‘new’ ideas, but these ideas in my view are the most effective ones. The ideas aim at transforming our relation with English.

Zaffron and Logan argue that our performance is correlated not to how or what something or someone is, but how something, someone or some situation occurs to us and that how something, someone or a situation occurs to us is inside of what conversations we have about it with ourselves or with others. They point out that by altering these conversations about something, someone or a situation, we can alter how it occurs to us and there by alter our performance. Hence in order to alter our performance in English we have to look at how English occurs to us and inside of which conversations does it occurs to us. In short, let us look at what we keep telling ourselves and others about English.

Typically, we say English is not ‘our’ language; it is the language of outsiders. It is not our ‘mother tongue’, it is our ‘auntie tongue’ or it is ‘step-mother’ tongue. We say it is the language of slavery. We say it is the language that is destroying our languages and it contaminates our Glorious Indian Culture. We say it the language of the dominant and elite class, which is consequently ‘less Indian’ than us. We call this class neo-colonizers or colonial collaborators.

We also say it is too difficult and we will never learn it properly. We say English is all about speaking English fluently (look at the thriving ‘spoken English’ cottage industry in India). We say we want to ‘think’ in English. We say that by making mistakes in English would make us ‘look bad’ and that by speaking it fluently we will ‘look good’. We say that by learning grammar properly, we will learn English.

Consider that inside all these conversations, we have already ruled out any possibility of English being ‘our language’ or using it like our mother tongue, because we have already declared it to be ‘other tongue’ and our ‘second language’. When we call it a ‘foreign’ language, we can never make it our own.  Hence the possibility of being as fluent in English as one is in one’s own language is already ruled out, even before we start learning it seriously. Unless we stop telling others and ourselves these things, we can never use English as well as we use ‘our’ non-English languages. Surprisingly we say all these things when our nationalist leaders like Swami Vivekanand, Sri Aurobindo, Dr. Ambedkar, Jawaharlal Nehru and even Mahatma Gandhi who opposed English in theory and who brought out an English newspaper, were highly accomplished in English and even the Constitution of India was drafted in English. Inside of these conversations of blame, we have already distanced ourselves from English and closed our access to the language.

Our complaint that English is the language of the upper class elite or the class of neo-colonizers/ colonial collaborators does not prevent us from desiring the language and from sending our own children to English medium schools. This means that though we resent that class and are envious of it, we want to be part of that class. This means that our complaint is nothing but hypocrisy and this hypocrisy takes on a different shade when the academics who should be teaching English and who themselves belong to this class start saying that the English is the language of upper class elite. These academics imply that they are ashamed of being who they are and hence want to prevent others from having English. This simply means they don’t want to do their jobs, although they don’t mind being paid for it. If we want English and we want to belong to the English speaking elite, it is honest to abandon this hypocrisy and blame games.

Now consider that inside of the conversations like ‘it is too difficult and we won’t be able to speak it properly’, we are again ruling out the possibility of mastering English and using it with proficiency for ourselves. Hence it is extremely important that we accept the responsibility of all these conversations and drop them every time they crop up in our heads or on our tongues because they are blocking all the possibilities of our getting English.

Once we drop all these dialogues which prevent us from acquiring proficiency in English, we should access the language through our listening. There is no other way of acquiring a language. We feel language is all about talking and we feel that the only way to learn speaking English is by speaking. However, listening is the only way we can reach the core of the language. Consider, for instance, among the dumb and deaf people, most of the people classified as 'dumb' actually unable to speak as they are deaf. The chief reason why most of the people remain 'dumb' in English are actually 'deaf' as far as English is concerned.

In my view, instead of having 'spoken English' classes, we should have classes which teaches us how to listen to English. If we pay close attention to how we listen, we realize that we hardly listen or listen only  through our thoughts continuously going on in our minds. We hardly remain present to someone or something as our mind wanders all over the place: through our opinions, day dreams, memories and various kinds of distractions inside our heads. We should develop awareness about these distractions and pay attention to what is being spoken, why it is being spoken, how  it is spoken and what all is going on behind what is being spoken. Paying this kind of attention dramatically improves not just our spoken English but also our relationship with people. Regularly listening attentively to just how English words are pronounced, enhances quality of our spoken English.

One can see that a lot depends on the attitude and mindset regarding English. What we need is the right spirit and the right spirit is all about treating it as a game.  We begin the game by declaring openly that you will master the language and  as Zaffron and Logan put it ‘play as if our life depended on it’. Declaration is significant, because when you openly declare your intention, people hold you accountable for it and which makes you work without giving up. The authors suggest ‘Play the game passionately, intensely, and fearlessly. But don’t make it significant. It’s just a game’. (2004)

We may have hundred reasons for not using English, we don’t have people who can speak it with us, we don’t have enough vocabulary, and our grammar is poor and so on. But the point is to play it anyway. Zaffron and Logan suggest, ‘if something occurs to you as an obstacle, you will push back by playing on the obstacle’s terms. Instead, make the obstacles, conditions of the game.’ (201). We have to remember that the distance between two set of stumps on the cricket pitch is twenty two yards is not an obstacle, but the condition of the game itself.

The most important thing is being in action with English. Though there is great desire for English, there is an inbuilt reluctance in using English. It is usually reluctance to take risk in using English. It is about fear of failure and one is reminded of an old joke where a person declares, ‘I won’t step into water, till I learn how to swim properly’. Unless you jump into the language and take risk of ‘looking bad’, you wont be able to use English at all.

Zaffron and Logan make a profound distinction between ‘taking about the game, from the stands’ and ‘playing the game on the court’. They give example of a football game where the conversations of people who stand in the stands is all about ‘judging, evaluating, assessing, making excuses about their teams, or saying what their teams did right, or rationalizing’ (199). The authors’ note that from the stands there is little at stake and the conversation has no impact on the action of the game. They suggest, ‘You leave the stands when you stop assessing and judging and instead put something at risk.’ No action, no result, no mastery.

Hence to attain mastery over English, it is essential to drop the conversation which actually block our access to the language and inside of which there are no possibilities of mastering it. It is essential to declare your intention of mastering it so that people around you, hold you accountable for your performance. Without this accountability, we won’t work to enhance our performance. Finally, leaving the stands and being in action on the court with English, taking risks and making all the obstacles, conditions of the game will lead to mastery over English. Obviously, performance cannot be a one time affair.  Playing this game of mastering English is a life long process, where we keep climbing ‘Mt. Neverest’, jumping from one peak of excellence, to another – till we are burned, buried or fed to birds……

Reference:

Steve Zaffron and Dave Logan. Three Laws of Performance: Rewriting the Future of your Organization and your Life, San Francisco: Josey-Bass, 2009. Distributed in India by the Times Books, Rs. 395

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Texture of Forgetfulness: A New Poem by Me

Texture of forgetfulness
Slips away from my fingers

I don’t even remember how it felt

Probably it was like sand or silk
Or like a young woman’s curves
Or like nothingness
Or like feathers of a dead sparrow

Texture of forgetfulness is like daylight
Inside which we can see everything clearly

For instance when I am on my bike
I don’t see the vacant spaces between vehicles
The spaces which would be vacant
And those which are already vacant

Texture of forgetfulness
Is like the eyes
Limpid and sharp
In their absence
I don’t even see
What I am not seeing
Even the invisibility
Is invisible to me

Texture of forgetfulness is like a poem
We have forgotten to write
We don’t even remember what it was
And how it went
Or where it went

I dream of touching forgetfulness
Which is full like a cup of tea
Or empty like the forgotten sea

I smell the texture of forgetfulness

It smells the touch of mother’s saris
Before she went away to sleep
Or dad’s trousers
When he used to take me out for Bruce Lee movies

I listen to the texture of forgetfulness
It sounds like the music of the forgotten son
Which you can’t even replay in your heads

Texture of forgetfulness grows like a cobweb
On a winter afternoon

I feel like a lazy spider
Spinning the web of my forgetfulness
Trying to trap some unknown buzzing words
Which I don’t even know
They exist.

19 December 2010
2.55 pm

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Sinbad’s Afterlife Blues: A Poem by Sachin Ketkar

Sinbad’s Afterlife Blues
Sachin Ketkar

Ocean is an old discarded myth.

I hear the leisurely blue songs
Of the whale swimming
Serenely
At the back of my mind
I view her sprout jets of love
As she dives and crashes
I thought she was an island
On which I could live
But she fled.

I have gone down under the waves of sleep
Waters as voluptuous as death
Have engulfed me

When I open my eyes
The world turns its back upon me

They say
She is just a blue apparition
On an inky night

Her songs are the merely moving ridges
Tumbling over one another

Plug your ears they say

Now that I am just a pallid corpse
Floating like a weed under the sea
I will reach out to her

And let her secret songs
Run like silk through my veins

12 August 2010                     12 pm

Friday, July 9, 2010

The Book in the Age of Facebook:The Game of Reading in Twenty-first Century

( A talk given at senior school students of  Nalanda International School, Vadodara on 9 July 2010)

Let’s start inauspiciously by giving a thought to some common ominous rumours regarding the future of the book and art of reading.We have been told that the art of reading and the book are either on their way out or they are dead already. People don’t read books these days. They watch the TV and surf the Net. For a change they go to watch movies. Books don’t figure much in their lives. Whatever they read is because they are compelled to read by the schools and colleges. They read nothing on their own.



Nothing can be far from truth.

In fact people buy more books than before and book publication and sales is a significant commercial activity. Apart from the fact that academic books are a big industry today, popular writers like JK Rowling, Stephanie Myer or Sidney Sheldon are millionaires and celebrities. Self-help books like the Chicken Soup series, or by Shiva Khera or Stephen Covey are extremely popular. Cook books, books on health and well-being, books on New Age spirituality are extremely popular. Books related to computers, management and finance are greatly in demand.

Just look at the underbelly or the underworld of publishing industry: piracy. In every metropolis in India today, we find street hawkers who sell pirated books. The books mentioned above, the bestsellers are out there on the footpath and youngsters buy and probably even read these books.

I remember when I was pursing my post-graduate studies in Baroda in the mid nineties, when you guys had just come into this world, I ran into the pirated books on such footpaths. Some of the popular books in those times were the book’s like Will Durant’s The Story of Philosophy (1926), Eric Berne’s Games People Play (1964), Alvin Toffler’s Third Wave (1980) and Future Shock(1970), and David Reuben’s Everything You Wanted to Know About Sex, But were Afraid to Ask (1969). The books, I must confess, have left a deep imprint on my thinking. The fascination for Toffler and Transactional Analysis has not yet died down, even after fifteen years. When I find these are the books on the streets in pirated version today, I reassure myself that I haven’t grown very old yet.

The thing is, we read for various purposes. We usually read to obtain information and knowledge, and we read to satisfy our fantasizes and escape boredom. We read for entertainment. We also read out of curiosity. 

The real problem with people who complain that youngsters don’t read is that youngsters don’t read what they want them to read. Youngsters don’t read Jane Austen or Shakespeare or Keats. They don’t read the classics. They read pulp and popular. They read Harry Potter, graphic novels and Twilight Saga. They fantasize about invisibility cloaks and dating a vampire. They read about secret identities and alter egos of the superheroes. School youngsters cannot identify with the world in the books they are taught in their usual literature courses.

One should realize that elders complaining about youth are merely engaging in an age old pastime, a game rather, in Eric Berne’s sense in his book Games People Play. To be more specific, it’s the game called ` Aint it Awful’. I refuse to participate in this grown up’s game of complaining. I will point out that the respected elders and teachers too have had their share of pulp and popular. Remember, Mills and Boons? Nancy Drew? Hardy Boys? Famous Five? Three Investigators? Comics? The popular stuff that we lapped up? I wonder if kids read it these days too.

Reading, unlike, television or films, involves a great amount of active imagination and participation.  This is where its strength lies. We are no longer spectators; we become players in the game of reading. Unlike field sports or computer games, the game of reading takes place in solitude and within us. Reading is the adventure sport that is played inside our minds. For people who love to read are often people who like solitude.

Unlike TV or films or computer games, when a character or situation is described in the book, we create it in our minds and we do it in our own way. When we do it our way, who we are plays a great role in it. The heroes and villains become our heroes and villains, the heroes and villains within us, which are part of us. Reading brings out the hidden parts of our personality into play. We are implicated in the game and it is us who are at stake. We discover our own thoughts, ideas and imagination, we invent our own thoughts and imagination- we discover and invent ourselves.

Hence, the game of reading will never disappear.

As we grow up, the intention behind reading changes. We want something more than entertainment or information or satisfaction of fantasies. We are dealing with issues which cannot be solved by imagining invisibility cloaks and clandestine affairs with vampires.  We read to search for the meaning of our life. We look for the books which help us understand our relationships with others and ourselves. We read to find out why people are the way they are and why we are the way we are.

As we grow up playing the same game, we tend to increase the difficulty level of that game.

Some of us learn to participate in more risky games of reading. Some of us, not all, graduate to `difficult’ books, the ones dealing with very abstract and complex ideas.  the  novels which are very experimental as they avoid the popular ways of story telling, poetry which makes no `sense’ at all because poetry does not make ` sense’ the way newspaper article makes sense or a text book makes sense. The difficult books are difficult because they demand more involvement, imagination, intelligence and concentration than Harry Potter or Twilight. They also challenge who we are. In this challenge, in this solitude, the books reveal who we are to ourselves. This is probably one of the biggest rewards of reading.

The reason why not many people read such books is because not many people care about such things or want to take up challenges and risks of confronting themselves .Such books can cause discomfort and make you feel sad. Not many people raise the difficulty level of the game they have been playing. They either give up the game or continue playing it at entry level.

I am here to coax you to raise the difficulty level of your reading because, as you know, more difficult a game is more fun it becomes. You don’t want to play today the same games you played in your kindergarten. The fun that you get out of a game is directly proportional to the challenge it poses. Same applies to the adventure sports of ideas and imagination, which the books are. All new games may be boring in the beginning but as you learn them, they turn out to be addictive.

I will end my talk with a short list of suggested reading. They are simply my personal favorites.You might have heard of them. Thankfully, you won’t be examined on these books, so that you can play around with them and even forget about them.  I will mention their difficulty level too. Feel free to choose!

I) Difficulty level: Easy to Difficult
            Short Stories of RK Narayan
Short Stories of Anton Chekhov
            Short stories of O Henry  
           
II) Difficulty Level: Difficult to Very Difficult
           
Short Stories of Gabriel Garcia Marquez
Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Love in the Time of Cholera
            JD Salinger: The Catcher in the Rye
            Short Stories of JD Salinger
            Short Stories of Franz Kafka
            Kiran Nagarkar, Ravan and Eddie
            Kiran Nagarkar, Cuckold
            Poems of WH Auden and WB Yeats
            Milan Kundera, Laughable Loves
            Italo Calvino, If On a Winter's Night A Traveller

III)  Very Difficult -But who is scared?

            Short Stories of Jorge Luis Borges
            Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities
            Julio Cortazar, Hopscotch
            James Joyce: Ulysses
            James Joyce: Dubliners
            Poems of TS Eliot, Ted Hughes, Wallace Stevens, Arun Kolatkar

 IV) For the Bravest of the Brave

            James Joyce: Finnegans Wake

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Releasing the Erratically Lazy Jarasandha

He is out and is at large. He shouldn't be.He should be long dead, and far off in the world of myths. He belongs to pre-capitalist, even pre feudal hoary antiquity. But then now he is in our midst. He is all over the place. Divided and unredeemable, but alive,contrary to what the Mahabharata says. He is evil. He is a serial killer who aught to be imprisoned. Who released him? Well, Devy released him on 6 th May in the VY Kantak Seminar Room of the Dept.of English, Faculty of Arts, MS University of Baroda. But actually he had released him almost seventeen years ago. In the years 1993-95, to be more precise. I was  writing  in English and even in Hindi. It was mostly juvenellia but it had started becoming more and more modernist. I learned of Devy's Aurobindo scholarship and showed him my Hindi renderings of Savitri and he was impressed ( I guess). I showed him my English poems and he suggested I should try my hand at writing in Marathi and the guy did not know what he was doing. Its like the jailer who finds the face of a serial killer rather innocent,takes pity on him and releases him out of compassion. The killer goes out and the first thing he does is slits throats of five people in the city.  I started writing poetry and entered bad books of almost any senior critics and poets in Maharashtra. People were simply irked and annoyed with me. Who the hell is this guy ?What the hell is he talking about? Where the hell has he come from?and more  importantly why the hell is he here?

I am an upstart writer in Maharashtra. A bug, actually. I cant possibly do much harm to the Establishment ( which is ruined and in shambles due to other reasons) but I can be a bloody pain in neck : consider my vicious and sharp articles in the globalization wars in contemporary Marathi poetry or my tampering with political set up of Marathi poetry by bringing out something like Live Update. Or consider my critical takes on the pet Ideology of the Establishment : Nativism+ Socialism+Realism. The ideology of Devy which is fashionable in English studies is the ideology of Establishment in Marathi: the Sarkari View of Literature which I have attacked in no uncertain terms in my writings.

It is not surprising that the speakers on the occasion: Dr Devy, Prof Kannal or Dr Karogal hardly discussed the book. They were either talking to Sachin Ketkar the critic or like Dr Devy trying to contextualize him.

Prof Kannal talked about the insistence on contemporaneity or the towards the present moment that I have in my critical writing and tried to point out how some  of my poems were not at all contemporary - he did not talk about those which were, obviously, unsurprisingly. I responded by talking about Borges' Pierre Menard who tried to rewrite Don Quixote exactly as Cervantes wrote it two  hundred years ago. He ends up copying passages from Quixote word to word in the same language, but the narrator in Borges says that in spite of perfect copying the texts were different. Contemporariness is not an option, it is only when you are not fully aware of the present that you feel there is something like timelessness. The intimations of eternity are temporary. What I should have emphasized, and this I realized later, was the fact that we treat literature as if it does not have any temporal dimension and a historical context. This is the approach so deeply embedded  in our thinking about literature that we treat Tukaram or Shakespeare as if they our contemporaries. This treatment actually does not do justice to the texts we read. Tukaram's obsession with Vitthal has to be contextualized to be understood. It is this ahistorical way of reading that creates the illusion of the eternal in literature.

Devy,on the other hand,put me in two traditions, when I thought I had none. He said that the Dept of English in the MS University had two major Indian writers in English as faculties who were also bilinguals and translators: Sri Aurobindo  and AK Ramanujan. He also placed me in the long line of Marathi bilingual writers like Arun Kolatkar,Dilip Chitre, Vilas Sarang and Kiran Nagarkar. Devy said this probably with tongue firmly in his cheek.

However,the best thing he said about me was that when I was his student, he suspected me of turning out to be a poet looking at my `erratic laziness''. But he felt looking the girls chasing me ( what girls, which girls,where girls) I might turn out to be a romantic poet who might churn out mushy sugary stuff.

Prof Salat had interesting things to say about my poems. He commented on the all sorts of ordinary and extraordinary `objects' found all over and around my poetry,and how I make a poetic use of them.

 Mangesh spoke with reference to Prof Kannal's views and pointed out that a bunch of my poems in the earlier part of my collection are unprecedented in style, theme and treatment in Marathi and are unique while some of my poems can be considered as extensions of my earlier phase. He read out my Dildopnishad and others to make his point. The programme was fun anyway and had a great time with friends. Ashwini was the master of ceremonies.

The best response came from Amogh. He simply fell asleep in his chair with head on the desk!

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Masculinity, Modernity and Other Miseries: Kiran Nagarkar's Cuckold

I have only one word to describe it.Stunning. I havent read anything like this before. I don't know why I did not read it sooner.Superbly dramatic in treatment, full of wicked twists and turns in its plotting, amazingly passionate, imaginative and heartbreaking, it is one of the best novels written by an Indian novelist. Nagarkar has put in an impressive amount of research into this novel. It is way better than the `NRI  and imported' navel-gazing 'diaspora exile' horseshit fiction euphemistically named as the post-colonial Indian novel. It is far better than pseudo-intellectual  wordplay and phoney `India' of Rushdie and company, which keeps po-co theory happy academicians contented. It bears no signs of what Meenakshi Mukherjee terms as "anxiety of Indianness", or colonial hang up of any sort. It does not deliver what the western readers want: a consumer friendly India which reinforces the existing stereotype image of India.


The story is about a hopeless love triangle, ` the stuff for a bad nautanki'. One angle of the triangle, the woman named Little Saint or Greeneyes ( more widely known as Meerabai)  is of one of the greatest poets on the sub-continent , the third angle of the triangle is none other than the Bhai of the Whole Universe Himself a.k.a Jagadish a.k.a the God with thousand names, and the angle from which the story is told is of an unknown figure in Indian history, the Cuckold, the Prince of Mewar, Maharaj Kumar, the narrator.

Maharaj Kumar is essentially an anachronism: a modern man trapped into a feudal society of 16th or 17th century Rajasthan. The narrator achieves immediacy by his predicament and by his colloquial, and ironic wit. He is living in a society which glorifies manhood, death in battlefield, bravery and machismo to no end. Maharaj Kumar appreciates none of these values. His role model, ironically, is the Bhai who he feels is having a steamy affair with his wife. The Bhai, also known as Ranchod,  we all know did not mind turning his back to  his enemy and running away from the battlefield for strategic advantage. Maharaj Kumar doesnt mind using some of the Bhai's strategies in politics and battlefield. Maharaj Kumar defies all conventions in personal and public life. He is interested in sewage systems of his town and acquiring newer technology in the battlefields, instead of living on jingoism of Rajput bravery. His military strategies are absolutely non-Rajput and ahead of times. Maharaj Kumar's stratagems seem to belong more to Kiran Nagarkar's ancestor - Shivaji- rather than the Rajputs who preferred to take huge armies head on  rather than retorting to guerrilla surprise attack-and escape tactics. Thus he invites sneer, contempt and charges of not being manly enough from his contemporaries.He is stigmatized as a cuckold, a `ball less man' in his personal as well as political life.
He is not a `good' man. He beats Greeneyes, he tries to rape his wife on the very first night and consequently injures his member. Virgins terrify him. He fails to `rise to the occasion' on the first night of his second marriage to another woman, who goes into the arms of his more `manly' brother Vikramaditya, thus getting cuckolded twice. The Prince goes on to dress as Krishna at night to win over Greeneyes, who one day dresses him in woman's clothes and she becomes Krishna herself as part of Bhakti frenzy!  This Maharaj Kumar is a victim of the patriarchal society as he fails to conform to the established norms of masculinity. He is humiliated on all fronts. Interestingly, Maharaj Kumar takes it with calm stoic irony, without self pity or melodrama. Kiran Nagarkar, a film actor himself, manages to enter the role of Maharaj Kumar and speak to us with great intimacy and humour. His story is an heart breaking story of a brilliant man caught in an old world which is to go away and the new world which is yet to be born.

The epic sweep of the novel reveals very vividly delineated cast of unforgettable characters, apart from Maharaj Kumar. His dad Rana Sanga, Kumar's scheming step mother Karmavati, Kumar's two wives, his mistresses,his friend Mangal and the nemesis, Badshah Babur, for whom Kumar feels affinity and who is about to change the history of the subcontinent forever. The plot is full of sinister intrigues, suspense, and very wicked and unexpected turns which keep you glued to the book. The end, of course, is as unexpected as it goes. Nowhere does one get bored by sheer number of pages.

The research is extremely meticulous and thorough. The battle strategies, court intrigues,games, religious and social customs, mores , research into town planning, espionage, cultural mores  are described with all vividness and freshness. It is a model for those who want to write historical fiction. It succeeds as fiction, first and foremost, and the historical research in no place jars or bores the reader. A must read for the readers who don't get carried away marketing hypes or are bored by Booker hyped `canned India' type novels and for those who feel that the great Indian novel in English has not yet arrived.

Ravan & EddieThe novel can be contrasted with Nagarkar's Ravan and Eddie which is bawdy and hilarious celebration of the power of Mumbai over the lives of people.

The novelist who showed great promise as the writer of Saat Sakam Trechalis in Marathi with his intensity, craftsmanship and dramatic story telling skills ,has delivered his very best in English. The novel also is reminiscent of Nagarkar's colleague and friend Arun Kolatkar's treatment of history, myth and legend in his poetry.

Read more reviews of Cuckold by clicking the links below:
i) At Amazon
ii) At Goodreads

Monday, April 12, 2010

WHO IS TRAPPED IN THE UGC NET?

The University Grants Commission, a statutory body of the Indian Government formed through an Act of Parliament in 1956 for “the coordination, determination and maintenance of standards of university education in India”, conducts the National Eligibility Test since 1989 “to determine eligibility for lectureship and for award of Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) for Indian nationals in order to ensure minimum standards for the entrants in the teaching profession and research.” The test remains mandatory for candidates dreaming of becoming permanent lecturers. The intentions behind holding such a test, like most of the bureaucratic intentions, were indeed noble. However, when it came to implementation, the NET test can be a nightmare for the aspirants.


The major problems of this test are regarding the quality, vagueness and even irrelevance of many questions that are asked.  For instance, one has only to consider some of the questions asked in the December 2008 test for the paper one, which is “General Paper on Teaching and Research Aptitude”.

Here is the very first question of the paper:

1) According to Swami Vivekananda, teacher’s success depends on:
            i)   His renunciation of personal gain and service to others
            ii)  His professional training and creativity
            iii) His concentration on his work and duties with a spirit of obedience to God
            iv) His mastery on the subject and capacity in controlling the students

An objective type question, by definition, is the question which can have ONE AND ONLY ONE correct answer. As most of the new candidates and the old university teachers would not locate the exact source from which this question is taken, it can be readily be seen that there are more than one correct answer to this question. A person like me would not mind selecting all of the above option MINUS the phrases like “a spirit of obedience to God” and “capacity in controlling the students.’ Such an option is not given. One may wonder how two phrases like “His (sic) mastery (?) on the subject” and “capacity in controlling the students” are connected. The questions like this would leave even the Swamiji perplexed regarding his own views on the subject.

Now consider the second and grammatically incorrect question in the paper:

2) Which of the following teacher, will be liked most:
            i)   A teacher of high idealistic attitude
            ii)  A loving teacher
            iii) A teacher who is disciplined
            iv) A teacher who often amuses his students

The correct option would be the teacher who resembles or does not resemble the candidate’s daddy. The option, however, is not available.  Whether a particular student likes the stand-up comedian in front or the person which “high idealistic attitude’ is purely a subjective issue. If the quality of questions meant for the future teachers in universities is this ridiculous, I am amazed how people manage to clear this test at all.

The vagueness, irrelevance and language abuse (Down with the language of colonizers!!!)  is reflected in the syllabus of the paper one too. The syllabus says, “The test is aimed at assessing the teaching and general/research aptitudes as well as their awareness. They are expected to possess and exhibit cognitive abilities.” Awareness of what? If they don’t possess and exhibit cognitive abilities, will they be considered alive? General –slash- research aptitudes? What’s that?

There is a section in the paper on Information and Communication Technology. The question in the December 2008 paper from this section was as follows:

36) The accounting software ‘Tally’ was developed by:
a) HCL  b) TCS  c) Infosys d) Wipro

Now is the candidate who is appearing for lecturership in History or even worse, in English, will have any idea about the right answer? How many senior university teachers in the Humanities or Medicine or Arab Culture and Islamic Studies know the answer to this question? 

Such kind of questions reveal the ignorance of fact that the people who take this test come from wide variety of disciplines and backgrounds and they hardly require the kind of knowledge that’s being tested in the paper. In short, the examiners and paper setters have absolutely no idea who they are testing and what they want to test.

Besides, what the test tests is, most of the time, alas, memory. If this is what is expected from the future teachers at university levels, I wonder what ‘minimum standards’ will the UGC NET ensure.

The test is compulsory also for the candidates who have done actual research at M.Phil and doctoral level. UGC, it implies, does not trust the ability of its own teachers who have supervised the research and the students it has registered. This sort of `doubting its own product’ would have an adverse impact on the image of the UGC. I feel that UGC does not realize this.

The effort was made to review this test under Prof Mungekar and it has a questionnaire which is available online. The instruction says that the questionnaire is to be filled up and sent to the authorities within thirty days of the date mentioned on the covering letter. The covering letter, however, is not available online, so the whole question of the date and thirty days is misleading.

The test is tyrannically imposed on the aspirants and it sees to it only the luckier ones manage to clear it and thus defeating the very purpose of such a test. If the test has to achieve its objectives, then, it is high time we RATIONALIZED it. The UGC should appoint the paper setters who not only know the language in which they are setting the papers but also know how to frame questions. The vagueness, linguistic incorrectness and irrelevance of much of the content of the paper results in the test being a sort of gamble as most of the large-scale tests are in our country. This sort of opacity would undoubtedly result in corruption at many levels.  This test becomes a nightmare for most of the aspirants. It leaves many of the temporary university teachers at the mercy of the authorities, most of who would not mind exploiting them. The present form of the test would only end up the intelligent and capable candidates whose `objective type’ memory is not all that good out of the system and thus be detrimental to the system of Higher Education which is already in doldrums, thanks to the negligence of the politicians and decision makers in the country.