Luminous, A Fleck O’ Caress
Dipanwita Sarkar _________________ One yellow, tri-cornered fruit. and contaminated all evenings. your garland-chandan on my palm, cherished melodies, eddies dragging like ma’s breasts…over the close-fisted yamuna, through paradise-thickets, pray, who had let them in! to their coition i stand more luminous, a fleck o’ caress. Two i be a point. clasp i a point. throbbing firefly i clutch that pious godly-feet on my breast and my tongue exposed, laugh out hoary. mattress and swimming glide in unison by the oars of dimming light. dawning night now side-sleep, now turn over tummy-hunched. come let us commence afresh at midnight. Three whirlwind, whirlwind, whirlwind, on the trail frenzied finger like lance piercings .does vagina mean birth then? knowing this import, this cataclysm my wench life rambles. and she becomes ma, my birth as ma. such a lotus-hatch floods in a tri-embrace Four on plaits mine i have fettered him, you know? by the neighboring shadows of the bamboo-grove have i enchained him. like the din of my dense forest leaves, he glows in drums and chimes. adorned as kuhu-moni I shall send him off to a wedge of swans. the colour of water, through his dip-dip-dip ululates the day. incarnadine in the hues of phag-sindoor, the harikirtan sways and sways .the sharp nails and tooth his rai-besh unfurl. his… Five now, with rai-kamala’s body let me a trestle build. weave a merry-coronal of sondol-buds. on her distracted chins his play, and in her riotous-bacchanalian ripples try your luck in plucking foliage verdant, what else! reap with care and in the late-night drip-pond melds she her odorous-thighs. atop an aqueous-pungent kalmi-tip stands probed a birthing-portal. drifting drifting drifting in some long-ago washed-away time, to a dream of snakes-encoupled i awaken *** উজ্জ্বল এক স্পর্শবিন্দু এক হলুদ তিনকোনা ফল | আর এঁটো সমস্ত বিকেল, তোমাদের মালাচন্দন আমার হাতের তালুতে, রাখা গান, ছলাৎ-ছলাৎ মায়ের বুকের মত…হাতে রাখা যমুনা এবং নিধুবনের দরজা খুলে ঢুকতে দিয়েছে কারা | আমি ওদের সংগমের কাছে আরও উজ্জ্বল এক স্পর্শবিন্দু দুই বিন্দু হই | বিন্দু ধরি | জোনাকি দপদপ আমি শ্রীচরণকমলখানি বুকে নিই ও জিভ বার করে হাসি | বিছানা ও সাঁতার একযোগে বইতে থাকে টিমটিমে বাতির দাঁড় | ভোর হওয়া রাত তুমি এবার কাট হও, উপুড় হও, এসো আবার মাঝরাত থেকে শুরু করি | তিন ঘূর্ণি ঘূর্ণি ঘূর্ণি পথে এলোমেলোভাবে আঙুল বর্শার মত বিঁধেছে | যোনি মানে জন্ম তবে ? এই অর্থ ও অনর্থ বুঝে আমার মাগিজন্ম কাটে | আর সে হয় মা… মা জন্ম আমার | এমন পদ্ম মুখ ভেসে যায়ে ত্রিবেনী-সংগমে | চার বিনুনিতে তাকে বেঁধেছি জানো ? বাঁশঝাড়ের ছায়ার পাশে তাকে বেঁধেছি | সে আমার ঘন বন পাতার শব্দের মত খোলে ও মাদলে রূপ খোলে | কুহুমনি বেশে তাকে পাঠাব রাজহংসীর দলে | জলের রং তার স্নানে স্নানে উলু হয় দিন | রাঙা ফাগের শাঁখ সিঁদুরের পালায় হরিকীর্তন দোলে আর দোলে | নখে ও দাঁতের ধরে আমি চিনে ফেলি রাইবেশ | তার… পাঁচ এবে রাই-কমলার দেহ নিয়ে একটা সাঁকো গড়ি | গড়ি সে সোদল ফুলের মালা | আনমনা চিবুক তার খেলা তার মদিল মদিল ঢেউ নিয়ে তুমি শাঁকপাতা তল আর কি | বসে বসে বাছো আর সে শেষ রাত্রির টুপটাপ জলে মেশাক উরুগন্ধ, আঠালো ঝাঁঝালো কলমিডগার ওপর গেঁথে গেছে এক জন্মদ্বার | ভেসে গেছে কোন অবেলায় যেতে যেতে যেতে আমি জোড় লাগা সাপের স্বপ্নে জেগে উঠি ____________________________ adminhumanitiesunderground.org
Chora Bato: None of the Pathways in Darjeeling is Straight
Parimal Bhattacharya _____________________ In Tenesse Williams’ play A Streetcar Named Desire, the heroine takes rides on a streetcar line named Desire to come to the city center. In New Orleans, there really was a line by that name. If a tramway in a US city could be named Desire, then the taxi route to the hill town of Darjeeling could very well be named Longing. To understand this, one must go to Chowkbazaar on a dim, foggy afternoon. There one would see the battered Mahindra and Land Rover service jeeps waiting in front of the police outpost, below Golghar restaurant, and would hear the impatient cries of drivers and their assistants – Silgarhi-Silgarhi-Silgarhi Kharsang-Kharsang-Kharsang Last Turn! Last Turn! Last turn. After this, darkness would fall, no vehicle would ply on hill roads. Darjeeling would be completely cut off at night from the rest of the world. During my years of exile there, every time I heard the anxious calls of these men, I felt a sudden tug at my heart. Their litanies were blended with the muezzin’s call for evening prayer that rose from Butcherbustee below and filled me with a deep longing. One of my colleagues had an 8-year old son who suffered from asthmatic fits. These came unannounced, and he had to be immediately shifted to lower altitude as there was no other remedy. The jeep drivers’ calls would cast a shadow on the nervous father’s face. Another colleague, who had an odd sense of humour, would respond by singing aloud a Tagore song – Orey ay, amay niye jabi ke re bela sesher sesh kheyay Orey ay, diner seshe… ‘Oh come! Who’ll carry me in the last ferry at the day’s end…’ – the lyric says something like this, and then: ‘For whom the daylight has died but the lamp of the night has not been lit, it is he who is sitting at the pier.’ The light of the day would really die for us with the ardent cries of last-turn drivers, the lamp of the night would not be lit, we would plod on to go and sit at the pier…I mean, at one of the many pubs in town. I have heard anxious footsteps of village folk who had come to town on various work, and were hurrying to catch the last-turn service jeeps. With nightfall, not only would Darjeeling be cut off from the plains, but the settlements scattered all over the hills, too, would shrink into tiny islands in a dark ocean, the mountains would return to the priemeval times. The darkness would slowly curdle over the jeep stand, the calls would become mystical and indistinct: Kalempoong-Kalempoong-Kalempoong! Lebong-Lebong-Lebong! Kharsang-Kharsang-Kharsang! Last turn! Last turn! A keen ear could pick out in these slurred utterances roots of original Lepcha place names that the jeep drivers unknowingly evoked. Thus, Kurseong became Kharsang, Lebong Alebong, and Darjeeling became Dorhzeling. In Lepcha language, each of these words has a meaning: Kharsang means the land of white orchids (alternately, the star at dawn), Ale-bong is a tongue-shaped spur, and Kalempoong is ‘the ridge where we play’. In fact, many peaks, rivers, gorges and plateaus in these hills still bear Lepcha names whose sounds have been twisted in other tongues. Thus, Peshok comes from pazok, which means forest; Mirik from mir-yok, ‘a place burnt by fire’; Phalut from Fak-lut, or ‘the denuded peak’; and Senchal comes from shin-shel-lo, which means cloud-capped hill. These bear testimony to the fact that the Lepchas were the original inhabitants of Darjeeling hills. This is also acknowledged in British official documents. When the king of Sikkim gifted the East India Company the 24 miles long and 6 miles wide Darjeeling hill tract, so that they could build a sanatorium there, it was inhabited by the Lepcha tribe. But that shouldn’t stop us from taking a critical look at the image of pristine wooded mountains sparsely dotted with a few Lepcha dwellings before the British set foot here. The object of seeing, and showing, Darjeeling hills as an almost uninhabited place was two-fold: one economic, the other cultural. For the tenancy of this hill tract, the Company had agreed to pay the king an annual grant of three thousand rupees (the amount was later doubled). Lack of human habitation and, consequently, limited scope for revenue collection would have meant that the gift was rather profitable for the Sikkimese monarch. And then there was the colonial mindset at work behind the notion that Darjeeling was ‘discovered’ by the British. This led to the fabrication of a nostalgic home town on foreign soil, upon exotic Himalayan terrain. # The fabrication progressed through the 19th century on war footing; a military officer was appointed for this. In 1835, after the East India Company obtained Darjeeling hills as a gift, it sent Colonel Lloyd and Dr Chapman, the surgeon of the Governor General, to sojourn there and find out whether its environment and climate were suitable for a sanatorium. They stayed there for eight months, from November 1836 to January the next year, in a wattled hut that they built for themselves. Based on their report, Darjeeling Association was formed in Calcutta with a brief to set up a town in the mountains. The years 1838-39 were a period of intense activity in Darjeeling. Jungles were cleared and plots of flattened land were distributed among members of the association. Also, and what was of crucial importance, the construction of a bridle path to Darjeeling via Punkhabari began. The Darjeeling Family Hotel was set up; a colony came up with about a dozen cottages. St. Andrew’s Church was built in 1843; the Loreto Convent was established four years later. In the lower part of the settlement, not yet a town, dwellings of coolies and menials, most of them from the plains, were coming up now as a large native labour force was sine qua non for the comforts of sahibs and memsahibs. This led to the growth of
Jo Hona Tha Hona Tha, Jo Nahin Hona Tha Hona Tha: Poetry in Turbulent Times, HUG with 5 Poets in Varanasi
Poetry in Turbulent Times. HUG in Varanasi, with Ashtabhuja Shukla, Pankaj Chaturvedi, Vyomesh Shukla, Avinash Mishra and Siddhant Mohan. ___________________ On the sidelines of the Hindi Yuva Kavi Sangam, 2016, held at Benaras (February 26-27, 2016), HUG met with five contemporary Hindi poets who nurture a strong sense of the aesthetic, political and philosophical struggles that rage in the deepest recesses of our land. The idea of the nation is naturally fractious in the arts, in poesie more so. In fact, civilization or nation make little sense in defining and then transforming our realities into art forms. For poetry addresses our times, sometimes by unleashing myths and metaphors, and at other times, through subtraction–starkly, wielding the precise markers of language in keen realization of what the moment might demand. And yet, communicating poetry also needs some kind of binding force, a register that is material and personal, even as we objectively see history unfolding through varied inflections in different parts of our land. What do we expect from the conjurers of language in such troubled times as we live now? Should poetry say things simply and directly to power? Or should it instead seek refuge in the structures of the timeless and the transcendental? Is it possible to marshal a language that dares to take the challenge head on? What can be learnt and discarded from the older forms of poetry? How much is worth renewing? In the video links below, these five poets candidly talk about their convictions and art practice by historically situating the contemporary. The whole discussion has been divided into three sections. Connect your system to the speakers and click on the individual links please : 1. HUG at Yuva Kavi Sangam, 2016, Varanasi, Part I 2. HUG at Yuva Kavi Sangam, 2016, Varanasi, Part II 3.HUG at Yuva Kavi Sangam, 2016, Varanasi, Part III *** adminhumanitiesunderground.org
Dead Writing: Barthes and Posterity
Supriya Chaudhuri ___________________________ Posteritati (To posterity) In 1971, Roland Barthes gave an interview, originally intended for a series of televised broadcasts recorded under the title ‘Archives of the 20th Century’, in which he was asked to reflect on his life and work in response to a detailed questionnaire prepared by Jean Thibaudeau. This was four years before he published his idiosyncratic ‘auto-biography’, Roland Barthes (1975), translated into English as Roland Barthes by Roland Barthes (1977). The interview was never televised so far as I am aware, not even, as Barthes speculated it might be, after ‘the death of the author’. This playful reference to a physical event, the cessation of a human life, through a phrase that the author had himself made famous as metaphor, comes at the very beginning of the published text of the interview in Tel Quel, Issue 47, a special issue devoted to Roland Barthes. The responses – which were in any case a ‘game’ to Barthes and Thibaudeau — had been rewritten for publication. Nevertheless, Barthes insists that ‘the effect of enunciation’, rather than the protocols of writing, is at work through the text, producing ‘an entirely imaginary and continuous first person’ (Barthes 1998: ‘Responses’, 249), rather like the subject of a novel who shared his birth date, 12 November 1915, with Barthes himself. Reflecting on the form of the interview, Barthes says: ‘What writing never writes is ‘I’; what speech always says is ‘I’; what the interviewer should solicit is thus the author’s imaginary, the list of his phantasms, in as much as he can reflect on them, speak of them in that fragile state’ (266). In Roland Barthes, he begins with the proviso, ‘It must all be considered as if spoken by a character in a novel.’ (Barthes 1994: 1) It is this Barthesian imaginary, this phantasm, then, who towards the close of the interview tells his interviewer: As for posterity, what can I say? It’s a dead word for me, which is giving it its dues since its validity is only established on the basis of my death. I consider I have lived well up to now … buried in the archives (of the twentieth century) perhaps one day I will re-emerge, like a fugitive, one witness among others in a broadcast of the Service for Research on ‘structuralism’, ‘semiology’, or ‘literary criticism’. Can you imagine me living, working, desiring, for that? If one day the relations between the subject and the world were to be changed, certain words would be dropped, like in a Melanesian tribe in which at death a few elements of the lexicon are suppressed as a sign of mourning; but it would be rather as a sign of joy; … this would happen doubtless to the word ‘posterity’, and perhaps to all the ‘possessives’ of our language, and, why not, to the word ‘death’ itself. (266-67) But posterity is not a possessive, as Barthes knew well: it is a substantive based on the Latin posteritas (‘descendants’), from posterus (‘coming after’, from post ‘after’). That Barthes links it to all the ‘possessives’ of our language indicates that he has in mind the genealogical notion of descent, that he wishes to disclaim the unborn generations claiming filiality with the dead author, and to say that they are dead to him. That is, we, who celebrate Barthes today, who call upon him to bear witness to structuralism, semiology, literary criticism, we are dead to him: and ‘if the relations between the subject and the world were to be changed’, both posterity and death would disappear from the lexicon. Rarely has an author spoken with more authority from his grave to disallow a memorial celebration. Still, if Barthes disclaims posterity, he does not in fact disclaim death, which may be why Jacques Derrida, in the first chapter of The Work of Mourning, uses the possessive case to speak of ‘The Deaths of Roland Barthes’. In effect, this is to remind us not only of the dead author – dead in physical fact at the time of writing – but also of the deaths by which he was moved and of which he wrote, the inscription of death in his writing, contrasted with the ‘literal’ impossibility of his actually saying ‘I am dead’ (Derrida 2001: 52, 64-65). Yet, as Barthes says elsewhere, ‘the voice is always already dead, and it is by a kind of desperate denial that, we call it living; this irremediable loss we give the name of inflection: inflection is the voice insofar as it is always past, silenced’ (Barthes 1994: 68). Writing insistently, obsessively, of death, throughout his life as a writer, Barthes may seem to avert his face from ‘his posterity’ (I use the possessive deliberately), but he is always addressing the ghosts, the spectral presences, released by the knowledge of death, his own and those of others. In his ‘auto-biography’, Roland Barthes, published five years before he died, Barthes positions himself, as Petrarch had done six centuries earlier in his ‘Letter to Posterity’, (‘Posteritati’, Seniles 18.1) within the binary of portrait and biography: offering us a choice of two representational modes, synoptic and chronological. The first is a selection of photographs mainly from his childhood and youth, haunted by that deathliness that Barthes associates with the form of the photograph itself; the second is a set of notes about a historical person, incomplete because he is still living, but anticipating death as the punctum that will make them meaningful. Yet, curiously, Barthes associates narrative with the first form of representation: the photographs tell a story, though one that is entirely ‘imaginary’, they are a succession of images, of a body now irrevocably lost, no longer that of the writer, ‘figurations of the body’s prehistory – of that body making its way towards the labor and the pleasure of writing’ (Barthes 1994: 3). That remembered, imagined narrative of youth is interrupted by the subject’s fall into text: Once I produce, once I write, it is