Fall of a writer

 

More than a writer it’s a fall of conscience. A possibility for a better self. If a human being has aesthetic capacity to celebrate liberty and give context and meaning for humanity to expand its existential bearings then it becomes a responsibility. A writer has responsibility not as a moralizer or preacher but a cataloger of the times we live in an utter sincerity of comprehensive and lack. Not a mere cataloger but a conjurer of an alternate world or thought with his or her creative sensibilities, to create aesthetics of expanding freedom and liberty that makes life meaningful, each life a burgeoning possibility of deeper understanding or a satisfying presence for progressive collective. Good literature may not save humanity but it certainly can save a person and with that the humanity, by expanding reader’s sensibilities and his or her capacity to experience freedom and understand value of liberty. This then leads to fulfilling path of exacting estimation of contemporary reality and possibilities. Not of certainties but clarities of nuance in ever-changing complexities of an uncertain world. It expands mind for chaos and stillness of life, and accept vaster realities. A good writer liberates the reader. Words can shape like birds and come alive. It makes life urgent, curious and delight the path of understanding.

The recent book by Amitav Ghosh is a failure of a writer but more of a human. This failure is not accidental but systemic. He was considered a foremost fiction writer and a conscientious human. This book Ghost Eye (not read, nor will I read…the same reason I don’t have to read holy books to reject it with the awareness of juvenile premise as also how much damage it has done to humanity over centuries) gives credence to the worst. Indian english writing suffers from crave for validation from West hence the performance. Ghosh is few rare authors who not only resisted this with his fiction but also his stand against degrading conceptions like commonwealth. What though is clear is that he is no longer the same, and is quite clearly co-opted by the system of benefit which ofcourse he was always receptive to. This book is a nauseating demonstration of someone seeking validation from West by presenting the exotic cliched other. What is obnoxious in this attempt is normalizing of horrors of primitives in India. The charlatans, the pseudoscience, superstitions and juvenile rituals of sleaze that wrench soul of India in every street corner. With monster mullah hugged by vacant elois in West caste cannibals have tiptoed from the woodwork with renewed vigor displaying their cosmic level muck. This book is that confidence. While conscientious Indian reviewers are dismayed -aware of the pernicious civilizational lapse, they call out the fake. The western reviewers meanwhile are understandably circumspect, not because they aren’t aware of exotic garbed breach but because of their self-flagellating narration that compromise them into apology (islamophilic left leaning british The Guardian egged by caste cannibals -as representing India -so much so that their persistent anti-india slant should be seen as racism, is “let down by the prose” in the book! An example of compromised reviewer incapacitated by relativism). 

India suffers lack of basic critical thinking, education system is largely compromised to negotiate desperate upper mobility, while politicians, media, religion, are here to churn herd and make them feel special. Ghosh is in a position which very few Indians can ever be. He had the opportunity to nurture his skills from early on and the wherewithal as well as talent to materialize it into some fantastic writing over the decades. He had to evolve but he couldn’t. There is a reason why I stopped following Indian writers (except exceptional rare few) they will take you down, beyond a point they lack the complexity of craft or sincerity of awareness. It is not only confined to writing. The intellectual section is severely compromised, and they are quite aware of it hence this fervency to cover the track and control narration specifically for western consumption. Lacking much grip on contemporary their attention is always on history, to construct a rosy picture to not only place their entitlements but also to evaluate the present in this rarefied fiction. Amartya Sen, with his obsessive regurgitation, moonwalked as historian while at other times as benign local guardian, consolidated this narration for worst of people to munch on (indeed he wrote a tome on ancient Indian justice system without mention of caste in its foundational context, and extends this superficiality into contemporary without serious concern for environment!). History is the hunting ground of charlatan class to not only control narration but to cleverly thrive it to opportunistic path of self-aggrandizing redemption. It is literally history making in all its metaphoric alluding! To understand these people who work in rarefied field of reading and writing -that some are especially entitled (indeed crave) to be classified as wise, one must read theories that they use as intellectual ruse. Hegelian conservatism is a compelling standpoint of intellectual class to hitch their wagon. Create an extreme binary of uncouth politicians or mainstream culture, or whatever heuristic opportunistic deal of the day, this anti-thesis is their calling. Whether it is obfuscating truth is not a concern as long as it fits the binary narration. Many thriving careers are built on mock fight of binary taken to extremes. In Indian context it becomes a rant that many times turn absurd. This book is in that tradition. To not only position as anti-thesis to supposedly western lack of spiritual bearing (which india is overflowing with we are told, bleary eyed westerners do drop in for the search while Indians gawk at them!) but to stake exalted exceptional civilizational awareness in no uncertain terms. Ghosh’s fiction is extending Sen’s nonfictional fiction. It is how civilization is built for common people to study and wonder. It is realization of reason through mythical history, to claim past society in perfect state. This gossipy nether is a hollow substitute for genuine engagement. It is a framework on which balderdash of native intelligence work into common psyche that keep them stupefied when faced with utter stupidity in the name of tradition and faith.   

Reincarnation is absolute nonsense; it can be compelling theme for cheap fiction or horror or whatever that can rivet the herd but for a serious writer to show ambiguity on these matters is a grievous untenable breach. A good fiction writer keeps it open for the reader, and surely not reveal unless he or she is moralizing. I recall a short story by Mark Tully (or was it Kushwant Singh?) that I read many decades back wherein childless couple do penance while she ‘visit’ the sadhu. The child born as ‘miracle’ is kept open to conjecture. This is very much the Indian reality. Or in my earlier blog I quoted Siebo There Below (Laszlo Krasznahorakai). Now read these lines again “…so that unfortunately the pair of eyes glancing over there by accident sees nothing, just a motionless bird leaning forward, doing nothing: such a person, with his brain in the trough of observation, would have been the only among us -and perhaps he will never see anything else ever again and will remain that way for his entire life, and what could have given his life meaning is passed over, and because of that his life will be sad, impoverished, worn, dreary with bitterness: a life without hope, risk, or greatness, without the sense of any higher order…”. The emphasized words are where the author enters to avoid pontifying. If these words weren’t there the writing will shrink as it looks down on the reader, indeed all existence. This remarkable attribute to be aware, as a writer as well as a reader as also overall context of life. I don’t claim to be a writer but when I used to write fiction, I am deeply aware of this. This ofcourse doesn’t exist when writing nonfiction as I go for jugular to make it clear and urgent. If herd is the word that fulfills the definition, then go for it. There is no dilution whatsoever. This society doesn’t really deserve mild handling.

Wittgenstein oft quoted, mostly misquoted, “even if all possible scientific questions are answered, the problems of life still have not been touched at all” is fallaciously predictive making it irrational. The premise is dubious. The process of understanding world is channelized systematized inquisitiveness as scientific method. Problems of science is problem of humanity. Doing science is doing life. Every part of life is doing science. There is no distinction. They are embedded. These don’t pose different types of questions nor are they different type of language. So, by its very nature it is irrational to claim that “all possible scientific questions are answered”. Obviously, the intention is to question the methodology and its incompatibility to answer spiritual existential questions, or shall we say, matter related to consciousness (religion needn’t be mistaken into this, a premise understood and easily dismissed as it stands on juvenile claims). This distinction is fallacious. World has more understanding of reality than what was possible hundred years back. What was considered unanswered, or indeed unanswerable, is now answered or we have more insight. What was miraculous is now inane. Understanding is a process and science is consolidation of consciousness for better understanding. It is too specious to claim that “…problems of life still have not been touched at all…”. We have no way to know, and we don’t know, and best of humans will carry this humility. It goes without saying that the best of human will necessarily carry mindset of the best of scientist. And surely best of scientists will need to carry comprehensive understanding to be best of a human. With this in mind there is no distinction in human pursuit. Existential is awareness, and awareness is existential. Wittgenstein contention therefore is fallacious, doesn’t stand the scrutiny. It is product of wishful philosophy. It is incapacitated to bind mind and matter. It lacks awareness that a wave is also a particle and a particle is also a wave. As we open our understanding to quantum world our awareness will go deeper. Ofcourse there will still be questions unanswered which necessarily means that there is more of research needed and still these may remain unanswered…. It doesn’t however mean that it cannot be answered (nor it means a definite answer). That is not how life evolved. If there is no answer there is silence. Silence is also an answer. Silence is also what is said. Silence is also not forever. The fact that we are aware of what is still unanswered, and what is it that we are not able to find answer is a big step, and is indeed beginning of the answer.