Revisiting Witches: Reading Aleph

O Mary Conceived Without Sin, Pray for those who Turn to You. Amen. “Here we are in the twenty first century, and yet the descendents of the real criminals, those who killed the innocent victims, still they have the right to grant pardons. Do you know what I mean, Haron?” Coelho, The Witch of the Portobello(page 2). The character sketch of Athena in the novel “The Witch of the Portobello” clearly recalls the witch hunt of Early Modern Period. Yet, the novel, some say, has nothing to do with the witch hunt in the those period. However, if someone raises a question, what is there in the mind of Coelho while writing this novel, or the recent one, “Aleph,” it is a complicated one. When I ask this question, my objective is not to conduct an investigation of the real motives of the author, something the New Critics termed as “Intentional Phallacy.” The books of Coelho has been viewed from different angles by different critics. Mostly, the novels have been termed as an encouraging, inspirational stories which talk about the individual powers and the success of human beings. However, when the characters like “Athena”, or “Hilal”, mention something about mystical experience and the past experience of prosecution in the Court of Inquisition, it is quite normal to have some doubts about the “intention of the author.” “Aleph” is an autobiographical story of Coelho, where he starts a journey back to his kingdom. He talks about the previous life in which he helped the Inquisition. His teacher/mender in the Tradition(which is quite ambiguous term for me) advised him to visit the past life through meditation. So, Coelho conducted a journey through the Russian provinces where he met the woman from his past life. In a moment of “Aleph”, he could understand that he was one of the reason for her cruel death in the past life, so he decided to request forgiveness to the woman. The rest of the story is clear, he asks forgiveness and she accepted it, so he went back to his native country and lived happily ever after. Here, whether the hero achieved mental peace after the experience completely is not that much clear. It is because in the beginning of the work, the author says that he started doubting the relevance of his own beliefs and started doubting whether the Tradition can answer his problems. Then, he hope that through the journey he had undertaken, he could overcome his problems and get back the peace of mind, or even salvation(what he wanted to achieve, his real quest is unclear for me, truly speaking). The thing is that happiness or peace of mind cannot be achieved permanently for anyone, except saints(?). If one achieves complete satisfaction in his life, achieves everything, the life ends there. The happiness achieved by Coelho cannot be permanent in my opinion, after a time, he may again start questioning the beliefs, and may again start a journey. So, whether he achieved anything by this journey is a question.

Another issue related to the work is the question of forgiveness and the way he approaches it. Even though he used many praises the ancient traditions which is mainly matriarchal, the idea of forgiveness itself is patriarchal. It is the nature of men to engage in sinful acts towards women; then they will ask forgiveness, and it is always the duty of the women to grant it. When Coelho got his kingdom back, it is not clear about the female character. Even though it mentions that she finds absolute solace in the presence of Coelho, she did not continue her career as a violinist. Coelho advices her to use it as a tool for forgetting everything, she give up the career. In the last part, the author says that he don't know why she decided like that, after all she has every right to do or choose her career. It is her kingdom, others can't enter into it. In other words, it is the novel about Coelho, and “his” journey back to his kingdom; whatever happens to the rest of the world or the female part is not his concern. The more serious issue of forgiveness is that, Coleho's journey is not complete. In the novel itself, he mentioned that he id responsible for the bad life of eight woman, Hilal is the fifth one. Even if he asks forgiveness to the eight women, he can't get what he wanted to get. It is because when he says he is responsible for the death of the girl in the previous life, he indirectly responsible for the misfortunes of her family as well. He did not ask forgiveness to the father of the girl, from whom he received many favors. After all, as mentioned earlier, asking forgiveness should be “a man to a woman”, not to the rest of the family. When the girl died by burning in the fire, the family died by burning in the society. If this way is correct, he is not only responsible for the woman and her family, but to the society which is forced to believe this idea of burning the witches. And what about his fellow culprits?

The Enchantress of Florence by Salman Rushdie


Salman Rushdie is one of the foremost Indian English writer who received the prestigious Man- Booker Price for Literature. He criticized the dominant ideologies which constitute the psyche of Indian nation, especially in his celebrated work “The Midnight's Children”. He provoked the conservative religious and political leaders across the globe with his pen. You can feel the power of his pen in the novel “The Enchantress of Florence”  also. 
 
The background of the novel is an incident happened in the court of Emperor Akbar; a young, yellow-haired European traveler calling himself 'Mogor dell' Amore' visited the court by claiming himself as the kin of the Emperor.  Then, the traveler narrates the story of the late Princes of Mughal court Qara Koz, the sister of Babar who is taken captive by different warlords. This story, with a touch of history, is served as a critique of the values of the so called progressed society, in the hands of Rushdie. 
 
Rushdie is always celebrated as the critique of the dominant ideologies of the modern society, but how far this novel deconstruct those notions or he simply serves as a tool to strengthen the same ideology which he is trying to resist. 

Reinventing History:

The novels of Rushdie are famous for his treatment of history and his reinvention of characters and events. Against the celebrated Grand Narratives of emperors and war lords, he wrote about the history of common man. However, in this particular novel he used the mighty kingdom of the Mughals. Even then, the central character is Niccolo Vespucci, an ordinary man from Florence. Rushdie used the post modern literary concept of “Historiographic Metafiction”. It is a term originally coined by literary theorist,Linda Hutcheon.

According to Hutcheon, in "A Poetics of Postmodernism", works of historiographic metafiction are "those well-known and popular novels which are both intensely self-reflexive and yet paradoxically also lay claim to historic events and personages".

The historic personages like Akbar, Jodha, Birbal etc are present in the novel, but apart from that what is the purpose of these characters in the novel. If the author used some of controversial ideas into the mouth of a common man, it lacks authenticity whereas if the criticism comes from the mouth of “Shelter of the World, Akbar”, it has the authenticity. Then, whether, he is against these power-centers or in favor of them. It is a question that worth answering.

The one central criticism that may arise against this novel is the treatment of woman in the novel. For some, it is the story of a woman's adventure in man's world. For some, it is a patriarchal narrative attempting to idealize woman. Since the freedom loving Qara Koz is a central icon, we can say it is a feminist novel, at the same time, the words and deeds of the charecters in the work give the other option. Both extreme is possible. For example, the lyric, “If she was a letter I would have sent her, If she was a coin I would have spent her”, was nothing but pure romantic lyrics. The words of Akbar also note down the same kind of ideal sexual body. That, the female body is nothing but a sexual device for the man, to enjoy, to crucify.

When analyzing whether Rushdie is accepting or resisting the hegemonic ideology, one more thing need to be questioned. His treatment of religion, and mainly the question of incest. Throughout the narrative we feel that, he is against the established religion. When he uses the symbol, Akbar, he is presenting two extreme pictures. On the one side there is Akbar who challenges all the orthodox belief system, who wants to synthesis all the major ideas in all religion and on the other hand the there is the conservative Baudauni, who favors strict religious dogmas. The point is the conservatives do not get much voice in the novel and the voice of the revolutionary Akbar is very weak(!). He is weak in the sense that whenever someone questions his core values, he became defensive and throw away the revolutionary aspect. The way he handled the revolution by using Birbal, without addressing the questions they raised is an example. “Because God is everyone and everything, it follows that all acts are divine acts, and therefore, because all acts are godly, there is no difference between right and wrong, good deeds and evil ones, and so we may do exactly as we please”(314). He didn't answer this question, but answered the other question, that of incest. The narrative of Rushdie is weak is at this point.

Akbar at this time decided, almost, to take the foreigner as his heir, but did not. He thought that Veppucci is a son from an incestuous relationship. There is no proof or ideas to believe so. Then why did he invent such a tale. The Akbar who thought about his grand aunt Qara Koz day and night, is worried about the birth of that foreigner. This is because of the strict religious faith he has. In Quran it is forbidden to think about the kins in sexual motive. “Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: … two sisters in wedlock at the same time, except for what has already passed” [al-Nisaa’ 4:23]

Here, more than the religious notion it is the purity of the Mughal blood that compell him to take such a decision. The re-enliven Qara Koz says that this traveler is not her son in an incestuous relation, for royal bloods never commit such an act! So, the purity of the royal blood is assured and the traveler was being transported to some other country.


Redefining Colonialism:

The main argument of Said's “Orientalism” is to unravel the colonial missions of the European travelers and writers and how they constructed the notions of exotic, barbarian east. Contrary to that, in this novel, it is the eastern king, Akbar, who thought about the west in that way;

"The emperor, listening to Mogor dell'Amore as he told the story, understood that the lands of the West were exotic and surreal to a degree incomprehensible to the humdrum people of the East. In the East women worked hard, lived well or badly, died noble or ignoble deaths, believed in faiths that engendered great art, great poetry, great music, some consolation and much confusion. Normal human lives, in sum. But in those fabulous Western climes people seemed prone to hysterias- such as the Weeper hysteria in Florence- that swept through their countries like diseases and transformed things utterly without warning."


The emperor thought about crowning Mogor dell'Amore as the king if Hindustan, to realise his idea of a global kingdom on earth, were all beliefs are united.

"It would be a further step in the culture of inclusion..........in which all races, tribes, clans, faiths and nations would become part of the one grand Mughal synthesis, the one grand syncretization of the earth, its arts, its loves, its differences, its problems, its vanities, its philosophies, its sports, its whims."

The Hindustan under Akbar was a superior force than any other European countries, may be that is what Rushdie's conclusion.



View all my reviews

The Bridge Across Forever

The Bridge Across Forever: A True Love Story by Richard Bach




Michael Bakhtin formulated the idea called dialogism while studying the nature of the literary form called 'novel'. Bakhtin identifies 'polyphony' as the greatest quality of the genre, by which he means its ability to include diverse voices within the same work. Different contradictory elements exists in a single literary work, complementing each other.



A good literary piece is one which reflects different ideological strands without affecting the central or dominant voice of the 'author'. Richard Bach's theme in the novel 'Bridge' is his search for 'soulmate' and his concept of love, and also how he find out his true soul mate. However, this idea is one among the many ideas he discussed in the work; at the same time, the idea of 'love' dominates in the work.



You can find different voices in this text; Bach who is against the institution of marriage; against the institutionalized church; against govts' intervention of individual freedom; and so on and on. Contrary to this, he a married man, he is searching for spiritual harmony, he is conservative supporter of the governmental system.



The concept of soulmate, according to Bach, is “perfect woman among many”; you cannot find a single perfect woman, but can find perfection among many. He went afer many woman and enjoyed the lifestyle. The pilot, Bach, visited several places and found new and new women everywhere . The idea does not mean he is a licentiousness, instead he believed in the superiority of the human self, and does not want to be the slave of any system. He searched for the perfection of his own self.



Bach believed in a particular religious philosophy in which an individual attains perfection by himself. He can converse with the spirits and can foresee the things. The power of the human soul is above any powers in the world.



The concepts of love and music and everything he possesses is in contrast with Leslie, his real soulmate. Love means understanding each others freedom and unique identity, she thought. The life is full of learning, they learned from each other, progressed the life with mutual trust and love.



View all my reviews

Anna Hazare:Modern Gandhi!

Dear friends across India,

Right now, Anna Hazare, a 73-year-old Gandhian, sits in the burning sun fasting, and he will stay until death -- unless the government agrees to consider a powerful law that could rid Indian politics of the scourge of corruption.

This “Modern Mahatma” is taking the utmost act of courage and determination to push through a bill that would give an independent body the power to punish corruption -- even in the Prime Minister’s office. Across the country a movement has exploded, and a media storm of pressure has been sparked that’s engulfing Singh. But dirty politicians are desperately trying to water down or kill the law.

For the first time in forty three years, we have the chance to change the way politics is done. Let's join together and stand with Anna Hazare to tackle corruption and clean up Indian politics. We have no time to lose -- sign the petition to Prime Minister Singh and send this on to everyone:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/stand_with_anna_hazare/97.php?cl_tta_sign=ef2591eba79d6ee4653520997d4fa9a7

Hazare is championing a citizen-developed bill called “Jan” Lokpal that will create an independent body, selected by judges, citizens and constitutional authorities, with enough power to investigate and punish all politicians. No minister or bureaucrat will be able to influence its investigations.

Since 1968, when this bill was first introduced, greedy politicians have thwarted its passing. Now the government is pushing for a watered down Lokpal with no hope of ending fraud, vice and dishonesty -- it gives politicians overriding power to decide who will be investigated, and is a complete eyewash.

Pressure is mounting on Prime Minister Singh to endorse the "Jan" Lokpal. Members of the opposition party have begun to make the right noises in support of Anna Hazare. And even the National Advisory Council, a powerful advisory body to Sonia Gandhi have come out in favour of the bill. But corrupt politicians and vested interests are doing all they can to kill it.

Anna Hazare has set the example. But only a national citizens movement can ramp up the pressure to get Singh to endorse “Jan” Lokpal and save Hazare's life. Sign the petition and forward it to everyone now:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/stand_with_anna_hazare/97.php?cl_tta_sign=ef2591eba79d6ee4653520997d4fa9a7

Corruption in politics has become a plague across our country, it is draining our resources and demoralizing our nation. This bill would go a long way to deterring those that steal and undermine the public good. Last year, the Avaaz community in Brazil won an important victory -- against the odds millions of people came together and pushed through a historic anti-corruption law. India has a proud history of people power overcoming oppression -- today if we all stand with one voice we can fight this corruption that is poisoning our political system.

With hope,

Saloni, Shibayan, Ricken, Ben and the whole Avaaz team.

More information:

India Today, "Lokpal vs Jan Lokpal: A study in contrast":
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/134429/latest-headlines/lokpal-vs-jan-lokpal-a-study-in-contrast.html

The Hindu Business Line, "Anna Hazare on fast-unto-death demanding Jan Lokpal Bill":
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/article1602555.ece

Times of India, "On day Anna Hazare begins fast, NA C too calls for lokpal debate":
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/On-day-Anna-Hazare-begins-fast-NAC-too-calls-for-lokpal-debate/articleshow/7880511.cms

Tehelka, "Social activists come together to show flaws in Lokpal Bill":
http://tehelka.com/story_main49.asp?filename=Ws050411ACTIVISM.asp

Anna Hazare's fast against corruption strikes huge chord
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/anna-hazares-fast-against-corruption-strikes-huge-chord-96593

The Three Mistakes of My Life-Chetan Bhagath

Bollywoodization of novel
Historiographic metafiction
Nation and Identity
Cricket Nationalism
Politics and Religion
Inspirational Novel
Comparison of Nationness
Conflicts between Emotion and Logic

These are some of the points I have noted in relation to the novel The three Mistakes of My Life by Chetan Bhagat. Those who have viewed the novel as silly might feel my arguments as childish. Bollywoodization of Novel means the particular style adopted by the novelist in the treatment of Character settings and Plot construction which will reminds the reader about the Bollywood films, may be a second rated movie. In other words the term refers to the adaptability of the novel to a film; not only this particular novel but almost all the novels of Bhagat.
The term Historiographic Metafiction, coined by Linda Hutcheon refers to the self reflexivity of the novel and also the reconceptualization of History. This term usually applied to the novels of Salman Rushdie and Amitav Ghosh, and not to the novelists like Bhagat. The reason is Rushdie and Ghosh’ treatment is somewhat serious and grand where as Bhagat is so ‘silly’. The idea of “ historicity in fiction and fictionality of history” worked well in the novel. Contrary to the writings of Rushdie we won’t feel the artificial link between ‘individual memory’ and ‘collective history’. Bhagat wrote about the earth quake in Bhuj, terrorist attack of America, and Gujarat riots from the point of Govind and showed how individual memories can intervene in the grand narration of history.
The idea of nation used by Bhagat is of great significance in the contemporary social scenario. The statement of Ali, he will be an Indian even if he have a hundred births, is significant in many respects. At one level it is significant in a level which helps us to understand how the nationness being constructed rather than there normally. Through films and various ways like the cricket is used to build national sentiments. In Ali’s case it is important because he is a Muslim, therefore the ‘other’. In the opposite side we can see Parekhji and others tried to assert the Hindu identity of the nation. As Benedict Anderson noted the nation is an imagined community. Nobody really cares about nation except during the time of cricket matches. At one level Eric Habsbawns idea of “invented traditions” might helps us to understand the situation further. Through Rama and Ayodhya the Karsevaks tried to invent a tradition which is homogenous. The attitude of the Australians and how they treated Indians and the cultural difference between us and Aussies is also important. They are not blinded by nationalism, instead tried to understand the talent in others. The trained vs. artificial comes there too.
An important motive in the novel is the conflict between emotion and logic. In the very beginning itself the central character makes it very clear that he don’t like emotional dramas; even the hugs of his mother. Later he criticise his friends for bringing sympathy in business. In his conversation the Aussies player criticise the Indians for being too much emotional. The reactions of Mamaji and Parekhji also project this as a weakness of Indians. And Mamaji tried to overcome his weakness after the death of his son, by not crying but at the same time became too much emotional which is not grief but anger. The characterization of Vidya also mentions this aspect. Vidya is portrayed as a brave character instead of the’ weak Indian woman’. She never cried when she faced problems in contrast to Govind who is very weak at that time.
The novel is Inspirational in the sense that modern novels tried to educate the people, inspires them and tried to be with them. The title itself, i.e The Three Mistakes of My Life makes it very clear that it is about the mistakes of a person’s journey toward success; the mistakes taught him new lessons and he will move forward by learning from those mistakes.









View all my reviews