[Reader-list] Indo-centrism On Sarai

[gouri]

Dear Swadheen and Madhumita,
I find this debate interesting but if it has less
research jargon, it will be easy to understand
arguments and positions. I didn't understand much of
Madhumta's post.
Regards,
Gouri
--- Madhumita Lahiri <ml49 at duke.edu> wrote:

> Dear Swadhin,
> 
> I am not making a liberal proclamation. Perhaps the
> tone on this listserv
> could be a bit more amicable and less antagonistic;
> it would certainly make
> me more comfortable engaging in it!
> 
> Thank you for answering my question -- as to whether
> starting with a
> linguistic unit of reference ('Bangla') works in
> harmful ways to erase
> important differences (of history, state formations,
> etc) -- and your answer
> seems to be an unambiguous yes (that such a move is
> harmful). Please notice,
> however, when i speak of 'erasing differences' i do
> not assume that to be a
> good thing or a bad thing -- and it does hurt my
> feelings to have liberalism
> and the 'erasure of differences' attributed to me!
> That's not my project, my
> sentiments, or contained in anything I wrote.
> 
> We all choose starting points for our work -- some
> are more productive and
> some are more problematic. The tendency to focus
> always on the state is
> something which i think has its own limitations;
> when i posted to the list
> about Bangla, i was asking, what are the effects of
> taking a linguistic unit
> as a starting point of inquiry, instead of always
> starting with a
> state-based delineation? Which is not (and never --
> hence my thoughts on the
> complexity of South Asian language categories) to
> say that language can be
> separated from geopolitical realities -- but that
> one has to choose
> somewhere to start. Keeping Indocentricism and
> geopolitics in mind, how does
> a cultural project work against them, where does one
> begin?
> 
> The Bangla material has allowed me to think about
> nation-formations (always
> an imaginary identification and conception, as you
> point out) that are not
> exactly coextensive with the state -- both in terms
> of Bengali identity
> within India, which engages with governmentality at
> a non-national level,
> and in terms of any/all cultural imaginings of
> something like a single
> 'Bongodesh' (I realize it looks funny in Roman
> script), which tend to work
> around or beyond nation-state boundaries. My hope is
> not to fall on one side
> or another on the question of WestBengal/Bangladesh
> distinctions, but to
> chew on those differences for what they reveal --
> about cultural
> imaginaries, nations, states, and those of us who
> work on them. As to
> whether such non-partiality is possible, i guess
> i'll find out when i
> finish....
> 
> As for the availability of materials, which is
> always conditioned by
> circumstances well beyond one's control, that is a
> problem i am getting to
> know quite well! Suggestions are always welcome as
> to how to deal with the
> question.
> 
> Yours,
> Madhumita
> 
> On 9/12/07, Swadhin Sen <swadhin_sen at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Madhumita
> >
> >
> >
> > Although your mail addressed both me and Naeem, my
> personal sketchy
> > remarks on your questions are as follows:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > BUT, the question is: To what extent do you feel
> that it is a valid move
> > to (claim to) work in/on/about 'Bangla,' given
> that the project will tilt
> > towards Indian films? Does the claiming of a
> linguistic category end up
> > erasing important geopolitical and historical
> differences -- or does it
> > work usefully against the seemingly pervasive
> insistence on state-based distinctions,
> > which are only 60 years old in our context?
> >
> >  -         I do not endorse the position which
> assumes that 'linguistic
> > categories' could be conceptually separated from
> 'geopolitical and
> > historical' differences. I am skeptical about
> success of your intention to
> > 'work in linguistic unit' (and not primarily
> geopolitical ones). I think the
> > 'linguistic units' are enmeshed into 'geopolitical
> ones'. It does not matter
> > whether our state based distinctions are 60 years
> old or not. Because, even
> > before the partition, there were variations in the
> languages of West and the
> > East (Now Bangladesh). I want to view language as
> a representative system in
> > which question of power and authority are crucial
> for cultural and political
> > transactions and translation. The variations of
> dialects of Bangladesh are
> > stereotyped, homogenized and distorted in
> mainstream films and electronic
> > media of West Bengal. Bhanu Bandopadhaya was
> pioneer in the sarcastic and
> > comical representation of the dialect of East
> Bengal or East Pakisthan or
> > present Bangladesh. The continuation of the same
> practice is common in
> > Taliwood films and Soaps & variety shows in
> E-media of Kolkata.
> >
> > -         The question of whether a linguistic
> category end up erasing…
> > differences' is not very interesting for me.
> Rather I am interested to
> > question the conditions that destroy older
> categories and construct newer
> > ones for legitimizing various ways and means of
> domination and control. Most
> > notably, I think, the parties (or agents) involved
> with these
> > reconfiguration processes are unequal in their
> power to borrow, insert and
> > translate. 'State' (more precisely modern state)
> act as a universal
> > condition in these unequal exchanges where 'we'
> (and you) cannot act as
> > autonomous and sovereign subject (as it is usually
> taken for granted in
> > liberal ideals).
> >
> > -         Now if I take India and Bangladesh (or
> west Bengal and
> > Bangladesh) for example we may find that while we
> the Banglaeshis are
> > optionless consumers of the film and media
> representations from Hindi and
> > Bangla (kolkata version) domain, the people from
> the other part of the
> > boundary are not. The statist conditions
> controlled by various legal and
> > juridical and as well as ideological apparatuses
> do not give us (and you)
> > any other options to choose from. You can't see
> the mainstream films and
> > visual narratives produced in different mediums of
> Bangladesh. Your vision
> > and horizons of arguments, thus, are subjected by
> inequality where we are
> > active only in the selection from those which we
> are permitted to do.
> >
> > -         I contend that your question regarding
> the validity of working
> > on/about Bangla films should be rethought from the
> above problematization.
> >
> > -         The inequality is also applicable within
> a state also. For
> > example, in Bangladesh the ethnic nations (not
> tribes, or ethnic minorities)
> > are subjected to the same statist and
> nationalistic processes of
> > reconfigurations. They are bound to speak Bangla,
> but we are not bound to
> > speak Chakma, Shaotali, Rakhain and many other
> languages.
> >
> > -         From a predominantly liberal terrain, we
> may optimistically
> > believe in and call for the erasure of
> differences. But the complexly
> > articulated state (and multicorporate) apparatus
> (from education sector to
> 
=== message truncated ===



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more!
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658