The dream of a borderless world

MAHESH PAUDYAL AND UJJWAL PRASAI

For many in English academia, if Gayatri Chakravotry Spivak admits to not knowing the answer to a particular question, it means that it is probably unknowable. Even when she does know the answers, they are oftentimes perplexing. Spivak is characterised by something of an enigmatic personality; she is not easy to comprehend. And it was this side of her that enthralled those gathered to hear her speak at the recent Dabur Excellence Series in Kathmandu. Spivak spoke at two sessions during her visit, one at IACER in Old Baneshwor on Dec 20, and the other at Hotel De l’Annapurna in Durbar Marg on Dec 21.

The delivery at IACER was fundamentally academic, and dwelt on the theoretical premises Spivak works with. The question of subalternity obviously arose, for which Spivak had a clear-cut position: The term ‘subaltern’ has lost its power to indicate people from the very bottom layer of society. She observes that unlike what Marx thought of the proletariat, as a class devoid of class-consciousness, the subaltern has a type of organisation and consciousness but has been hegemonised to accept its wretchedness as normal. In other words, this subaltern does have a voice, only it is not loud enough to be heard by the people in power. One might ask, if Spivak is so cynical about the audibility of the subaltern’s voice, why is she still working with the poor villagers of Beerbhoom in Bengal, where she teaches? Spivak’s answer is that she believes in “training the imagination” of the subaltern, and gradually transforming their existing consciousness. Her project is not about direct financial assistance; it is the mind that she wants to remap.

Spivak’s method is participatory, for she is always apprehensive about the authority of autobiography, also a clever schema to ward off questions like: How could Spivak reshape the consciousness of the Sabars, for example, when she came from a highly-educated family comprising of a postgraduate mother and physician father—part of the so-called bhadra lok in Bengali? It is interesting that Spivak, who relies so much on her parental heritage otherwise, detaches herself from this lineage when it comes to her engagement with the subaltern, distancing herself from the elite-issues. Of course, the elite are equally plagued by moral, economic and political problems as are subalterns, and a scholar of such an extraordinary erudition like Spivak is not, obviously, dismissive of that, but her focus is clearly elsewhere.

The second talk was on the theme ‘A Borderless World?’ The question suggests that there is no certainty, no guarantee of such a world, and yet the idea, in Spivak’s own terms, is ‘doable’. She is convinced that while there might never exist a future where visas and passports become obsolete, yet a seamless world whose walls have been demolished by capital, technology and knowledge of languages is surely feasible. Spivak emphasises on the significance of self-reflective criticism and introspection when it comes to our established systems, as well as attention to detail, a requisite, she says, for every successful revolution.

Spivak is particularly outspoken about the necessity of a sense of democratic

judgment to be instilled in all through education. The possibility of a borderless world, Spivak says, hinges largely on economic justice. For this, the downtrodden must acquire living skills and learning should commence from the ground up so people are able to think from a global perspective early on. In fact, a vernacular cosmopolitanism, at least at the level of thought, should be launched. And we must keep dreaming, she says, expounding on her own dreams, which are two-fold, and could serve as a model. First is the nation dream, where she envisions a strong India, which can only be achieved through recognising the necessity of the subaltern in changing the world. This requires understanding the desires, and not just the needs of the subaltern. The second is the island dream. Spivak claims that we are all islands in our own right, making a critical statement against the exclusivist, chauvinistic, racist notions put forth by staunch nationalists in any country of power. If every country or continent were to be considered islands, exposed to and defined by the same seas, where then are these all-determining borders between us? Further, if the planet itself were to be considered as an island, how insignificant does that render us humans in the larger picture? Knowledge of this vulnerability should inspire nations to rethink their loyalty to borders and frontiers within the larger schematics of the earth’s ‘planetarity’, and dismiss it as an absurdity.

The sessions offered audiences—consisting mainly of academicians at the first and a more diverse group comprising of high officials of government, Indian diplomats, art historians, corporate executives, media personnel, students and teachers at the second—a rare opportunity to come face to face with, for the first time, such a globally-acclaimed a literary theorist. Spivak in person, as in her texts, is certainly a force to be reckoned with, and we can only hope she’ll be back for another insightful round of talks in the future.

The Kathmandu Post, Dec 24, 2011