[Reader-list] Indo-centrism On Sarai
Swadhin Sen
swadhin_sen at yahoo.com
Fri Sep 14 00:40:59 IST 2007
Dear Madhumita
First I would like to apologize if I have been less amicable. That was not deliberate; The points I would like to raise on the basis of your post
is as follows:
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.
-
I never said that ‘a linguistic unit of reference works
in harmful ways to erase important differences’. Therefore, there was/is no ‘an
unambiguous yes’. Rather ambiguity is essential and central to some of the core
arguments. My point was simply to hint at the complexities in answering any
question regarding language, representation and differences. The notion of
state came as an example of one of the most powerful conditions of our
existence. I was also against any homogenized notion of ‘Bangla’ (as language,
as culture or as identity). I think that the dominating discourses in West Bengal,
India takes an
essentialized and homogenized narrative of ‘Bangla’. More importantly, language
and culture are conceptualized in these narratives in ways as if they are
exchangeable.
-
I am really sorry to offend you by attributing
liberalism. And I am also very happy to know that you have been offended.
Because, it has made your political position overt to me.
-
Most importantly, my point was not on ‘erasing
differences’. Rather, it was on the ways and means of creating and erasing
differences and on the inequality of power in construction and/or destruction
of the differences (be it statist, national or linguistic). For example, India
and Bangladesh
will never be (and never was) in equal position to act as agents in linguistic
or any other forms of exchange and translation. As consumers of Hindi movies,
detergents, fairness creams with mediation of Shahrukh Khan, Rozgere Ginni or
Barisaler Bar, Kolkatar kane on Bangla TV channels of Kolkata and even, Desh or
other periodicals, ‘we’ have been
subject of various norms and processes which have constructed some new
differences in place of the older ones while retaining and reproducing many.
-
I would like to emphasize on the inequality in languages
and states, and also the problematics of the liberal ideals of ‘freedom of
speech’, ‘free thinking’ and self constituted autonomous self which the
globalized capital and US-Eng. (and India indeed in relation to us) Imperialism
renders less and less feasible.
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?
- I think I have been a little bit
misunderstood in this regard. I do not take ‘state’ as a a priory condition. I wanted to point at the genealogy of the
formation of modern state and the other categories implicated on it as one of
the most crucial and foundational aspect to be elaborated upon for any project
(on language) in India and Bangladesh. Yes, linguistic unit could be an
affective frame of reference to begin with. However, given the pastiches of
theoretical discourses and considering the politics of academy and disciplines
in the west for a non-westerners, I always remain very critical about my
theoretical and political frameworks. I appreciate your endeveurs with such a
project.
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....
- I am really overwhelmed to hear that. I am not an authority on this topic. As
an archaeologist from a non-western (and non-Indian) country, the sketchy
thoughts and points that I have gained through my works and little experiences
have been posted in these letters.
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.
- It will be my pleasure to supply you any material from Bangladesh,
if you need.
Yours,
Swadhin
Swadhin Sen
Archaeologist
&
Assistant Professor
Department of Archaeology
Jahangirnagar University
Savar, Dhaka
Bangladesh
Ph. 88 01720196176 (mobile)
----- Original Message ----
From: Madhumita Lahiri <ml49 at duke.edu>
To: Swadhin Sen <swadhin_sen at yahoo.com>
Cc: reader-list at sarai.net; Naeem Mohaiemen <naeem.mohaiemen at gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 1:56:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Indo-centrism On Sarai
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 Job
Market, from agricultural products to coca-cola) constructs newer differences
and boundaries.
Under these circumstances, I am not very much interested in
some sort of liberal proclamation of erasing differences among languages,
cultures and states. I am more hopeful about the critique of the formation
differences.
Interestingly, the affairs with Tasleema Nasreen can also be
viewed in the framework of the inequality. I
think Naeem's points on Taslema were not taken into proper theoretical
and political account by the members who responded with a predominant liberal world view of everything. I will try to address the issues in another mail.
And what is one to do with the reality that South Asian language boundaries,somewhat like South Asian regional boundaries, are constantly shifting and responding to political imperatives, as well? (The Hindi/Urdu wallahs certainly know this one well!)
-
I hope to touch upon this part of question in future. To comment briefly, the boundaries are being reconfigured and redefined (as I have argued above) off course. Unfortunately and apologetically I am not in a position to profess on what one should do about it!
I hope this response will stir more arguments,
Wishes
Swadhin
Swadhin Sen
Archaeologist
&
Assistant Professor
Department of Archaeology
Jahangirnagar University
Savar, Dhaka
Bangladesh
Ph. 88 01720196176 (mobile)
----- Original Message ----
From: Madhumita Lahiri <
ml49 at duke.edu>
To: reader-list at sarai.net
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 9:58:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Indo-centrism On Sarai
Hi Swadhinji and Naeemji,
I use the Hindi honorific because using no honorific at all feels unseemly.
I wanted to interface a rather stupefying question i got yesterday -- from a
smart young Indian-origin student at a prestigious US university:
"Is there a difference between Bengal and Bangladesh?"
I answered yes (there is a geopolitical difference), then no (the cultures
are not entirely separate), and then yes (but there are significant
historical differences) and then just, what?
Because the question, while seemingly simple, is a rather difficult one to
tackle.
I work on South Asian expressive
culture -- particularly, the interface
between popular film and what is thought of as 'high' literature -- and i
work in Hindi, Bengali, and English. While my project is Indo-centric --
because of a focus on the transnational reception of the Kolkata- and
Bombay-based film industries -- as a student of language and literature i
want to work in linguistic units, not primarily in geopolitical ones.
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?
And what is one to do with the reality that South Asian language boundaries,
somewhat like South
Asian regional boundaries, are constantly shifting and
responding to political imperatives, as well? (The Hindi/Urdu wallahs
certainly know this one well!)
Best wishes, and hopeful for a response,
Madhumita
On 9/9/07, Swadhin Sen <swadhin_sen at yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Dear all
>
> The ubiquitous silence of the sarai subscribers about Naeem's mail is
> noteworthy.
>
> 'Freedom of speech' is always entwined with the power relations. We may
> send mails after mails to sarai. Yet, it doesn't mean that we will be heard.
> In liberal version, the act of writing and act of speaking assumes the
> action of other parties in taken for granted terms. The weak and
> marginalized may be permitted to speak and write; but this agency doesn't
> inhere the act of listening and consequent corrective measures.
>
> How will
'we', the non-Indians, interpret this action (in term of
> refraining from acting and/or participating in the debate)?
>
> Thanking all,
>
> Swadhin
>
> Swadhin Sen
> Archaeologist
> &
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Archaeology
> Jahangirnagar University
> Savar, Dhaka
> Bangladesh
> Ph. 88 01720196176 (mobile)
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: S.Fatima < sadiafwahidi at yahoo.co.in>
> To: Naeem Mohaiemen <
naeem.mohaiemen at gmail.com>; reader-list at sarai.net
> Sent: Saturday, September 8, 2007 3:37:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Indo-centrism On Sarai
>
> No, no... we won't talk about Bangladesh and Pakistan.
> Aren't those regions part of the Akhand Bharat. I hope
> you know what akhand means. You better start learning
> Hindi or else you would be branded anti-national.
You
> are a security threat to our Rashtra. You are a
> Bangladeshi.
>
> (Sorry Naeem - that wasn't real me. I think being on
> the Sarai list I am slowly turning into a Patriotic
> Indian, which practically means being a Gaurav shali
> Bharatiye and no longer respecting other cultures and
> languages).
>
> By the way, they were exchanging Urdu couplets, not
> Hindi. Since when has Urdu become Indian?
>
>
>
> --- Naeem Mohaiemen <naeem.mohaiemen at gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> > There are many members of Sarai who are neither
> > Indian, nor
> > Hindi-speakers. But Indian members of Sarai seem so
> > oblivious to
> > their Indo-centrism that they presume that we will
> > be able to, or want
> > to, follow debates that are at this point even
> > written entirely in
> >
Hindi (I refer to recent posts where entire couplets
> > are posted in
> > Hindi w. no translation).
> >
> > This comes at the cost of many other debates that
> > could possibly
> > happen. I've witnessed items posted regarding
> > Bangladesh sinking
> > without a trace/response. Recently, particular
> > "Indian" topics have
> > generated hundreds of replies, drowning out all
> > else. The only time a
> > Bangladeshi cultural producer (Taslima Nasreen) gets
> > debated is when
> > what is at stake is how she was treated in India.
> > Only when Taslima
> > is a vehicle to debate Hyderabad values, Indian
> > secularism, etc does
> > she become a person of interest.
> >
> > Bangladesh/Pakistan/or elsewhere in South Asia does
> > enter
into other
> > discussions-- as a foil. To insert immigration into
> > the debate, and
> > of course the ultimate insult that can be flung at
> > Suddha is that "he
> > is no longer in Bangladesh".
> >
> > This weekend, I was talking to Manosh Chowdhury, who
> > has just returned
> > from Japan to Dhaka. Unprovoked he started talking
> > about how "we" is
> > used unquestioningly on Sarai to mean "Indian".
> > Even "South Asian"
> > means "Indian", or at least everything non-Indian is
> > through the prism
> > of the "center".
> >
> > But it's a bore to be the resident scold, or a
> > token. I fear
> > eventually most who feel suffocated by the recent
> > endless debate (a
> > debate which is often between a few individuals,
> >
sometimes even
> > one-to-one, and yet it gets sent to the entire list)
> > will have
> > Manosh's reaction. They will drift away, exhausted.
> >
> > As Jeebesh pointed out, it takes very little time to
> > destroy a
> > cyber-community that has been built up painstakingly
> > by Sarai over the
> > years. Tyranny of the few threatens to do just
> > that.
> > _________________________________________
> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
> > the city.
> > Critiques & Collaborations
> > To subscribe: send an email to
> >
reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the
> > subject header.
> > To unsubscribe:
> >
https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > List archive:
> <
https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
> DELETE button is history. Unlimited mail storage is just a click
> away. Go to
https://edit.india.yahoo.com/config/eval_register
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all
> the tools to get online.
> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to
reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe:
https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/
>
_________________________________________
reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
Critiques & Collaborations
To subscribe: send an email to
reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
To unsubscribe:
https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/
>
Be a better Heartthrob.
Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
More information about the reader-list
mailing list