Thinking Activity : Postcolonial studies

Hello everyone.

To understand clearly what is post colonial study our teacher gives us a task to watch some videos and we are supposed to do postcolonial analysis of that particular video and to see postcolonial elements in the video. So the task assigned by our professor Dilip sir. In this blog I'm going to see the video with some interesting postcolonial point of views. 

Have you ever thought about what post colonialism is ? I have never, because there is no need to know why because there is no sense of seeing the thing in a different perspective and in a different point of view. But the sense developed while studying literature and criticism. 

So the first thing which we have to understand here is what is postcolonialism ? Let's see one video,

 

Postcolonialism is the historical period or state of affairs representing the aftermath of Western colonialism; the term can also be used to describe the concurrent project to reclaim and rethink the history and agency of people subordinated under various forms of imperialism. Postcolonialism signals a possible future of overcoming colonialism, yet new forms of domination or subordination can come in the wake of such changes, including new forms of global empire. Postcolonialism should not be confused with the claim that the world we live in now is actually devoid of colonialism.

"Postcolonialism... involves a studied engagement with the experience of colonialism and its past and present effects"

To understand postcolonialism with examples we have to watch the video of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.

 

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie born on 15 September 1977) is a Nigerian novelist, writer of short stories, and nonfiction. She has written the novels Purple Hibiscus (2003), Half of a Yellow Sun (2006), and Americanah (2013), the short story collection The Thing Around Your Neck (2009), and the book-length essay We Should All Be Feminists (2014). 

Here is the video :- 

 

1.The Danger of single story 

In her speech she tells about the experiences which she felt in her life. This talk helps me to understand postcolonialism. So let's see what are the arguments of her. 

She said that in her childhood she started reading at the age of two, probably four. And she read British and American children's books. And she started writing at the age of seven. Her father was a professor and her mother was an administrator. She grew up in Nigerian campus. In her stories all characters are white and blue eyed. Because she read that type of story. But in Nigeria she said that they don't have snow, they ate mangoes, and they never talked about the weather, because there was no need to. Here we can see cultural differences. 

Then she said that she took inspiration from Chinua Achebe and Camara Laye. She went through a mental shift in her perception of literature. She said that she  realized that people like her, girls with skin the color of chocolate, whose kinky hair could not form ponytails, could also exist in literature. So she proves that literature doesn't have any condition for becoming a great writer. 

She talked about a little house boy, his name was Fide. And her mother used to tell her that Fide's family was very poor. Her mother sent yams and rice, and old clothes to his family. And when Chimamanda didn't finish her food, her mother said to her that,

"Finish your food ! Don't you know ? People like Fide's family have nothing"

Here she tells one interesting experience that when they went to visit Fide's village, his mother showed them a beautiful patterned basket made of dyed raffia that Fide's brother had made. So she was really startled. Because she only listens about Fide's poverty, it is quite impossible for her to see them as they can make something except poorness. 

Another experience she shares and says that when she went to university her roommate was shocked by her skill of speaking fluent English. Why because she had a single story of Africa : a single story of catastrophe. She included in this single story, there was no possibility of African being similar to her in any way, no possibility of feeling more complex than pity, no possibility of a connection as human equals. Why does it happen ? Because we already have a single story for any particular place, person, matter. And that's why our mind doesn't think about other aspects. 

She felt  like others in University. In U.S. Whenever Africa came up, all people turned to her. She added that people have some type of images for particular things. If she was not born in Nigeria, she has some things in her mind for Africa also. 

One of his pivotal arguments is when she spoke at a University and one student told her that it was such a shame that Nigerian men were physical abusers like the father character in adichie's novel.  And she gave answers to the student that recently she had  read a novel named "American Psycho"... and that it was such a shame that young Americans were serial murderers !!! The intention is that you can not blame all for any one person. All are not the same. Because of one we can't judge the whole community. She was able to give the right answer because she had read many stories of America, she didn't have a single story of America. This is what is happening in our today's time also. We haven't enough knowledge about anybody and we started blaming them. Why ? Because somebody tells us about them and we simply believe in them, without any inquiry we made up a single story !

Through the speech she wants to say that stories influence our understanding of  other people and places. She also state confidently that the danger of the single story is that it can result in perspectives based on stereotypes. 

Then she talked about the importance of the stories. Stories have been used to dispossess and to malign, but stories can also be used to empower and humanize. Stories can break the dignity of a people, but stories can also repair that broken dignity. 

She ended her speech with this quote,

"When we reject the single story, when we realize that there is never a single story about any place, we regain a kind of paradise".

So overall she wants to tell that there is no single story for any place, there are many sides of people, places. So we have to see them with different perspectives also.

2.We Should All be Feminist 

The video of that talk :-

 

The first thing which we need to understand is what is the meaning of word Feminist 

"A person who believes in social, political and economical equality of the sexes."

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie talks about feminism in this talk. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie also needs to be appreciated for being an advocate about educating people on the whole about feminism. Some argue that it should not be the responsibility of a woman to teach a man about treating women as humans, and not objects or those that need to be saved. Adichie does not disagree, but at the same time, she points to the imbalance that is being created. Girls are being empowered but at the same time, boys are not being taught, consciously, about equality for all.

This is not creating a balance, where people can co-exist without being discriminated against on the basis of gender. Instead, it’s probably reversing patriarchy. It is important to teach boys and young men to feel comfortable around women who are powerful, who make more money, are more talented or even more vocal. People of all genders, should be made to realise that no one should feel weaker than any other for any reason. 

In another instance, Adichie also talked about how opening the door for a woman is considered an act of chivalry and her point was to open the door for a person, irrespective of their gender.

The point which we can make with Adichie’s blessing, is that men should not be made victims for being men, because that is not what feminism is about. This happens quite a bit and we need to be a little more conscious, because we are all products of patriarchal societies. This is also not to say that people of certain genders, say women, are not to be encouraged to be given reservations, for example. While that is necessary, we also need to be careful before disregarding people’s talents  just like women have been disregarded for centuries, despite being talented and hard working. 

So we can say that the arguments which she makes are convincing with the time. 

3.Third talk : Importance of Truth in Post-truth Era

 

When we think about Truth some people fail to remain true. We are the generation of the 21st century. The Postmodern era in which people are highly civilized. So, in this talk Chimamanda said that speaking lies is speaking lies to yourself. She said in her talk that,

"Be courageous enough to accept your life as messy, your life is not always perfectly matching to your ideology." 

There is also a reference of a poem by Mary Oliver, that Whoever you are, no matter how lonely, The world offers itself to your imagination.

So, she wants to tell us that we have to be true. Not only with others but also with ourselves. So the word has significance in our life. 

4.significant changes

Here I want to say that these talks bring very significant changes in my way of looking at literature and life also. 

The first significant change is to look at others with different aspects not only based on the single story about them. From now I will trust on any matter with my research of that particular matter only. I shouldn't believe what others say. 

The second thing which I learned from Chimamanda Adichie is we have to be true with ourselves. To be true with others is the second thing. The first thing is to be satisfied and to be true and honest with yourself is very pivotal. 

1706 words

9773 characters

Thinking activity : Shashi Tharoor's Speech at Oxford

 Hello readers !

Today I'm going to talk about Dr. Shashi Tharoor and his speech at Oxford about the dark era of inglorious empire. This discussion is part of my classroom activity. Apart from that this talk is also interesting which explores the truth of our past. This task is given by our professor Dr. Dilip Barad sir. If you want to know more about activity visit teacher's blog click here .

In this task we have to watch a video in which Dr. Tharoor gave a speech about his book "An Era of Darkness The British Empire in India" at Oxford. He participated in the debate, so he pointed out some of the arguments about what Britishers did in India and how India became a poor country. While watching I have made some interesting points which seem in postcolonial elements. I watched the video two times, then I came to know what Dr. Tharoor wants to prove by his book and his speech. 

(Dr. Shashi Tharoor)

Before discussing the speech let's know something interesting about Shashi Tharoor. Dr. Shashi Tharoor born in London, UK and raised in India. He is Indian politician, writer and former international diplomat who has been surving as Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha from Tiruvananthaouram, Kerala, since 2009. He was formerly Under - Secretary General of the United Nations and contested for the post of Secretary General in 2006. His well known novel, "The Great Indian Novel" was first published in 1989. His other works are,

• Riot (2001)

• India : From Midnight to the millennium (1997)

• Show Business (1992) 

• Bookless in Baghdad (2005)

• Indian Sastra : Reflection on the Nation in our Time (2015)

• Why I am A Hindu ( 2018)

• The Paradoxical Prime Minister (2018)  

• The Hindu Way : An Introduction to Hinduism (2019) 

So now let's  discuss our main topic, his speech about his book An Era of Darkness The British Empire in India.

Here is the video of that discussion of Dr. Shashi Tharoor. First watch the video so we can understand it in better way :-

He said in his speech that the economic situation of the colonies was worsened by the experience of British colonialism. He said that India's share of world economy was 23% before Britishers arrived, but it was down to below 4% when they left !!! And this happened because India had been governed for the benefit of Britain. Because Britain's rise for 200 years was financed by its demolition in India. And this is the truth, the hard reality. 

Tharoor states that British started taking raw material from India and started manufacturing cloth. They buy raw material at a lower price and sell manufactured clothes at high prices. And that is why India became beggar ! 

He said that by the end of the century India became the biggest cash cow for Britain. Do you know what is the meaning of cash caw ? Here cow is not taken as meaning of animal but it is taken as an allusion to the dairy cow, which once acquired may be milked on an ongoing basis. When someone or something which is a dependable source of appreciable amount of money; a moneymaker it's called cash cow. India became enterprise for Britain that generate high net free cash flows. 

In the speech he talked about slavery. He said that in 1833 when slavery was abolished a compensation of 20 million pounds was paid not as reparations to those who had lost their lives or who had suffered, but to those who had lost their property. It means the reparations were not given to the very poor people but to those who are quite known and familiar with the government. For this argument he given an example of Mr. Gladstone was one of those who benefited from the compensation. 

Also he gives an example of the Bengal famine. In this case also British did not think about the poor people and many people died because of famine. 

There is statement known in the world that

The sun never set on the British empire !

For the answer of this statement he states that, 

"Sun never set on the British empire because even God couldn't trust the English in the dark"

This statement is quite satirical about British empire. Britishers who exploit Indian very much in the daylight (sunlight), what they will do at night ! So God could not trust them, that is why God doesn't give them night mode. 

Then Dr. Tharoor talked about World War | and World War || He also talked about the contribution of Indians in both wars. Many Indian are died, many are wounded and many remained missing or in prison also. And they didn't do it for their country, they did it for Britishers. 

Since our childhood we used to hear that British government built roads and railways. We can consider it as a good change of India's past. Some people claim that it is good to see that the Britishers made these railways and roads and when they left it's useful for Indian people also. But here we are making a mistake. Because they made up this roads and railways for their benefits for serving their government not for local people of India. And some English people and others also said that the discovery of roads and railways that British made is for their personal usage not for Indians. 

When we done such mistakes what people want from us is to acceptance, that people can accept that they did mistake. So here  at the end of all this talk Dr. Tharoor only want that the people of Britain accept that harsh reality that what their ancestors did. Because there is lot of people who don't know from where their wealth has came. Maybe it's because they don't teach their children that what their grandparents grandparent did. So this point Dr. Tharoor made here. And if Britain want to pay for what they have did then they have to pay at least one pound for the day and they have to pay for 200 years of ruling India. 

So above all discuss dicribes about the dark era in Indian past. This book reveals the reality of British people that I think they didn't think about. Dr. Shashi Tharoor received the Sahitya Academy Award for this book An Era of Darkness non fictional work. To wind up we can say that they written about the truth which all have to accept specially Britain. And this is what he wants to convey all people. 

1073 words 

6018 characters

An Artist of the Floating World : Thinking activity

Hello friends, in this blog I'm going to discuss a Japanese novel "An Artist of the Floating World". This blog is part of my classroom activity, given by our professor Dr. Dilip Barad sir. So let's start.

An Artist of the Floating World is a novel by British author Kazuo Ishiguro, published in 1986. Ishiguro is a prolific and well-known novelist, famous for his books The Remains of the Day and Never Let Me Go. He has won the Man Booker Prize and won the Nobel Prize in 2017, and was knighted in 2019. An Artist of the Floating World, his second novel, is an example of his earlier writing, and was well-received, earning a Whitbread Award. This novel is particularly well-known for its use of an unreliable narrator, Masuji Ono. It tells the story of Ono, a retired Japanese artist trying to come to terms with changes in his country after the Second World War. Ishiguro himself was born in Japan, but emigrated to the United Kingdom as a child and did not return to Japan until after publishing An Artist of the Floating World. He has said that, by writing about places with which he is unfamiliar, such as post-war Japan in this novel, he is able to write more imaginatively. Here is one video for better understanding the novel,

1.'Lantern' appears 34 times in the novel. Even on the cover page, the image of lanterns is displayed. What is the significance of Lantern in the novel ?

'Lantern' is an important symbol of the novel. Lanterns in the novel are associated with Ono’s teacher Mori-san, who includes a lantern in each of his paintings and dedicates himself to trying to capture the look of lantern light. For Mori-san, the flickering, easily extinguished quality of lantern light symbolizes the transience of beauty and the importance of giving careful attention to small moments and details in the physical world. Lanterns, then, symbolize an outlook on life which prizes small details and everyday moments above the ideological concerns of nationalists or commercial concerns of businesspeople. It is an old-fashioned, aesthetically focused, and more traditional way of viewing the world. 

2.Write about 'Masuji Ono' as an 'Unreliable Narrator'. 

An Artist of the Floating World is a masterpiece that glides in and out of many dimensions. On the one hand, it is a story of generations separated by a massive ideological gulf. On the other, it is about an older man attempting to come to terms with his mistaken philosophies. It is also a historical fiction set in the Japan of limbos; Japan, which has suffered because of its misplaced imperialism, been shattered by bombings and is now critical of the past and every person representing it. At the heart of it is an unreliable narrator, Masuji Ono. 

Both instances where Ono’s reporting of the words of others is explicitly signaled as unreliable relate to his career and reputation. The puzzled reactions of Noriko and the Saitos to his abrupt confession at the miai suggest that his guilt about his past is excessive. Even if there is a note of self-justification in Ono’s statements about his career, which alerts us to his possible unreliability, he is not so much covering up his past as being reticent about his present. Is it not strange that Ono has no recall whatsoever of a conversation he had a week ago with Jiro Miyake? Perhaps his problem is not the inability to recall past conversations but the inability to commit them to memory in the first place. There are two interrelated explanations for Ono’s absentmindedness during his interactions with others. The first explanation, even though this is something that is not foregrounded by the novel’s progression, its engagement of the reader’s interest and expectations lies in the recurring motif of alcohol. We see Ono sitting at Mrs. Kawakami’s day after day often as the only customer. His stories of his life as an artist are also set in such establishments or otherwise associated with the floating world of pleasure and decadence. Consider, for example, his memory of the painters passed out on the lawn at their teacher Mori-san’s villa. We may also recall Ono loudly snapping at his grandson Ichiro and insisting on giving sake to him even though the boy is only eight years old.

The most revealing, however, is the report of the miai with the Saito family:

"It may well be that the tension of the occasion made me drink a little more quickly than I intended, for my memories of the evening are not as clear as they might be."

It is as if we were reading a graphic novel in which the protagonist is wandering around the city and running into people he knows, but their speech balloons are all empty. While an ungenerous reader might take Ono’s failure to listen as further proof of his egotism, it is in fact an image of profound isolation and loneliness. Due to the loss of his wife and son and the grief it must cause him, Ono is deprived of intersubjectivity, of meaningful encounters with loving others. Ono only speaks about himself, making up an autobiographical narrative  centered on his professional self, because this is the only thing he knows how to speak about and the only thing that has perceptual salience to him at this time.

The perplexed reactions of Masuji Ono's daughter and the family of the prospective groom to his abrupt confession at the miai offer support to the interpretation that Ono’s narrative of guilt is not based on facts but is, rather, an illusion generated by grief and depression. Instead of a “mad monologist” a well-established category of unreliable narrators obsessively speaking about themselves Ono could be termed a “sad monologist”. The term reflects the fact that it is his emotions that make him unreliable.

3.Debate on the uses of art / artist (Five perspectives : 1. Art for the sake of art - aesthetic delight. 2. Art for earning money / business purposes. 3. Art for Nationalism / imperialism - art for the propaganda of government power, 4. Art for the poor / marxism, and 5. No need for art and artists (Masuji's father's approach).

We can observe all types of art in this novel. The first type of art for aesthetic delight. Masuji Ono's teacher Mori-san believed that the art is for aesthetic delight. In which artists create any art for the art's sake. For themselves, for their happiness they make any art. The second type of art is art for earning money purposes. So in the novel we can see that Master Takeda thinks that art is only used for business. With the use of art they used to make money first. The third type of art is art for Nationalism. In which artists think that he or she will have to give back to the nation through their art. So for that they used art as the propaganda of government power. The other form of using art is art for poor people. And the last one is about the meaninglessness of art. Masuji Ono's father believed that there is no importance of art in our life.  But I want to say that not everyone has the ability to be an artist. Maybe it's inborn talent or it will be taught by someone.  Like Masuji Ono learned from his master. 

4. What is the relevance of this novel is our times ?

Every literary work has its own importance. In other words we can say that there was purpose behind any of the work. Why are they writing this all, because they want happened in past will never be repeated. And some artists are driven by the wrong person and unconsciously they make the work which inspires people to do wrong things. 

We can connect this novel in today's time also. Sometimes we also do some floating things. The World is also like floating. When and how it changes,  Nationalism can be seen in our society we never know. But Some artists are using art for the nation. They believe that we have to do something for our nation through art. 

We are living in a floating world. Which changes every second. So we have to be part of the world. This is happening in our relationship also. So this is the relevance of An artist of the floating world. 

Thank you !

1402 words

8014 characters

Nineteen Eighty Four by George Orwell

Hello friends, today I'm going to discuss the very famous author George Orwell as part of my thinking activity assigned by our professor Dr. Dilip Barad sir. So let's discuss it. 

George Orwell was born Eric Blair in India in 1903. He was born to a comfortable ‘lower-upper-middle class’ family and a father who served the British Empire. George Orwell is one of the world’s most influential writers, the visionary author of Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-four and his eyewitness, non-fiction classics Down and Out in Paris in London, The Road to Wigan Pier and Homage to Catalonia. 

Nineteen Eighty-four, also published as 1984, novel by English author George Orwell published in 1949 as a warning against totalitarianism. The chilling dystopia made a deep impression on readers, and his ideas entered mainstream culture in a way achieved by very few books. The book’s title and many of its concepts, such as Big Brother and the Thought Police, are instantly recognized and understood, often as bywords for modern social and political abuses. So here are some questions which I have to discuss. 

1] What is dystopian fiction ? Is 1984 dystopian fiction ?

First we see what is dystopian fiction, then we can see this novel is dystopian novel or not.

“All utopias are dystopias. The term “dystopia” was coined by fools that believed a “utopia” can be functional.” 

 

   - A.E. Samaan

Since Thomas More’s first use of the word utopia in 1516 it has conjured multiple and ambiguous connotations. Utopia and its defining antithesis dystopia can be articulations of what we wish to become or to avoid becoming, an investigation of hope and the potential for transformation.

Let's see one video for better understanding :-

"Dystopian literature is a form of speculative fiction that began as a response to utopian literature. A dystopia is an imagined community or society that is dehumanizing and frightening. A dystopia is an antonym of a utopia, which is a perfect society."

The central themes of dystopian novels generally fall under these topics:

• Government control

• Environmental destruction

• Technological control

• Survival

• Loss of individualism and identity

• Totalitarianism 

∆Is 1984 dystopian fiction ?

Yes, according to the above characteristics we can say that this novel is dystopian fiction. 

In George Orwell’s 1984, the world is under complete government control. The fictional dictator Big Brother enforces omnipresent surveillance over the people living in the three inter-continental superstates remaining after a world war. 

Environmental themes are there in the details of the world of Big Brother and Oceania. The streets of Airstrip One (the renamed England) are strewn with refuse – everything is ruined. The universe is in a state of entropy, of falling apart. And yet everyone is indifferent to this state of affairs. 

A well-organized and effective propaganda machine goes a long way in ensuring total control of the Party over the superstate and its residents. The regulation and dissemination of information involves 

“tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your choosing.” 

Totalitarianism is one of the major themes of the novel, 1984. It presents the type of government where even the head of the government is unknown to the public. This theme serves as a warning to the people because such a regime unleashes propaganda to make people believe in the lies presented by the government. 

So we can say that this novel is a dystopian novel. 

2] Your learning about the novel from online screening.

Screening of any movie helps us to understand the context very clearly. In this movie I learn many things which I want to discuss here. 

The first image of the movie. It starts with the lines 

"who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past". 

If the person is controlling their past, they are able to control the future. But who controls the present is able to control the past ? Is it possible ? Yes, it's possible through the language. And in this novel we can see that people are controlled by language. If we can see sometimes we are also controlled by the language and some speeches. So we have to learn this type of language to understand, when somebody is using this language we can understand and be alert. 

Sometimes any particular person or party can brainwash people's minds. By using the language. We simply believe what they said is true. We hate some people or some party when they said to do that, and we love some party or person when they want. Our thoughts become prejudiced because of this type of brainwash. We can say that,

People started hating people without knowing people !!

So we have to first know everything about the person and then make any prejudice about them. And don't believe simply what others say, but to do clear things with ourselves. 

As we see in the movie, the workers are controlled by the government. So we have to open our eyes to see what is going around and we have to be alert of every situation that can control us. And yes, they are not controlled physically but mentally ! That's why this point is very important to be aware of. 

One other thing I learned from this movie is we have to stay away from friends like O'Brien. He was first familiar with Winston, but later on we came to know that he was a secret police. So we have to check every person with whom we are believing.

3] What according to you is the central theme of this novel ?

According to me the central theme of the novel is Loss of Identity and Independence.

Totalitarian governments often adopt strategies that make people lose identities and independence so that the citizens will not question the supremacy of the governing class. Thus, proving that totalitarianism, which is one of its major themes in the novel, has ripped people of their own personality. The uniformity in food, clothes and what the people hear and absorb in 1984 shows that the Party and its supposed head, Big Brother, are engaged in erasing the individualities and identities. Winston Smith’s feeling of criminality in writing his diary is a dangerous act. The final torture scene when O’Brien confronts Winston to erase his integrity and his significant resistance brings out response from O’Brien. He explains to Winston Smith that he is the last man on earth if he is harboring rebellious thoughts. This is an example of how individuality and identity are not tolerated in totalitarian regimes. 

4] What do you understand by the term 'Orwellian' ?

This term "Orwellian" was named after British author Eric Blair. It is an adjective describing a situation, idea, or societal condition that George Orwell identified as being destructive to the welfare of a free and open society.  This term includes the hypnotic state of cognitive dissonance called doublethink. In which one is compelled to disregard their own perception. This might sound like something that can only happen in totalitarian regimes, but Orwell was warning us about the potential for this occurring even in democratic societies. And this is why "authoritarian" alone does not make "Orwellian". 

Language and words have the power to shape our  thoughts and opinions. Language is the currency of politics, forming the basis of society from the most common, Everyday interactions to the highest ideals. Orwell urged us to protect our language because ultimately our ability to think and communicate clearly is what stands between us and a world where war is peace and freedom is slavery. So this is the term "Orwellian". 

Thank you.

1264 words

7555 characters