OSCAR REVIEW

We speak of world movements and have a fair acquaintance with the
principles and details of Western life and thought, but we do not always
sufficiently realise where we actually stand today and how to apply our
bookish principles to our situation in life. […]

We talk – a little too glibly perhaps – of a conflict of the ideas and
ideals of the West with our traditional ideas and ideals. In many cases, it
is confusion rather than a conflict, and the real problem is to clear up
the confusion and to make it develop in the first instance into a definite
conflict. The danger is in the complacent acquiescence in the confusion.
The realisation of a conflict of ideals implies a deepening of the soul.
There is conflict proper only when one is really serious about ideals, and
feels each ideal to be a matter of life and death. We sometimes
sentimentally indulge in the thought of a conflict before we are really
serious with either ideal.”

- “Swaraj in Ideas” (1929), Krishna Chandra Bhattacharya

Nearly a hundred years ago, Acharya Krishna Chandra Bhattacharya, India’s
pre-eminent modern philosopher from the early 20th century, had given a
discourse named “Swaraj in Ideas” before his pupils at Hooghly College. In
this discourse, he warned us of several pitfalls in the business of
intellectually navigating through a modern world, where ideas and ideals of
one’s own national identity are bound to interact with those from the world
outside. In the process of showing where such pitfalls may lurk in, in a
language and in a style that is strikingly lucid and persuasive, the
Acharya especially highlighted two things: first, the danger of not
sufficiently realising how and where to apply certain principles or ideas
that we may have learned in our schools; and second, the folly of indulging
in glib talk about a conflict between the ideas and ideals of the West and
those of our own tradition, when in reality there may not be a real
conflict but only confusion regarding the ideas and ideals involved. The
Acharya’s warnings proved prophetic in a recent predicament involving an
international film awards event and our mixed reactions to its outcomes
where India was concerned.

Not one, but two Indian entries clinched the winner’s title at this year’s
Annual Academy Awards, which is popularly known as the Oscars. At this
95th edition
of the Oscars, held in Los Angeles, USA, the Telugu song ‘*Naatu Naatu*’
from S.S. Rajamouli’s 2022 blockbuster nationalist drama ‘*RRR’* made it to
the top in the ‘Best Original Song’ category, and so did Kartiki Gonsalves’
‘*The Elephant Whisperers’* in the category of ‘Best Documentary Short’.
Naturally, many Indians found themselves elated at the newsbreak of this
double success.

That elation is hardly a matter of surprise. But what is indeed a little
surprising is that some Indians are expressing disgruntlement over the
celebratory mood displayed by their fellow countrymen. And the reason why
they’re disgruntled over this turn of events is – you’re in for another
surprise – not their disagreement over the award choices made by the
Academy’s voting members. Instead, it is a concept that this disgruntled
section has turned into a slogan by adopting a crude reductionist approach
to understand and apply. It is a concept that has only recently gained
traction among this unhappy section, which consists mainly of social media
commentators and a few writers, who claim to be speaking/writing from a
‘Hindu standpoint’.

As is the wont of social media opinion peddling, users find slogans to be a
useful tool – because they’re simplistic, they don’t invite or even require
people to do much thinking (or any thinking at all); and thus, social media
users, relieved of the necessity to use their mental faculties, can quickly
conjure around them a virtual mob of followers who may hit ‘like’, ‘share’,
and ‘subscribe’ at the drop of a hat. After all, isn’t that what
commentating on social media is about, for the most part?  Be that as it
may, in this particular instance, the slogan being spouted by the
aforementioned section of social media commentators, who are disgruntled
over Indians celebrating the success of Indian entries at the Oscars, is
the voguishly oversimplified term ‘decoloniality’.

Vaguely understood by the sloganeers themselves, decoloniality happens to
be a theoretical concept which encapsulates a culture-specific way of being
and knowing, and which provides a radical alternative to the one that is
forcefully imposed upon much of the world by Euro-American colonialism
throughout history. Decoloniality, thus understood and practised, can
become a key instrument in dismantling the hegemony of the colonialist
Euro-American way of being and knowing, which has a universalistic
pretension of an almost fanatic nature, and which seeks to dominate the
minds and bodies belonging to every other culture on this planet. Each
erstwhile (or presently) colonised nation or culture that has somehow
managed to survive the onslaughts of colonialism in one form or another,
has the potential to evolve and offer its own version of decoloniality,
based on its peculiar historical experience and its national character.

Like some African and Latin American nations with a really long and
harrowing experience of European colonialism, present-day India, too, has
evolved its own distinct form of decoloniality. But India had to withstand
a double whammy of successive colonialist projects: at first, she faced a
particularly traumatising Islamic rule across various large parts of the
Subcontinent, followed by the British colonial rule that engulfed almost
the whole country and invaded every little aspect of Indian life. Barring a
few African nations, no other nation or culture had to undergo such a
distressing and prolonged experience of political and cultural colonialism.

However, there’s still a silver lining to this dark period’s history. Due
to the sheer historical and geographical magnitude of the twofold colonial
impact, India’s resistance has accordingly evolved to be much more layered
and richer than any other form of anticolonial resistance anywhere in the
world. In fact, other nations have drawn inspiration from it to resist and
change the dehumanising status quo that colonialists sought (and, in
several instances, are still seeking) to perpetuate. Add to this India’s
civilisational legacy, which itself had evolved through millennia of
pre-colonial Indian history, and through multiple socio-cultural
revolutions occurring at both precolonial and colonial periods, it helped
India surge boldly ahead into the future, braving all sorts of odds along
the way. In the process, the Indian civilisation has wrought for itself a
wonderful power of assimilating differences into its mainstream, without
allowing any fundamental changes to occur in its character.

These evolutions have taken a long curve through India’s vast historical
timespan – emerging rather slowly through the first fifteen centuries of
the common era, building its groundwork upon the shoulders of saints and
warriors who defended dharma in the face of Islamic invasions and
proselytising efforts – but it picked up a highly accelerated rate of
growth only thereafter, reaching a climax in the 19th and 20th centuries
during the British colonial period.

Moreover, this homespun Indian decoloniality has been shaped by historical
circumstances and cultural currents that are not exclusive to India, a
country which has constantly interacted with various nations of the world
in these slow-paced intervening centuries, before reaching an apogee of
cross-cultural transactions, especially with Europe and America, in the
last two hundred-odd years. Several world historical events, and the
influence of exemplary leadership in such events – including the French
Revolution, the American Revolutionary War, the Italian Carbonari Movement,
the Unification of Italy, the shaping of the modern German state under
Bismarck, the Irish Revolutionary Movement, and the Russian Revolution –
left a deep imprint upon the best minds of India in those two centuries of
tumultuous political upheavals around the world.

Despite all these strong currents of influence rushing in from all
directions, India in the 19th and 20th centuries has attempted, even more
vigorously than she has done in the past, to assimilate those external
elements into her time-tested civilisational character. The special
contribution of the dynamic modern era consisting of the last two centuries
is that it gave India’s own version of decoloniality a very definite and
robust shape, as against an amorphous, disjointed decolonial narrative of
the era that immediately precedes it. India in those two critical centuries
was blessed with some extraordinary minds and personalities in the fields
of religion, education, philosophy, politics, the arts and the sciences:
viz., Raja Rammohun Roy, Pundit Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Bankim Chandra
Chattopadhyay, Thakur Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Swami Vivekananda,
Rabindranath Tagore, Sri Aurobindo, Krishna Chandra Bhattacharya, Mahatma
Gandhi, Jagadish Chandra Bose, Abanindranath Tagore, Ananda Coomaraswamy,
Nandalal Bose, Sri Anirvan, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, Ramachandra
Gandhi, and many others. It is thanks to their exemplary lives, their
self-effacing, benevolent actions, the profundity of their thinking, and
the clarity of their articulation, that the assimilative decoloniality of
Modern India was made future-ready for India herself, and for the rest of
the world, even before the twentieth century came to a close.

Thus, a careful perusal of Indian history reveals that centuries of
life-threatening and all-sacrificing struggle started bearing fruit with a
cultural revolution in the nineteenth century, which in turn gave rise to a
bold new anticolonial political revolution at the very beginning of the
twentieth. And it is mainly due to the momentum generated during that
revolutionary era, that India has managed to maintain a connection,
howsoever thin, with her living but endangered civilisational inheritance
till this day through thick and thin, through all the deafening tumult of
historical-political-social upheavals, and despite having suffered two
prolonged, severe bouts of foreign colonial rule at the hands of various
West Asian and European nations.

Precious little of this historical complexity is reflected in the popular
discourse that reduces decoloniality to a mere slogan. Slogans as such are
not necessarily bad; they help you get excited over things that are
sometimes worth getting excited about, but there is a kind of
unidirectional inertia of motion attached to the business of sloganeering,
that ends up zombifying human beings by stripping them off their God-given
power to reflect.

Having closely followed the popular discourse arising out of a supposedly
nationalist coterie, it seems to me that an ill-understood, ill-digested,
and childishly flawed perception of decoloniality, as well as an equally
ill-conceived area of its application, is lately being used as a bundle of
sticks to beat some unsuspecting and rather easy targets with. The latest
of such victims is the Indian crowd celebrating the success of Indian films
like ‘*RRR’ *at various competitive platforms overseas. Their fault? Merely
that they’re elated at the success of these Indian films at some foreign
awards ceremony and are celebrating the same.

Little do our decoloniality sloganeers realise that competition, of any
kind and on whatever platform, does have the inherent tendency to build up
a kind of intense anticipation around it, which should be dissipated, and
can only be expressed, through a momentary outburst at one’s success or
failure. Not everyone happens to be the stoic *sthitaprajña* that the *Bhagavad
Gita* presents as an ideal – least of all our decoloniality sloganeers. And
that is by no means a hopeless scenario; even competition can usher in some
good if it is fairly conducted, and if it generates a healthy desire in the
participants’ minds to excel at their craft. The competitive spirit that is
fundamental to the concept of sporting events is a case in point. Will our
decoloniality sloganeers now decry international sports as well? Will they
denounce the various prestigious recognitions that Indian cricket teams,
Indian hockey teams, Indian football teams, Indian athletes and
sportspersons have over the years gained, and still continue to gain,
through their hard work and performance in competitive events organised
internationally, or by a foreign country exclusively, such as the Olympics
or the US Open tennis tournament?

How I wish these deprecators of the Oscars had instead directed their
‘critical lenses’ at the very idea of introducing competition in the field
of cultural content production – like the great poet Rabindranath Tagore
had once done in his essay “*Brahmana*” to criticise competition as a
fundamental driving force of the socio-political machinery in Europe. That
would at least have been a much more genuine critique of the economy of
such show businesses that masquerade as measures of cultural excellence –
something patently foreign in the traditional cultural domain across
civilisations, and especially so in terms of Indian cultural sensibilities.

I also wonder if these geniuses have ever stopped to consider the fact that
these Oscar-winning Indian films are now going to attract more attention,
and so will the works of those who have been involved in the making of
these films.  I for my part hadn’t even heard the name of *The Elephant
Whisperers* before it won the coveted prize; and it is only after the news
broke that I noticed its presence on Netflix, despite being a regular
visitor to the Netflix <https://www.news18.com/topics/netflix/> website.
When I finally did watch this short documentary film, I was struck by the
affectionate depiction of what was a classic vignette of a patently Indian,
Hindu way of life integrated with Nature in perfect harmony. While watching
the documentary, I was reminded of Tagore’s utterance, made in deepest
spiritual conviction, to the effect that God is ever-present in his life by
entering his heart through his relations – father, mother, brothers, wife,
his friends and children, indeed his entire family – when Bomman, one of
the human protagonists of the documentary short subject, observed in all
sincerity and simplicity: “I am proud of being both a priest and a mahout.
Both bring me immense happiness. We pray to Lord Ganesha. Seeing an
elephant, to us, is equivalent to seeing God. God and elephants are one for
me. The way I serve God is the same way I serve the elephants. We take care
of Raghu [an elephant calf, another protagonist from the film] every single
day, which in turn, puts food on my table every day. This is God’s presence
in my life. Without him, we’d have nothing.” That is the whole essence of
Indian civilisation’s attitude to life, summed up in a fraction of a
sequence in ‘*The Elephant Whisperers’*. God bless the film, its characters
and its makers; and God bless the Oscars for thrusting such a film into the
limelight. Indian decoloniality – the Indian way of being and knowing –
will spread across the world through such films, far wider and far more
effectively, than any sulky, preachy sloganeer can ever dream of doing.

And then there is ‘*RRR’*, that operatic celebration of the Indian
nationalist freedom struggle, its revolutionary spirit, its dharma-based
angle of justice and respect for every living being, as also the
celebration of characteristically Indian loyalty towards family, friends,
community, and homeland. Do I personally think the song ‘*Naatu Naatu*’,
for which the film got the Academy Award, is the best thing about the film?
Heck no; neither is it my favourite song from the film (and probably not of
M.M. Keeravani’s either). With my sensibilities, ‘*Komuram Bheemudo*’
appeals to me deeply, but the international audience seems to have gone
gaga over ‘*Naatu Naatu*.’ But that hardly matters in the larger scheme of
things. Thanks to the Oscars recognition of this one element of ‘*RRR’*,
more and more people from various countries, of different generations, and
of diverse tastes are now going to sit through this modern epic, and might
as well take note of several other films made by S.S. Rajamouli. And in the
process, they’d perchance soak in some of the ethos of Indian civilisation
that so obviously pervades his works. Is that a good thing or a bad thing
for India, for Indian civilisation and Indian nationalism? The answer is, I
think, obvious. I can see no downside to an increasing amount of global
attention being directed to Indian cinema, and despite my best efforts at
scepticism, I can think of only prosperous pictures that such attention can
result in. More awareness about India, her history, and her unique way of
being and knowing, is likely to build up a positive image of India and
Indians around the globe.

There’s another side to the farcical pontificating done by our blessed
beloved sloganeers. Apart from reducing a profoundly important concept like
decoloniality to a mere slogan, the air of self-righteousness being put on
by this jargon-happy coterie of superficial social media commentators is
becoming totally nauseating by the hour. Their oversimplified line of
‘reasoning’ goes like this: because we are presently ‘decolonising’
ourselves, we no longer need any kind of validation from the world outside
for what we do! Taking a step further into their murky discourse, not only
do the decoloniality sloganeers claim that international recognition of
indigenous cultural products is irrelevant because India is now
‘decolonising’ herself, they also proclaim to us poor benighted people
their judgment that, since such recognition does not matter, those who
attach any amount of importance to such trifles, are fundamentally lacking
in respect for, or faith in, indigeneity. This sorry excuse for logic could
have simply been dismissed as an object of ridicule, had the sloganeers not
claimed for themselves a moral high ground right on the basis of this
pitifully faulty argument. And it is precisely because of this sort of
one-upmanship practised by our decoloniality sloganeers, dwelling in their
respective social media echo chambers, smugly oblivious of their dopiness,
that the whole thing feels utterly obnoxious.

But let us stick to discussing the quality of thought displayed by their
arguments. Stumbling upon such stunning products of woolly thinking, one
feels dumbstruck at first. When the benumbing effects of this gloating
smugness wear out a little, one starts wondering: whence this complacency,
this sense of being contemporary witnesses – even active participants – of
some imaginary revolutionary present epoch of ‘decolonising’, could have
crept in into the consciousness of Indians living in the 2020s, in the
first place? Living in this era of abject surrender by India to
neo-colonial modes of being and knowing (which, by the way, are nothing but
the old wine of eurocentrism presented in a new, sturdier bottle) in every
single sphere of human culture, from politics to religion to family life,
it is a wonder that one could still feel so overconfidently certain and so
complacent about being ‘decolonised’. Could it be true that these blessed
sloganeers would like themselves and their social media followers to
imagine that this ‘decolonising’ process just started the other day when
one of them woke up to catch their 8 AM bus to work? Or maybe it started
with the onset of the COVID pandemic in 2020, when folks took to performing
Surya Namaskar regularly (only to slacken their newfound enthusiasm for
yogic regularity, or drop the practice altogether, with the return of
normalcy), and when they learned the trick of smattering grammatically
awkward Sanskrit terms all over their usual linguistic medium of thinking,
speaking, and dreaming, namely, English? Or maybe ‘decolonising’ had
started f-a-a-a-r back in the Indian civilisational scale of time – for
example, in 2014, perhaps?

As a matter of fact, Indian decoloniality has been formulated and
articulated in precise terms during the last two centuries, its blueprint
and the direction it ought to take meticulously worked out in the writings
of thought leaders whose names have been already mentioned. At the risk of
sounding repetitive, I must highlight the point that the project of
charting out this unique modern-day version of Indian decoloniality had
reached its climax in the 19th century, it had all the blessings of the
centuries preceding it, and it was completed by the 20th century with a
great and almost sacred sense of urgency. But like the River Saraswati of
yore, a river that is central to the story of our great civilisation’s
past, the Indian decoloniality project has unfortunately lost its way in
the desert sand of present-day democratic electoral politics.

What remains to be done is to educate ourselves in the literature of this
well-formulated, sharply-articulated Indian decoloniality, and bring back
the Indian way of being and knowing to the centre stage of our public and
personal consciousnesses. It has to be done, if at all, with a greater and
more sincere sense of urgency than that with which the main architects of
the project took it up in the early 19th century, all the while keeping in
mind that it’s already been very late in the day.

What we should also keep in mind is that Indian decoloniality, this Indian
way of being and knowing, does not at any point seek to cut the Indian off
from the outside world. To do so is to damn ourselves to a dingy chamber of
parochiality, the kind which Swami Vivekananda had warned us against in a
famous 1893 speech at the Parliament of World Religions in Chicago. In that
speech, the venerable Swami, who was a formidable organ voice of Indian
civilisation in this Modern Era, told the story of a frog who lived in a
well all his life; and by virtue of living all his life in the well, it had
come to the conclusion that “nothing can be bigger than my well; there can
be nothing bigger than this; this fellow [another frog that came visiting
him from the seaside] is a liar, so turn him out.”

I can only hope that we, mired as we presently are in our contemporary
political exigencies and our little games of self-seeking competitive
pursuits, don’t end up being a *Kūpa*-*maṇḍuka*, the frog who lived in the
well, in the name of a sloganized, reductionist, and stunted decoloniality.

*Sreejit Datta is an educator, researcher and social commentator,
writing/speaking on subjects critical to rediscovering and rekindling the
Indic consciousness in a postmodern, neoliberal world. Views expressed are
personal.*

KR IRS 23 3 23

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZord_zr9QXxYTAY7JLuXuP0zU3Y1uDy6Cx%3DR-xi-y4YahA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to