The West Wind- Will it Destroy India?

The entire media and people are now frenzied to support Narendra Modi, the new icon in India, the new middle class driven India who favors industrialization, technical development coupled with a strong fundamentalist Hinduistic notions. Why I am against Modi? It is because several reasons. Or rather I am not against Modi because I don't know Modi personally. But I am afraid of this media which celebrate this man. I don't think that the media, literary figures and such so called independent people will check everything objectively and come out with their findings. Someone who has gone through the nature of Indian media would easily find out the media people will stand with those who are successful and celebrate them. The same is the case with Modi. Or in other way, he is successful in wooing the media with the support of effective media managers. But media is a double edged weapon I would say. They don't have any specific commitment other than for money. If you think the media spend their pages with praises for Modi do those things because of their love for Modi, or for India's development( as he is celebrated as an icon of development) or for their commitment to the Hindutva. Not at all. It is simple, they can sell him than Rahul Gandhi; means the market value of Modi is higher than Rahul. The moment they see the market value decreasing, they will start throwing stones instead of roses.

Then, you may ask this market value of Modi itself shows Modi has more supporters in the grass root level and more Indians wanted to see him as the next PM. As I said earlier, I don't have any specific reasons to feel hatred towards Modi, it is his supporters I detest the most because I could see those who support Modi are against secularism, about the basic concepts of equality and justice. These are the things I dread most. When they speak of Muslims, or of Christians, you can see their tongue changing venomous. If anybody thinks India is the sole property of Hindus and all others have to live here under the mercy of Hindus, it is dangerous than being wrong. This claim is both historically and logically wrong. So, the victory of Modi will in a way toll the death bell of the democratic system in India.

If I come back to the praises that Modi gets from the media, I am less afraid. It is a double edged weapon as I said earlier. Once Modi receives a trivial set back or his media managers fail to satisfy them, they will fight back more fiercely than ever. Even then, I would say I am a little bit upset about the language that I could see in the newspapers. It is sillier than the old panegyrics used by old poets to praise the kings and queens. It is just “Deepasthambham Mahascharyam, Namukkum Kittanam Panam”, as told by Kunchan Nambiar. Even then, when we associate the Fourth Estate with higher claims of objectivity and read newspapers columnists refer Modi as the West Wind which will change India to a better future, I feel nervous. I simply could not digest it( read http://www.firstpost.com/politics/theres-a-wild-west-wind-blowing-and-his-name-is-modi-560966.html). Remember, the West and their rule in India was disastrous and terrible in the past. The East has its own dignity.

What is wrong with being apolitical?

The disturbing question every political philosopher or any serious observer of Indian democracy would be ‘where we are really heading at?’ The never-ending controversies, coupled with corruption cases made the people to have a strong disbelief in the democratic process. Even those who have some revival during Hazare movement also lost any small fragment of faith. In this juncture, I would like to ask this question: “What is wrong with being apolitical?”

Every politician and political philosopher would start criticizing the very idea of being apolitical, but can’t they see it is the need of our time. When all the systems that are working in the society befool us, when everything is corrupted, every politician, bureaucrat, media guys are under the shadow of doubt, will we not forced to discard the long-held beliefs and values? If we do not doubt the present system, if we do not question the essentialized notions, how can we think of an alternative?

Even after witnessing these mass homicides in the name of religion, race, caste and creed which are in tune with the results of the battle for power, how can we trust the system. Those who still follow the dictates of the party leaders have to understand one thing, i.e., they are making the country from bad to worse. Any ordinary party worker who claims that “we are right, others are wrong” won’t be aware of the cruelties they are inflicting upon the nation.

I would say only one thing that it is time to completely revamp the basic tenets of Indian constitution and political set up. Hazare might have asked only for a strong Jan Lokpal in which even the Prime Minister should come under. But the real issue is that we have to redefine even the basic principles, rewrite the constitution. There should be a strong governmental system..

The point is that while discussing about revamping the system, I am not an apolitical person, but very much political. I can’t help it. If we want to run our country successfully for some more decades, these changes are necessary, but we can’t give any guarantee how long it will last. The idea that one can rule, or lead another person in life itself is absurd, non-human. Man essentially is free, and he will always crave for freedom. Those systems of governments which failed to understand this can’t last long. The basic goal of governments should be to give complete freedom to humans ultimately
ASVDNC566ZG8

New Trends in Malayalam Novel: Reading "Aadujeevitham"

The novel Aadu Jeevitham by Benyamin foregrounds the life experience of the Malayalees in the Arabian countries through the shared experience of the life of the central character, Najeeb. For us, the image of Gulf countries often correlates with big buildings and luxurious life style. We often hear stories of fortune attained by many people and more and more of us are tempted to get to that ‘heaven’ once in a life time. The novel demystifies these generalised ideas about the Gulf countries and foregrounds the dark sides of mass migration and exploitation. My attempt in this review is not to discuss such sociological aspect of the novel, but just to mention the philosophical side of the experience of the central character. Throughout the work, we can see that the central character experiences the hardship more or less alone. Yet, throughout the story, an unknown power follows the character and helps him to confront the exploitation. A religious reading of it can chalk out the presence of an all powerful God in the life of each and every one of us.

Michael Bakhtin developed the idea of “dialogism” to show the importance of dialogue in a multi-cultural society. He interpreted ‘dialogue’ as an interaction “between mind and world”. The existence of humans is possible only through ‘dialogue’ and the absence of it will lead to death. As far as the structurality of the novel is concerned, it is not about dialogism as it does not focus on “hetroglossia(multiple voices)”. On the other hand, we can hear only one voice, the voice of the author. It goes to the extent that the voice of the author and the voice of the central character merge into one unified whole; a nullity of multiple voices. If we deal with the philosophical dimensions of the existence of the central character, it shows the significance of dialogism through its absence. From the beginning of the life of Majeed in the Gulf itself, he was prevented from any human contact; the only companions were the sheep that he was supposed to look after and his Arbab. As far as the character of Arbab is concerned, he is not talkative, and not at all humane in his relation with Majeed. Besides, language acts as a barrier between them.

Even in this complete absence of ‘dialogue’, Majeed manages to adapt to the changes because in the absence of linguistic dialogue, a psychological dialogue is possible for him. He communicates with the sheep, names them and at one particular situation, has sex with one among them. In his physical absence from his family and relatives, he had an exceptional relation with the sheep, so he names them as his acquaintances. He communicates with the sheep, to himself, to the god. It is this dialogue with his inner self, with the god, or even the non-human entities that made existence possible for Majeed. In the absence of dialogue, no life exists.

Using Figurative Language in Public Speeches

What is going on in the political arena of the country is worse than a farce. The art form “farce” is used to delight people, not just make them shame on themselves. Though politicians are always been criticized by both laymen and scholars alike, and regarded as the “last resort of a scoundrel”, it was never been subjected to vehement criticism than now. The words and deeds of the leaders are being thoroughly examined by the 24/7 channels, and they make us laugh at the leaders. From these live streaming and discussions, we develop the idea that the politicians are as a class, bad. This commonsensical notion tries to hide the fact that the leaders are just the representatives of the people and belong to the many classes and creeds among them. If one has to say that the leaders who represent the people in the respective legislative bodies are damned corrupted, it is equal to say that the entire people as such corrupted. One way to criticize the wrongdoings of the present is to take references from the past and then glorify it. It can be either the most glorious, most celebrated, or the most discussed the great Indian Civilization or even the later on “national” leaders like Nehru-Gandhi era. It may be because there were not this 24/7 channels in those days or even that the media people were not as greedy as now. The pathetic thing is that leaders are not even dared to open their mouth. I am telling this specifically with regard to the latest development in Kerala politics. The leaders of the left are being questioned and examined for their threatening words in the public meetings and even a murder case has been registered against a leader. While mentioning this, I am not at all supporting the events and crimes related to it, but just trying to mention something about language, my subject of study; the language that are used in public speeches. The first time I had taken interest in the art of speech, oratory, is after reading an article by Sukumar Azhikkode, and at that time, I was convinced that it is an art like any other forms of entertainment. As of literature, oratory also can be used to delight and to teach or profess though the main aim of it is to profess. However, this art form, like any other forms, may have to use some “ingredients” to persuade. In poetry, they will make use of metaphors, rhetoric, hyperbole and other speech forms. Usually, in literature, these speech forms will be analyzed by literary critics and will take those meanings not in the actual meaning of it, but the literary value of it. Whether oratory, including political speeches, should be considered as an art or not, I don’t have any doubt in it. But when it comes to the part of analyzing the speeches, I do think that, though with apprehension, those news readers, who may not have any notion about the literary aspect of the oratory, can analyze these speeches and pass judgments on it. However, they should understand from their part, that it is a speech event, so the speaker may have to succeed in arousing the interest of the listener, make him feel and think. If the media understand this, more than half of the problems in the present day will dissolve.