# Debaprasad
Bandyopadhyay *
ABSTRACT
This
collection, mainly written in Bangla, represents various aspects of
Rabindranath Tagore’s contributions in environmentalism, economics, language
planning, literary theory, philosophy and a comparative study of the philosophy
of Marx, Rabindranath and Gandhi.
In the paper, (অন-)অর্থনীতিবিদ রবীন্দ্রনাথ" [City and Village" & "(Non-), The author tried
to establish Rabindranath Tagore as a non-mainstream non-conventional
economist/fiscal auditor on the basis of Tagore’s different texts, viz. novels,
verses, songs, plays and essays. The author emphasized on the following points:
a) Tagore
thought that he was a parasite as he was not capable of doing necessary labor
and he was depending on surplus labor of the other.
b) According to Tagore, city is also a parasite
as it is sucking the blood of the villages.
c) Tagore
reinterpreted the concept of necessary labor by introducing a new category:
voluntary labor with pleasure/toiling with full of joissance and of course
without alienation.
d) He condemned the extraction of others’ labor-time/
surplus labor and critrisized usaries .
e) He had given the different semantics of private property, which was not merely property in the material sense of the term, but it is a possesion of creative mind.
e) He had given the different semantics of private property, which was not merely property in the material sense of the term, but it is a possesion of creative mind.
f) Tagore interpreted money-sign as /taka-rupak/
“money-simile”, by means of which unequals have become equals by some necessary
and sufficient conditions. In the “rupaka” figure of speech the identitity and
difference between the object compared and comparable are blurred.
g) The
“body-politic” of democracy is the joy-ride of the super-rich. Here “opinions
are manufactured” (1924). Tagore anticipated the concept of dollar-vote and entered
into the domain of political economy.
h) Tagore
introduced a novel concept of surplus freedom provided by the cessation of
activities (karmavirati) / leisure (udbritto ObokaS) that could be executed if
and only if the voluntary labor with pleasure might be performed.
i) He introduced ecology as a variable as a part of his economics. This is one of the unprecedented contributions of Tagore. He was against the extraction of wealth of earth by the violent anthropogenic intervention.
j) He emphasized on the passion of greed as a part of his epistemology. It can be reinterpreted in psychoanalytic terms.
k) Tagore introduced “samavaya” (Co-operative) through the activities of a society called “Sriniketan”, though the semantics of this term is totally different. The author of this paper explained the difference between the detachable (samjoga) and non-detachable (samavaya)relations. As for example, suppose that we are connected by some non-eco-friendly electronic gadgets like CPU, satellites etc. , i.e. we are connected in the web—we have some definite relations. These relations can easily be disconnected according to our whims or by some catastrophic situation. However, may you detach the quivering and leaves when you are perceiving quivering leaves? This is another type of non-detachable relation, which is de-sign-ated as “samavaya”. The small-big i and I non-detachable relationship/communication without any instruments is something different from the anti-green techno-centric communication network between you and me.
In the paper, বুনো রবি ঠাকুর ( Wild
Rabindranath Tagore), the author extended the previous paper and
described Tagore’s inclination towards ideal forest, hermitage, though the
author pointed out some problems in Tagore’s agenda. However, the discontents
of modern civilization was emphasized by referring to the problems of
anthropogenic global heating. (see also: o King, Stop
Killing Deer Of Our Hermitage: Environmental consciousness in Indian science
and technology)
On the other hand, in the book, তর্জমার তর্জনী বা একলব্যের বুড়ো আঙ্গুল (The Governance of
Translation and Ekalavya's Thumb), the author dealt with a different
issue related to translation studies. The first
part of the monograph deals with the Dronacarya-Ekalavya relationship in case
of translation by simply summarizing the propositions made in the paper “তর্জমার তর্জনী বা একলব্যের বুড়ো আঙ্গুল [The Ekalavya Relation: Modernist Locals’
Anti-Modernist Response(s)]”, which elaborates the association of translation
enterprise with colonialism, violence and pedagogy . The second part of the
monograph subscribes those propositions with an ad hoc hypothesis: Rabindranath
Tagore translated Eliot’s ‘(The)Journey of the Magi’ without reading ‘Journey
of the Magi.’ (see also: the PowerPoint presentation: Impossibility
Of Translation: A Case Study)
This peculiar as well as surprising hypothesis is subscribed by the chronology of events occurred within the pretext of confronting derivative modernity by Tagore. The Bengali young ‘modern’ thinkers, writers poets, viz. Dhurjatiprasad Mukhopadhyay (better known as D.P. Mukherji), Sudhindranath Dutta, Buddhadev Basu, Bishnu De et al., were debating with Tagore on the norms of newly introduced concept of ‘modernity’ and particularly on Eliot’s contribution on the modern ‘international’(?) literature. This polemic is elaborated by the investigator with the citation of four different Ekalavya texts of the same poem, ‘Journey of the Magi’ to reveal the emission of surplus meanings by deploying ankanta (theory of many perspectives) method.
The paper, “বাংলার খোয়াবনামা (Bangla: A Genealogical Fantasy)”, is a Bangla
translation/elaborated version of the two English papers: Language
Planner Rabindranath Tagore and Colony's
Burden: a Case of Extending Bangla. The Indian census reports since 1871 were put here to
show the lacunas of statistical survey techniques that helped to construct
genealogical fantasy and nation statist boundary. Secondly, the tensed
relationship between Laksminath BejBarua, an Asamiya writer, and Rabindranth
Tagore was shown to understand the impact of extra-linguistic variables at the
moment of a birth of nation in the context of colonialism. Thirdly, the role of
print capitalism was depicted through the endeavor of Fakirmohan Senapati, an
Odia writer, by analyzing the discourse of his biography.
All the linguistic movements in colonial India lead to the demand/desire for autonomy in different spheres and were linked with anti-imperialistic nationalist movement, though, on the contrary, all these movements had become the mirror image of dominant others’ nation statist mimic imagination. In this way, there was a demand for “autonomous” and “pure” tool indigenous grammar (free from “adulteration”) of a well-defined enumerated and “pure” language which is selected centrally as a standard language. Therefore, language-managers of a given community did two things: a) they, as a member of imagined community, defined the language boundary (i.e. selection of standard and extension of the standard language from centre to periphery) and b) managed that language with the help of a tool called grammar.
The author also tried to show the Bengali intellectuals’ (language judge/-police/-managers) perspectives (19th. C. and the first three decades of the 20th C) on the issue of autonomy of two neighboring languages, viz. Oriya and Asamiya, two neighboring languages of Bangla. The paper shows a classical centre-periphery relation, where Bengal as a centre, wanted to subsume the periphery through hegemonic selving in course of standardizing and extending the political geography of Bangla with the supposed language module. The situation shows dialectic of hegemonic inclusion, which creates internal colonization, and thus captive languages with a feeling of derivative nationalism were trying to combat external colonization as well. These cases in the colonial period and at the time of the birth of a new nation states might help us to apprehend the post-colonial withdrawal syndrome from the other defeated varieties (i.e., so called “dialects”).
All the linguistic movements in colonial India lead to the demand/desire for autonomy in different spheres and were linked with anti-imperialistic nationalist movement, though, on the contrary, all these movements had become the mirror image of dominant others’ nation statist mimic imagination. In this way, there was a demand for “autonomous” and “pure” tool indigenous grammar (free from “adulteration”) of a well-defined enumerated and “pure” language which is selected centrally as a standard language. Therefore, language-managers of a given community did two things: a) they, as a member of imagined community, defined the language boundary (i.e. selection of standard and extension of the standard language from centre to periphery) and b) managed that language with the help of a tool called grammar.
The author also tried to show the Bengali intellectuals’ (language judge/-police/-managers) perspectives (19th. C. and the first three decades of the 20th C) on the issue of autonomy of two neighboring languages, viz. Oriya and Asamiya, two neighboring languages of Bangla. The paper shows a classical centre-periphery relation, where Bengal as a centre, wanted to subsume the periphery through hegemonic selving in course of standardizing and extending the political geography of Bangla with the supposed language module. The situation shows dialectic of hegemonic inclusion, which creates internal colonization, and thus captive languages with a feeling of derivative nationalism were trying to combat external colonization as well. These cases in the colonial period and at the time of the birth of a new nation states might help us to apprehend the post-colonial withdrawal syndrome from the other defeated varieties (i.e., so called “dialects”).
In the paper, “দোস্ত আইয়ুব সাহচর্যে একটি সাহিত্যতাত্ত্বিক পরিভ্রমণ”,
Anekantavada is introduced in the context of
Tagore’s philosophy through the analysis of Abu S. Ayyub.
For detailed discussion, kindly follow hyperlinks (blue-colored titles):
·
2015.
“মা-রে-গা: মার্কস, রবীন্দ্রনাথ, গান্ধী[Marx-Rabindranath-Gandhi: Ma-Re-Ga] (Article along
with a review of the collection “Debating Gandhi” (Oxford, 2006), edited by A.
Raghuramaraju. Pranab
K Chakraborty ed. Interaction. X.
(pp. 15-25). ISSN 2277-4335
Download (.pdf)
·
2015.
বুনো রবি ঠাকুর ( Wild Rabindranath Tagore) Pathik Basu ed. Shrayan Yearbook 2015. (pp.86-98) Kolkata:
Shrayan.
Download (.pdf)
- 2014. O King, Stop Killing Deer Of Our Hermitage: Environmental Consciousness In Indian Science And Technology . National Seminar on Science and Technology in Ancient India. University Grants Commission; Dept of Sanskrit, Lalbaba College, Belur; Ramkrishna Mission Vidyamandir. Nov 18, 2014.
·
2011. “(অন-)অর্থনীতিবিদ রবীন্দ্রনাথ" [City and Village" & "(Non-) Economist Rabindranath
Tagore]", Sengupta, Arnab ed. Akkha(r)jatra. IX:11. (pp.7-46) Belghoria,
Kolkata Reprinted in 2011. Barun Kumar Chakroborty ed. Anna Rabindranath, Nana Rabindranath. (pp.336-360), Kolkata: Pustak
Bipani. ISBN 81-85471-106-1.
Download (.pdf)
·
2011.
Review of the book "Rabindranath:
vakpatih visvamanah Vol I"“রবীন্দ্রনাথ বিষয়ে একটিঅগভীর সংকলন” চট্টোপাধ্যায়, সুমন সম্পা.একদিন।10/09/10/2011 (Book Review Pg. 4) 5:91.
Kolkata. RNI: WBBEN/2006/ 17404
Download (.pdf)
·
2008.
“বিশ্ব সাথে 'যোগ' -বিহার ”.
[Travelling With The Universe] Bektitto, Somiti, Santobiplab. [Personality,
Horizontal Praxis and peaceful Revolution] Ed. Basu, Pathik. Kolkata: Shrayan.
(pp.188-223)
Download (.pdf)
·
2006. তর্জমার তর্জনী বা একলব্যের বুড়ো আঙ্গুল (The Governance of Translation and
Ekalavya's Thumb).
Rabindranath’s Translation of Eliot’s “Journey of the Magi” and the plurality
of translations. Kolkata: Janapadaprayas. ISBN-81-902893-1-4
Download (.pdf)
·
2006.
“বাংলার খোয়াবনামা (Bangla: A Genealogical Fantasy)”. SOtobOrser aloke bONgo bhONgo, Kolkata:
Pustak Bipani. (pp. 426- 447). First published in 2005.Chattopadhyay, D. ed. Parikatha. VII:2 (pp. 320-40)
Download (.pdf)
·
1999.
“দোস্ত আইয়ুব সাহচর্যে একটি সাহিত্যতাত্ত্বিক পরিভ্রমণ” (Abu. S. Ayyub and Literary
Theory)”. Janapadaprayas.6.I :3-4 (pp .23-76)January. Chuchrah
Download (.pdf)
·
1997. “Language-planner Rabindranath.”Pondicherry Institute of Language and Culture Journal of
Dravidian Studies. VIII:1. (pp.89-95).
Download (.pdf)
·
1992.(with
Debnath,S.)”সংখ্যাতাত্ত্বিকের সাহিত্যবিচার” :গল্পগুচ্ছ”
[Stylstic Interpretation by Statisticians: Tagore’s Short Stories.]Samatat:93. Kolkata. (pp.515- 520). R.N.
18270/69, ISSN0036-374X.
Download (.pdf)
·
1991.
“তোমার ন্যায়ের দন্ড”
[your scepter of morals]Ei katha. 8:
16. Kolkata. (pp.5- 13 ) Decl No. 108/82.
Download (.pdf)
·
1985. “Dante’s Portrait by Rabindranath Tagore?!” Pratikkhan.
II: 13. 2 June, 1985 (pg. 11) Kolkata. Response to Purnendu Patri's Article on
"Rabindranather Dante" (2-16 May, 1985)
Download (.pdf)
·
1985.
“বীক্ষণে রবীন্দ্রনাথ আর সার্ত্রে” . Brahmachari Achyatu Caitanya ed. Arindam. Ramkrishna
Bimalananda Math. Annul Number. (page not mentioned) Kolkata. Download (.pdf)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.