By Saswat Pattanayak
The most read books today are the best
examples of books we do not need to read.
The state of the world today is dismal, impoverished
and regressive. At least, this is how the majority of
the world feels. For once if we consider that state
as a valid reflection, then we do not have a single
major work today of any relevance that gets into the
bestseller’s list anywhere in the world.
An exhibitionist technological progress is running
parallel with widespread poverty, sometimes the
former thriving at the cost of the latter. Defense
industry everywhere is continuing to grow despite its
negative-return investments. Individual
aggressiveness is the mainstay today replacing a
collective will for social progress.
In times like these, a writer has a role to play. A
side to choose. A writer must feel stifled, and hence
must express the sentiments of the underrepresented.
Utilizing the uniquely powerful medium of writing,
writers have the potential indeed to change the world
for the better. This could be a highly underrated
opinion, but the reality is that the people who read
books, do so selectively, with all voluntary
knowledge and they exercise their choice to spend
money of their own sweet will (much unlike any
television programs, which are often adjudged by
researches regarding their effectiveness in
perception-making).
If among the literate circle, book (active choice) is
more powerful medium than even the television
(passive reception), then what are the books of the
day preaching to the world?
To begin with, books come in all shapes, sizes and
matters. They come from different publishers, cater
to specific segments, are rated differently by a
heterogeneous populace. And yet amidst all this
apparent diversity of bibliophiles, there is a
surprisingly staggering amount of cohesiveness when
it comes to reading books. To vulgarize a phrase,
book readers think alike. For example, there is a
genre of book called Classics (of course no one says
they are just the Western Classics) that includes
books about Moby Dick, Tom Sawyer, Robin Hood, Three
Musketeers, etc. None of us ever missed any of these
during childhood. The stories were good. David
Copperfield or the Man Friday. It used to be the most
happening thing for us to read the classics in their
original, abridged or translated form.
Fast-forward few decades and what we see is a flood
from a different genre: the modern classics for the
troubled times. The Chicken Soup series, the Deepak
Chopras, the 7 Habits of Effective People, the Da
Vinci Code, The World is Flat, The Alchemist, The
Monk who sold his Ferrari, The Fountainhead.
Much like the old classics which glorified a colonial
world by never questioning the status quo of the most
horrendous periods of human history, the modern
classics on the bestsellers list also help maintain
the current world order by emphasizing continuity.
The old guards White writers of the past century
never wrote anything to condemn the slavery, to
revolutionize the minds about the vast inequalities
brought forth by feudal society that they helped
build up in the third world. They even refused to
imagine that the world divide was being perpetuated
by their reactionary pens. East is East and West is
West and never they were to meet. Not just Kipling,
most of the European writers should have felt
burdened by this guilt of carrying such bias, instead
what they thought they were doing was bearing the
White-man’s burden to civilize the savages.
The modern times have seen further downfall of
intellectual capacities. Instead of effortlessly
indicating the gross disparities and weaving ideas
around bettering the existing conditions by
challenging a self-fulfilling system, the ‘acclaimed’
writers have indulged themselves in preaching
individualism and spiritual illusions.
For example, leading New York Times columnist and
multiple Pulitzer winner Thomas Friedman’s
exploratory history of the modern world has been the
number one bestseller since it was released last
year. The book of course declares the world as being
flat, but does not indicate how badly vertical is the
surface. Devoting a substantial section on India,
Friedman is highly impressed by the cyber cities like
Bangalore. The exoticisation is achieved in India not
only by people like Friedman who fail to note that
the IT industries have helped sky-rocket the rent
prices of rooms for people who are not working in
that sector, have forced people to give up Kannada in
favor of America English if they want to survive the
race, have made people accept the rape and murder of
a call center executive of HP as though it was some
professional hazard with an unapologetic HP still
letting people take drunk cabbies back home.
With a conspicuous lack of critical reasoning which
should help writers frame arguments against mindless
displacement of mental means of productions, what we
have instead is intellectual frauds like the Deepak
Chopras. Reducing the matters to mind and calling the
luxurious emotional upsurges as some aspect of
spiritualism, these writers have made money out of
innocence of the gullible. These so-called gurus have
no inkling of the foundations of old Indian
materialistic philosophies, the atheistic orientation
of the East, which is far more ancient and critical
than the enlightenment or rationalism of the modern
Europe. Instead what they harp on is the easy path.
The path of superstitions, the path of blind belief,
the path of hero-worship, the path of sacred texts,
the path of submissiveness. And we have The
Alchemists and the Monks. The objectivism of Ayn
Rand. The celebration of blatant individualism, the
refusal to look like a member of community, the
aversion towards uniformity, the love of the
ego-centrism, the victory of the lone survivor (who
of course enjoys defeating others in the race).
Social issues of significance never get discussed in
these bestseller books of today. Only the quickest
ways to solve individual dilemmas of careers or
spiritualism, self-centred happiness or recovery from
anguish resulting from selfish love triangles. And
the book publishers along with the television channel
owners, the big media conglomerates, the famous five
white companies of the world that control everything
we know every passing day, that converts news into
entertainment and then says entertainment is the
news—they constitute what we need to know and what
writers need to write in order to sell.
Its not like there is a dearth of writers we need to
read. Its just that they are not highlighted by the
mainstream media. Purposively, it serves their
interest of staying together. Else they would sink.
Why else I never found a book written by Howard Zinn
anywhere in Bangalore on my recent trip? Because its
still the age of the Ayn Rand or the Alchemist. The
age of the individual success, not of a collective
revolutionary rage.
To continue with the example, let’s contrast
mainstream Friedman with alternative Neruda and find
out why the cultural czars had to send Neruda to
exile and why they needed to glorify Friedman. If
Neruda was the oppressed people’s representative,
Friedman does sound like an agent for Microsoft and
Infosys.
Naturally enough, Neruda who never served the elite
interests could torch the flame, while Friedman, a
child of the conglomerates still can’t see the light.
And therefore, I so much long that Friedman, the most
famous writer of America today, author even a wee bit
similar to what Chile’s most famous poet of
yesteryears wrote more than three decades ago.
Especially, since the times, with due apologies to
Bob Dylan, have still not changed for a large part.
“I Begin by Invoking Walt Whitman” by Pablo
Neruda:
Because I love my country
I claim you, essential brother,
old Walt Whitman with your gray hands,
so that, with your special help
line by line, we will tear out by the roots
this bloodthirsty President Nixon.
There can be no happy man on earth,
no one can work well on this planet
while that nose continues to breathe in Washington.
Asking the old bard to confer with me
I assume the duties of a poet
armed with a terrorist’s sonnet
because I must carry out with no regrets
this sentence, never before witnessed,
of shooting a criminal under siege,
who in spite of his trips to the moon
has killed so many here on earth
that the paper flies up and the pen is unsheathed
to set down the name of this villain
who practices genocide from the White House.
Tags: Saswat, Literature, Media, Capitalism, Philosophy