Artists at work-Khirsu

Temple of Kandoliya Mahadeva at Pauri

Relevance of Ancient Indian thought on present Critical Practice in India

Often in Indian academic circles where a lot of importance and attention is given to critical theories and multidisciplinary studies the non relevance of Sanskrit texts and ancient thought is subtly stressed upon.

At the most these ancient thoughts are considered as some valuable museum pieces which have no bearing on the present art or critical writing scenario.The propounders of such ideas happily take refuge in Western theories and critical practices and quote extensively and many a time quite meaninglessly from these schools of thought.

As a student of Art History I have many a times wanted to and in my own way tried to question this hegemony of Western thought on the mind of our so called intellengensia.With all due regards to Ferdinand de Saussure, Jacques Lacan and much misquoted Derrida, I really don’t see how their theories are extremely relevant for present Indian art and literature scenario when works by giants like Abhinavagupta, Anandvardhana Batta Nayaka..etc are outdated and unscientific. Now if we argue that the relevance of great theories surpasses time and place then shouldn’t we give if not more than at least equal credit to theories of Indian Aesthetics and philosophy?

Ferdinand de Saussure hailed as father of Structuralism and in a way father of modern linguistic theories was a student of Sanskrit language and his doctoral study was on the use of Absolute Genitive in Sanskrit too.He was profoundly influenced by Sphota doctrine introduced as a philosophy of meaning by Bhartrihari in 500AD. In fact many of the foundational ideas proposed by de Saussure are directly or indirectly influenced by the Indian grammatical tradition particularly by Panini and Bhartrihari. Ironically we Indians today get taught the interrelation between Sign, Signifier and Signified as explained by Saussure but no one tells us about the beauty of Sphota theory….no one tells us about Saussure’s sources. And unfortunately we want to be spoon-fed while Western scholars do the groundwork for us.

To quote another example lets look at Jacques Lacan who for the first time related Freudian psychoanalysis to art. His theories are referred to, quoted from and provoked by most of the present art critics and feminists. In his widely known essay, "Function and Field of Speech and Language," Lacan makes an explicit reference to the Dhvani theory in order to point out that the unconscious does not express itself in language; it reveals itself through suggestion. More narrowly, Lacan traces the sources of the "full word" in what he calls "the power of the symbol," a power that the analyst can evoke "in a carefully calculated fashion in the semantic resonances of his remarks" (Ecrits 1966, 82). He adds, "this is surely the way for a return to the use of symbolic effects in a renewed technique of interpretation in analysis"

Lacan’s precccupation with Dhvanyaloka and his understanding of the text is made clear by his refering to the follwing passage from Dhvanyaloka of Anandvardana:
“A girl, it begins, is waiting for her lover on the bank of a stream when she sees a Brahmin coming along towards her. She runs to him and exclaims in the warmest and most amiable tones: 'What lucky day this is for you] The dog that used to frighten you by its barking will not be along this river bank again, for it has just been devoured by a lion that is often seen around here'....
The absence of the lion may thus have as much affect as his spring would have were he present, for the lion only springs once, says the proverb appreciated by Freud (Ecrits 82).
The example of the girl, the Brahmin, the devouring lion and the dog is one of nearly five hundred examples discussed at length in Dhvanyaloka. Anandvardhana and his commentators and others use these examples from Prakrit and Sanskrit literatures to isolate various properties of speech that facilitate poetic communication by concealing, negating, erasing of primary sense the mukhyartha. Besides being preoccupied with the suggestive functions of utterance in general, in the passages that follow the elaborate reference to dhvani, Lacan affirms the interdependence of analytic and aesthetic uses of language. This connection is particularly relevant to his concept of the "full word," its reliance on the internalization of the poetic resources of language.
Now to conclude my rather frustated outpourings I ask myself do I feel handicapped when it comes to understanding Indian thought and ancient tradition? The answer definitely is yes…My six years of arthistorical training and participation in various seminars and dicussions have not given me any clear insight in our ancient wisdom and thought….If tommorow I want to apply in any university abroad I have to devote two full years to learning Sanskrit properly.Regretfully I confess while I can quote Foucault, Lacan and Derrida like back of my hand I get cold feet when encoutered with Sanskrit texts.My meagre knowledge of Sanskrit is pitiable and whom do I have to blame?

Iqbal: Of meaning and interpretation

Dil se jo baat nikaltee hai asar rakhti hai par nahi taqt e parwaz magar rakhti hai

These two lines from Jawab e Shikwa by Iqbal, a great revolutionary Urdu poet started an interesting and thought provoking debate with a friend some time back More than the discussion it was the questions raised about deciphering the meaning of any art or literally work which caught my attention and which makes me write this piece.

Before I start I need to admit that my knowledge about the said poet’s writings is negligible and hence I have no idea of his complete oeuvre or style. Therefore when my friend interpreted and translated these lines as follows I couldn’t see any point to disagree upon.

‘The voice emerging right from one’s heart has a sure impact
But it alone is not enough as it does not have power to fly’


Here he was referring to the revolutionary aspect prominent in Iqbal’s writings. He kept stressing on the fact that what the poet here wants to convey is that all weeping and wailing by itself is not enough but there is a need to wake up and put in real effort to make things actually work.

To tell the truth till last fortnight I hadn’t bothered about the couplet and also his explanation which we had discussed once before sounded quite plausible. But the turning point came when another friend, a poet in her own right, gave a totally different and to me a more apt sounding interpretation of the same couplet which goes on as:

The voice emerging right from one’s heart has a sure impact
Even though it does not have wings still it has the power to fly

As one can see here she has interpreted ‘par’ as wings rather than ‘but’ and by doing so the meaning of the couplet not only changes drastically but also it gives a whole positive and optimistic meaning to the entire piece. Though on one hand in a flash of moment I saw such a wonderful possibility in these lines my another friend remained adamant on the socio-revolutionist meaning and started quoting other couplets by Iqbal to stress his point.

While both of them were discussing and debating their manner of interpretation I was deeply hit by the Vyanjana aspect in the lines…ie. The meaning beyond the literal and the metaphorical one. The capacity of a real work of art or literature to create various and sometimes totally opposite meanings. I intercepted their rather loud argument by this sublime thought even on cost of sounding entirely ridiculous and uselessly complicating the issue. My dear friend laughed at me and declared that because I don’t know Iqbal I am taking refuge in intricate theoretical fabrications…an allegation which I often have to face from various quarters as people nowadays cannot see or don’t bother to see the relevance of our ancient thought on the present day scenario.And isn’t it why we turn to western scholars who have for most part simplified our own ancient wisdom for us?

Anyways that is a huge debate in itself..coming back to the discussion, since we were reaching no where we decided to ask few experts for their opinion. After grammatically analyzing the lines and drawing comparisons and contrasts between Ghalib and Iqbal we were informed that the second interpretation is the valid one ie.the one where ‘par’ is translated as ‘wings’

Finally our argument seem to have reached somewhere. While my friend was reluctantly somewhat convinced the question of interpretation kept troubling me and raised various questions in my mind…Would like to share some part of this introspection here…..

Why should one fix a work of art with one final meaning?…Doesn’t it limit the scope of the piece? To me a real engaging work of art or a poetry would be that which has the power of generating various meanings. To substantiate my point I would like to draw your attention to ‘Rasa Sutra’ of Bharata which has been commented upon by not less than six scholars including the great Abhinavagupta. Imagine if Rasa Sutra would have been fixed with one meaning would such a stimulating body of literature exist?

Let a work of art grow on you…explore its various facets …and if you feel like going back to it again and again then it surely will have the capacity to generate various meanings for you….isn’t that how an art writer culls out meanings not even dreamt of by the artist and hence in the process becomes an artist her/himself.

Ponderings

Mute spectator
isn't that mute
It's brain constantly at war
Registering, rejecting and reinterpreting
The ongoing drama flashed on the screen!


Voilence of silence
Slow poison
is deadlier
than all the nukes!


What if I was asked
What do I want
want the most
most of all things

Would I be able to answer?

Life

Joyride or a dull routine
Life has its way of which
we know not
We toil, we plan we see to it
That it remains in our control

Fickle life laughs at us
At out futile attempt to hold
And in a single moment itself
Changes our entire approach

Destiny

I kept standing
and life passed by me
Making me wonder
and ultimately surrender
to that something
which men call destiny

Objectivity

As imagination creeps into nostalgia
There is no way
one can say
What was and what was not

Torn between two stands
With a history of glorious past
written all over the mind
Objectivity suffers!
And quietly takes a backseat

True Story with no Glory!

A story on the 20th June event organized by activists of Roots in Kashmir in Delhi on the occasion of The World Refugee Day...

.....to read more http://www.artconcerns.net/2007july/html/review_geethika.htm

.......And the world remained silent.......Wonder why???

Come lets figure out at:

Satya Sai International Centre, Main Auditorium, Pragati Vihar, Lodhi Road, (adjacent to NBCC building), on 20th June,6.30 PM

And The World Remained Silent is a straight in your face kind of a documentary that highlights how Kashmiri Pandits were forced out of the valley which they belonged to and the valley which belonged to them.

visit our blog: http://kashmiris-in-exile.blogspot.com/

Unbearable Lightness of Being: Book Review

My interest in Kundera’s works lies not only in his ability to trespass the conventional narrative mode but in his ingenuity to weave the story in an intelligible and extremely thought provoking manner। His move away from Realism, to formulate a more abstract and personal language recalls the visual artists of 20th C. who shunned all kinds of realism. His theoretical framework instantly reminds us of Kafka and other existential writers who have deeply problematized the role of human agency in their works...............

to read more......... ://www.artconcerns.net/2007May/html/bookReview_milanKundera.htm

Intoxication: Khyyam translated

I feel drunk to the very core
fill my glass, I want some more
Why denounce present for the future to come
O! Come friend…you also have some

Ultimately under the ground will you lie
Without a friend, lover or any ally
Listen to the secret I tell you know
Only in presence of Wine need thou bow