Change is a universal as well as subtle phenomenon. And a person who loves inertia is levelled as a 'reactionary'. I have heard many a times that one should be progressive enough, like changing colours, adapting in a way Darwin imagines in his phenomenal work, "The Origin of Species". What I find about Edvard Said and Ashish Nandi is totally opposite to the idea of 'progressivism', if I may say so. Both thinkers represent a school of thought which does not like the "hegemony of western thought". They disapprove a particular way of thinking mostly found in western schools of thought, like the rationalization and humanization of various structures, be it Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Modernism, or Post-Modernism. They don't like looking Asian, African, or Arab world in perspective of 'European progressivism'. Their project is simple; Edward tried to establish 'Orientalism' while re-reading and re-inventing the "historical traces", to refer Antonio Gramsci, to engrave a lost picture, a lost narrative, a repressed trace, in the graveyard of progressive historicism. Orientalism was the master project which never soothed the eyes of moral and intellectual progressivism. Edward was levelled as a 'reactionary'. Levelling is after all easier way to lynch the very growth of budding ideas. That is how the plethora of schools are developed underneath a few branch.
Ashish Nandi is read more in West than East. We don't have time to think beyond Modernism and Post-Modernism! Ashish Nandi is known for his comment on corruption in India which created turmoil in newsroom studios. He became the subject matter of editorialisation and condemnatory politics after his remarks for he had apologized, and promised not to do so in future. That is how I came to know about him. Indian intelligencia does not have time to reflect on his works, particularly "The Intimate Enemy". This work is my favorite. I believe this book is one of the best imaginations, transcends the "wall of reason", in search of better alternatives, better future, beyond the hyphenation of present, past, and future, a timeless creation, which is not consciously programmed. Such kind of matrix hardly happens in life.
Comments
Post a Comment