Hello,
This blogpost is part of thinking activity, Articles on postcolonial studies given by Dilip Barad sir, Department of English, MKBU.
Hello,
This blogpost is part of thinking activity, Articles on postcolonial studies given by Dilip Barad sir, Department of English, MKBU.
Hello,
This part of thinking activity on Dr sarvapalli Radhakrishnan as a Prose Writer given by Prakruti Ma'am, Department of English, MKBU.
During a time when few Indian writers were expressing themselves in English, Radhakrishnan led the way, encouraging others to follow suit. His scholarly revisit to the ancient texts of the Vedas and Upanishads gained attention and appreciation, particularly during the Swadeshi movement, when the revival of Indian culture and heritage was a focal point. Through his interpretations, he brought these forgotten texts into the contemporary conversation, providing fresh insights into their philosophical depths and presenting Hinduism in a renewed light.
Radhakrishnan’s impact extended beyond his writings. He delivered lectures at some of the most prestigious universities around the world, where his ability to articulate Hindu philosophy in English left a lasting impression. These lectures, later compiled into books, presented an image of an Indian intellectual capable of engaging with complex philosophical discourse in the global academic arena. His eloquence and clarity helped dispel misconceptions about Hinduism and showcased the depth of Indian thought.
Additionally, Radhakrishnan contributed significantly to the improvement of higher education in India. He chaired the Radhakrishnan Commission, a body set up to assess the condition of university education in the country and recommend reforms. The commission’s suggestions played a key role in shaping and enhancing the Indian education system, making his influence felt not only in philosophical circles but also in the educational domain.
In summary, Radhakrishnan's contributions to Indian Writing in English were far-reaching, improving the Western understanding of Hinduism, setting an example for Indian intellectuals, and promoting higher education reforms in India. Through his works and lectures, he bridged the gap between Eastern and Western thought, elevating the stature of Indian philosophy in global academic discussions.
The Swadeshi movement was meant to make India self-reliant by boycotting British goods. In the novel, Tagore shows both the good and the bad sides of the movement. On one hand, it was about fighting for freedom and independence. On the other hand, some people used the movement for their own selfish reasons, which led to violence and chaos.
Tagore gives us a balanced view of the Swadeshi movement. While it aimed to create change and independence, it also caused harm when people followed it blindly, without thinking about right and wrong.
The love triangle in The Home and the World critically reflects the conflict between idealism and passion in both personal and political spheres. Nikhilesh represents calm, ethical love and moderate nationalism, valuing respect and individual freedom. However, his passive approach makes him vulnerable in both his marriage and political views.
Sandeep, on the other hand, uses passion and manipulation, symbolizing extreme nationalism and self-interest. His pursuit of Bimala mirrors his exploitation of the Swadeshi movement for personal gain, revealing the dangers of unchecked political fanaticism.
Bimala is caught between these two opposing forces, reflecting the personal struggle between traditional values (represented by Nikhilesh) and the seductive allure of radical action (represented by Sandeep). Her emotional journey shows the cost of allowing politics to invade personal relationships.
Bimala’s journey reflects the inner struggle many people felt at the time—whether to stay focused on personal duties at home or get involved in the larger political fight for freedom. While she initially falls for Sandeep’s fiery speeches, she later realizes that his version of nationalism is selfish and harmful. In the end, she regrets her choices but cannot undo the damage that has been done to her marriage and personal life.
In a critical perspective, Nikhilesh represents the idealistic side of nationalism, rooted in ethics and humanism. He believes that real freedom must begin with personal integrity and self-discipline. Nikhilesh embodies Tagore's vision of rational, peaceful leadership that values individual rights and opposes the aggressive, emotional approach of extremists. His reluctance to control Bimala shows his belief in personal freedom, but this also becomes a weakness, as it leads to his passive suffering when she becomes influenced by Sandeep.
Sandeep, on the other hand, represents the darker side of nationalism, characterized by emotional manipulation, violence, and selfish ambition. While he outwardly supports the Swadeshi cause, Sandeep’s actions reveal his desire for power and control, more than genuine concern for India’s freedom. His approach highlights the dangers of fanaticism, where political movements are exploited for personal gain, and ethics are discarded in the pursuit of victory.
Critically, Tagore uses these two characters to contrast moral nationalism with dangerous, unchecked patriotism. Nikhilesh's ideals, while noble, may seem too passive in times of crisis, whereas Sandeep's intensity, though effective in rallying support, leads to moral decay. This tension reflects Tagore’s skepticism about the direction of the Swadeshi movement and serves as a critique of extremist approaches to freedom struggles.
Example:
"Gora" is a novel by Rabindranath Tagore about a young man in late 19th century Calcutta who strongly believes in traditional Hinduism and Indian nationalism. As he interacts with people of different beliefs, especially from the Brahmo Samaj, he begins to question his rigid views. The story climaxes when Gora discovers he was born to Irish parents, forcing him to reconsider his ideas about identity and religion.
Both "Gora" and "The Home and the World" are set in Bengal during times of social change. They explore how people's personal beliefs and identities are challenged by new ideas and social movements. While the specific focus of each novel differs, both reflect Tagore's interest in examining the complexities of Indian society as it faced questions of tradition, modernity, and national identity in the early 20th century.
Word Count: 953 Midnight's Children by Salman Rushdie
Hello,
This blog is written as a response to a task Midnight's Children assigned by Dilip Barad sir, Department of English MKBU.
Salman Rushdie's choice of "Midnight's Children" over "Children of Midnight" as the title for his novel is an intriguing one.
By putting "Midnight's" first, Rushdie emphasizes the moment of India's independence - that crucial stroke of midnight - rather than the children themselves. This subtle shift in focus places historical context at the forefront, suggesting that the story is as much about a nation's birth as it is about the individuals born at that moment.
The possessive form in "Midnight's Children" also implies a stronger connection between the children and that pivotal moment in time. It's as if midnight itself has claimed ownership of these kids, tying their fates inextricably to India's destiny. This plays into one of the book's big themes: how personal lives are shaped by historical events.
Moreover, "Midnight's Children" has a more mythical quality to it. It sounds like the title of a fairy tale or legend, which fits well with the novel's use of magical realism. The phrase suggests these kids are somehow magical or special, born with extraordinary abilities or destinies - which, in the story, they are.
While "Children of Midnight" might seem more logical given its frequency in the text, it doesn't pack the same punch. It feels more literal, less evocative. "Midnight's Children" leaves more to the imagination, inviting readers to question what it means and how it relates to the story.
Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Childrenis a powerful novel that explores India’s journey after independence, and it can be analyzed through postcolonial theory to understand its deeper meanings. One important concept in postcolonial theory is Orientalism, introduced by Edward Said. Said explained how the West often portrayed the East as exotic and inferior. Rushdie challenges this in Midnight's Children by offering a complex portrayal of India, rejecting the simplistic Western view. His use of magical realism blends history and fantasy, showing that India cannot be reduced to a single narrative.
Hybridity, a concept by Homi Bhabha, is central to the novel. It refers to the mixing of cultures and identities in colonized societies. The main character, Saleem Sinai, embodies this idea. He represents both Indian and Western cultures but feels like he doesn’t fully belong to either. This reflects the idea that postcolonial identities are fluid and constantly evolving, which is a major theme in the novel.
Gayatri Spivak’s idea of the subaltern—marginalized groups whose voices are often silenced—also comes into play. Saleem is the narrator, but his story is filled with gaps and biases, showing that he cannot fully represent the experiences of all Indians, especially those from marginalized backgrounds. This highlights the idea that not every voice in a postcolonial society gets to be heard.
Finally, Frantz Fanon’s warnings about postcolonial nationalism are evident in the novel’s critique of India’s political struggles after independence. Saleem becomes disillusioned with the country's leadership, especially during the Emergency period, reflecting Fanon’s concern that newly independent nations can repeat the mistakes of their colonial rulers.
In conclusion, Midnight’s Children engages deeply with postcolonial theory, offering a rich and nuanced exploration of India’s postcolonial identity. It critiques the legacy of colonialism and the challenges of creating a new national identity while highlighting the complexities of history, culture, and personal narratives.
3. The Role of 'English' in the Novel
In Midnight's Children, Salman Rushdie uses English in a distinctive way, often described as "chutnified" or "de-doxified" English. This refers to his blending of standard English with the rhythms, idioms, and vocabulary of Indian languages like Hindi, Urdu, and others, creating a unique, hybrid form of the language. By doing so, Rushdie subverts the colonial legacy of English as a language of power and domination, instead transforming it into a tool that reflects the diverse and multilingual reality of postcolonial India.
This "chutnification" of English allows Rushdie to express the complexities of Indian identity and experience in a postcolonial context. The language in the novel often shifts in tone, moving from formal, literary English to casual, conversational forms that incorporate Indian slang and references. This mirrors the novel’s broader themes of hybridity and the mixing of cultures.
Rushdie’s use of a hybrid English can also be understood through the lens of Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o's ideas on language in postcolonial societies. While Ngũgĩ advocates for a return to indigenous languages, Rushdie’s approach is different. He does not reject English entirely but instead transforms it, making it his own and showing how language, even one associated with colonialism, can be decolonized and used to represent the voices of formerly colonized people. His playful, mixed use of language becomes a form of resistance, challenging the notion that English should remain a rigid, standardized language.
In this way, Rushdie’s "chutnified" English in Midnight's Children becomes a reflection of the novel’s hybrid world, where identities, histories, and languages are all constantly intersecting and evolving.
4) Portrayal of the Emergency (1975-77)
Salman Rushdie, in his novel Midnight’s Children, sharply criticizes the Emergency. He portrays it as a “cardinal sin” against democracy, using satire to depict Indira Gandhi as a dictator-like figure. For Rushdie, the Emergency was a time of fear, repression, and abuse of power, which violated fundamental principles of freedom and truth. He uses fiction to highlight the moral wrongs of this period, focusing not just on political issues but also on the deeper moral consequences.
Salman Rushdie's decision not to meet Indira Gandhi during her visit to London in 1981, despite being invited. Rushdie had recently published his critically acclaimed novel "Midnight's Children," which contained harsh criticisms of Gandhi. When Gandhi invited him to a gathering, Rushdie declined, citing his status as a near-citizen of London and his reluctance to bow down to political powers. In his absence, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher praised the novel as a significant contribution to Anglo-Indian cultural relations. Gandhi, who had read the book and was deeply offended by its content, was reportedly furious at both Rushdie and Thatcher. The speaker also notes that Rushdie and Gandhi, despite their significant age difference and political disagreements, shared commonalities, as both were born in 1917 and the novel's opening year.
The question of truth and imaginative truth is central to how both Katherine Frank and Salman Rushdie portray Indira Gandhi. Frank’s biography sticks to the factual events of her life, while Rushdie uses fiction to explore symbolic and deeper truths about power and democracy.
5. Metaphor of Bulldozer
Salman Rushdie's use of the bulldozer as a symbol in "Midnight's Children" is a remarkably effective literary device. This analysis provides valuable insights into how Rushdie employs this imagery to convey complex themes of governmental oppression and societal erasure.
In the novel, the bulldozer represents more than mere physical destruction. It becomes a powerful metaphor for the authoritarian state's ability to obliterate communities, identities, and histories. Rushdie's portrayal emphasizes how unchecked political power can dehumanize individuals, reducing them to insignificant objects in the path of progress.
The irony of "civic beautification" programs, as depicted in the novel, is particularly striking. Rushdie juxtaposes the notion of improvement with acts of brutal destruction, highlighting the disconnect between government rhetoric and the harsh realities faced by citizens.
A poignant example is the loss of a character's silver spittoon to the bulldozers. This incident symbolizes how personal and cultural histories can be carelessly erased in the name of modernization. It underscores the profound impact of political actions on individual lives and memories.
The analysis also draws important parallels between Rushdie's metaphorical use of the bulldozer and contemporary instances of state-sanctioned destruction. This connection underscores the enduring relevance of Rushdie's symbolism and its applicability to modern political contexts.
By utilizing the bulldozer as a central symbol, Rushdie offers readers a tangible means of understanding abstract concepts of power, oppression, and resistance. This literary technique effectively critiques the misuse of governmental authority and its far-reaching consequences on society.
References:
Barad, Dilip. (2024). Erasure and Oppression: The Bulldozer as a Tool of Authoritarianism in Midnight's Children. 10.13140/RG.2.2.18505.15209.
Barad, Dilip. (2024). Postcolonial Voices: Analyzing Midnight's Children Through Theoretical Lenses. 10.13140/RG.2.2.16493.19689.
Word Count: 1193
Images: 2
Thank you
Plagiarism in Academia: Understanding Cultural Roots, Digital Influence, and Educational Approaches Name: Trupti Naik Batch: M.A Sem 4 [2023...