Tuesday, October 24, 2006

The root of the matter

"I heard something in those singers' voices that said there was more to life than what my old man was doing and the life that I was living. And they held out a promise, and it was a promise that every man has a right to live his life with some decency and dignity. And it's a promise that gets broken every day, in the most violent way."

- Bruce Springsteen

When I read these lines in Bruce's biography, which I picked up off of the Anna Salai pavement of all places, I suddenly realised what literature is all about. I had been struggling earlier to define exactly what I thought literature is, and this about summed it up for me.
I had had this argument with Chan about Salman Rushdie, whom she likes, and I don't. So she asked me why I don't like him, and I said, 'Well because I dont believe that's what literature is all about'. So she asks what it is about. After stuttering and stammering for a bit, the best I could come up with is 'it should be a reflection of life', an Aristotlean definition which could mean just about anything taken out of context.
The thing is, I knew what I meant, but I just couldn't find the words to say it. After reading this quote, which Bruce said about listening to the radio as a kid, I realised it really is that simple. That's what literature really is about - the good literature anyway.

A few posts ago, I had wondered what R&B is all about, and I had taken a shot at JayZ's 99 Problems. I had to have a rethink, cos even tho the lines 'If you're having girl problems I feel sad for you son, I've got 99 problems but a bitch aint one' are shocking, you have to look at the context.
In one stanza, he gets pulled over by a cop on the side of the road:

I heard "Son do you know why I'm stoppin' you for?"
Cause I'm young and I'm black and my hats real low?
Do I look like a mind reader sir, I don't know
Am I under arrest or should I guess some more?
"Well you was doin fifty-five in a fifty-four
License and registration and step out of the car
Are you carryin' a weapon on you I know a lot of you are"
I ain't steppin out of shit all my paper's legit
"Well, do you mind if I look round the car a little bit?"
Well my glove compartment is locked so are the trunk in the back
And I know my rights so you gon' need a warrant for that
"Aren't you sharp as a tack, you some type of lawyer or something'?
Or somebody important or somethin'?"
Tah, I ain't pass the bar but i know a little bit
Enough that you won't illegally search my shit
"We'll see how smart you are when the K9 come"
I got 99 problems but a bitch ain't one

It's violent, it's drenched with anger, but its also very very compelling because its honest. I find that I understand this and R&B in general a lot better after reading Alex Haley's Roots. Reporter saaar lent it to me, saying that its a good read. What I wasn't prepared for was the most heart-wrenching week of reading since Toni Morrison's Beloved - even more so than her, because even tho its heavily fictionalised, Roots still is based in fact.
For the uninitiated, Roots is Haley tracing his ancestors seven generations back, starting with Kunta Kinte (?) an African tribal who was shipped off to America. The atrocities committed to him are all the more heartbreaking because of the unsparing yet affectionate portrayal of his life before he is captured. It's such a wonderful story right up to that point - which makes the atrocities so much harder to bear. And then, again, after going through torture after torture, each more cruel and disgusting than the previous, more so because at the end of a day of being whipped to the bone, and shitting where he sits because he's chained up, and being branded on his skin, he has to hear the cries of the women tribals who were captured as they are raped every night by the whites. And then he finds some kind of solace in a comparitively humanitarian master in US - until his daughter is sold, only to be raped repeatedly by her new master.
With this history of violence, who is to grudge R&B any of its anger? My aunt was telling me the other day (and she's not really the US slamming type) that to this day they don't quite get that life of decency and dignity.
Again, this is only from what I hear, I haven't been to US, but if movies are any indication.... Because you always have the token black person, and everything is so pointedly politically correct, that, reading between the lines, you know those divisions still exist.
Also, I think history points out that any one community, on whom violence is perpetrated, would eventually turn violent themselves. Isreal is a case in point.

I still think with all this going on, that literature - and music - and any other art form - should basically be about what I mentioned above. Serious literature that is. Which is not to say that I'm saying that humourous or light hearted literature is in any way inferior to serious literature - there's nothing on Earth I enjoy more than Wodehouse or Tintin even... It lights up my day, it makes life worth living.
But when someone approaches a serious topic and spirals into identity crises and deconstruction and what not, I'm like get a life. And when I hear about people committing suicide because of a woman/man they were in love with, or a piece of literature that draws out the pangs of lost love, I'm like "If you're having girl problems I feel sad for you son... etc."

25 comments:

aarabi said...

hmmm, have you watched 'rent'? i think it quite makes sense of your post. and it's interesting to go back to your idea of literature as being a 'reflection of life' which is also on of the most widely debated, problematic issues in contemporary performance (touching upon concepts like everyday performitivity) and i think i quite agree with you as far as that claim goes. not just literature but any art, performance or installation work. but i also think that the very nature and definition of 'reality' and 'life' are so dodgy! there are so many alternative/hyper-realities. hehehehee. i'm sorry if my comment reminds you of all those postmodernism lectures back in college. heehehehehee.

aarabi said...

and with that, your blog has been visited by the muse! nyyehehehehee. i'm sorry. pardon the madness. i'm fresh out of a 4 hour lec/seminar on the politics of performance and a watched video of my lecturer smearing shit all over himself. it was staged in france and england sometime last year. he's an artaud worshipping french man! that's contemporary performance and performativity for you. :oD not quite 'roots' but well... it was worth watching! and yes, i loved 'roots' and 'beloved' as well. toni morrison is so amazing! "in a land that loves its blonde, blue eyes children, who weeps for the dreams of a little black girl?" :o)

Abhinav said...

aarabi,
you're totally right about 'reflection of life' being a problematic definition. As you pointed out, its hard enough to define what life is, let alone define lit as a reflection of life.
which is why both myself and chan had a problem with that definition (she was quite vocal about it).
which is why i switch to the earlier one - that literature is about reflecting this basic truth, that we want to live a life of dignity and decency, and are denied it everyday.
i haven't seen rent, but will do so now on your recommendation :)
and i'm guessing you're quoting from 'the bluest eye'. i didnt quite get thro the first chapter of that - i couldnt handle her being raped by her stepfather or whatever.. but then i was fresh out of school when i picked it up and these issues were all just alien and repugnant. maybe i should revisit.

abhorigine said...

i can see you are finding your way through the mass of literature that abounds all around us. i think i get your drift though not completely, because you have been moved profoundly and when that happens, clarity of expression is not that easy. My own test of a great book is: does it make you go round quiet and introspective and not jumping with excitement? In this instance, this apparently is what has happened to you. Such experiences are rare, and great literature has to be different things to different people. The one common factor is of course honesty.

Bharat said...

Abhinav. Am not a student of literature nor have I even glanced upon much of the stuff classified as literature. So take this with that pinch of salt.

I wonder why Literature has to be something that reflects life. It could be reflect life, it could be humourous, offer people solace... It's what people derive from it. But it could just be..., can't it? After all any writer (as RK Narayan put it once) writes mostly because of an urge to express something and sometimes because of habit. There could be genres but to classify something as literature and another as not, is very subjective. What say? To me, RK Narayan's and Wodehouse's works are the best I have read - in terms of entertainment, food for thought and the like. But neither of them have won the Lit Nobel Prize, ever. By that argument, could Jeffrey Archer's or Dahl's short stories be classified as literature?

Bharat said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Abhinav said...

abhorigine,
honesty - that is again, the one thing that any literature should be, and that's my main argument against rushdie, that the emotion is contrived for effect rather than honest.
i don't know about quiet and introspective though... i wouldn't mind getting that adrenalin rush and zest for life, which some books impart.

@bharat,
i think you mistake me when i use the word 'literature'. i dont use it in the sense of 'nobel prize winning material' literature. when i say literature, i simply mean books! of all shapes and sizes.
this definition is about serious literature - by which i mean any book that approaches a serious topic, not necessarily confined to the type of book that would be prescribed at a university.
so wodehouse and narayan, both amongst my favourite writers, definitely qualify.

shrutified said...

i love '99 problems'!! that whole album is excellent. there's also a kick-ass mash-up by DJ Dangermouse (who's one half of the current rage, gnarls barkley), of jayz's black album with the beatles white album --'the grey album'....pretty cool, and you wont believe how well it works.
should literature reflect the nature of life? sure, and maybe prompt the reader to reflect on it, or throw a different light on it...
or maybe literature could sit and stare transfixed at a pea-hen, if it so wishes!
im all for words' hijinks and fireworks, and these dont always have to be particularly enlightening :)

eyefry said...

Man, really, if all we wrote about was real shit, then reading would soon go out of style. A balanced world needs its hardcore social realists as well as its raging-loony fantasists. It'd be dull as hell otherwise. In fact, I think writers such as Rushdie and Marquez are not nearly as escapist as you think - they just seem more aware of the fact that the world is richer than our narrow moralist outlooks make it out to be.

Abhinav said...

ah, both of you are probably right. for some reason, i dont even know why i brought up this subject. hmmm.

Ray of Light... said...

just came across your blog, dunno how i got here, but im sure the six degress of seperation theory will explain it all...i know music better than i do literature, but i do know this much too, that every art form extends itself to another, and your blog hints at that...or maybe i percieved that hint...essentially i read it...and it was an effort :)

Abhinav said...

was it indeed? i'm sure it was!
sorry, i am not myself today.

Ray of Light... said...

hmmm...sorry???why???

eternal flunky said...

"every man has a right to live his life with some decency and dignity"
..including us sons with girl problems..... i'd like to read this book... is it urs, or did ur baas take it back?

chan said...

hmmm...I think I agree with shruti...literature may stare transfixed at a pea-hen if it so wishes...but as far as Rushdie goes, he, at least in Midnight's Children, is doing something that is as far removed from doing something as...well, shall we call it inexplicable, stupid even, as being enthralled by something as...well, unpretty/ uninteresting, as a pea-hen, as the two poles of the earth, exaggeration, may be, but that might well be my middle name ;)
I have a problem with the definition of literature as a ‘reflection of life’...mainly because it privileges, sets up a prescriptive model for the form of what you might describe as serious literary writing…
I suppose I might agree with the description of literature as a reflection on/about life slightly more than your description…which is perhaps why I don’t think Rushdie’s writing contrived/ written for effect/ gimmick writing at all…I think it is brilliant…he is a fantastic Story Teller.

eternal flunky said...

there's this essay called literature and science by aldous huxley... dunno how ur gonna get it but if u can check it out...

eternal flunky said...

rushdie staring at his pen went ah! when he got his idea.... it wasnt a peahen

Abhinav said...

@ray of light,
never mind! i was just talking shit.
btw, what was an effort? reading my blog??? what an insult! but yes, music and literature and every art form have the connecting link of being means of expression... i for one dont know the first damn thing about art, but i would imagine its holds true there as well!


@eternal flunky,
girl problems? you?? thought they were flocking around you, mate.. anyways, fair enough, i will lend you the book.
but what was that last comment of yours all about? clueless.

@chan,
he is indeed a great Story Teller, i never denied it.
and i don't know why everyone here is arguing with me on the basis of 'literature should be a relection of life'.
i thought i made i clear that even i was dissatisfied with that definition.
instead, the other quote, about wanting to live a life of decency and dignity, thats what its all about, is my argument.
rushdie doesnt do that. he goes off into some weird intangible issue that nobody who isn't a self-professed intellectual really gives a shit about.
ok that's a bit harsh.. oh but what the fuck. its what i feel.
no offence btw! its rushdie i can't stand not anyone defending his lit.

Abhinav said...

ok it occurs to me that i was in some weird mood when eyefry and shruti sent in their comments, but here goes, a proper response:

@eyefry,
so are you saying that rushdie is a 'raging-loony fantasist'?
(i havent read marquez so i won't go there)
i disagree.
i don't have a problem with a raging looony fantasist.
i have a problem with someone who's out there to impress audiences - especially Western - and to do so, cloaks his writing in the style of what you call a raging-loony fantasist.
therefore, i don't have a problem with backstreet boys and boyzone - i dont listen to their music, but what theyre saying is, fine, we're gonna make catchy tunes that teenage girls will listen and we're gonna make pots of money, so if u dont like us, go fuck yourself.
thats Fair Enough.
but i have a problem with David Gilmour's Pink Floyd, who looks around asking people what would be a good theme to use for the new album, so that it has the right Pink Floyd depression and seriousness and antiestablishment sentiment, so that he can sell oodles of records.
I mean, Momentary Lapse of Reason, what the fuck was that? Think Roger Waters put it best when he said, "The title is very apt"
The end.

@shrutified,
again, please dont make the mistake of arguing with me on the basis of 'literature should be a relection of life'... i SAID that i was dissatisfied with the definition myself.
all i'm saying is, if you're gonna stare at a peahen, then at least be fucking honest about it.
if youre gonna write 300 pages about a peahen, then don't turn around and say its an abstract post modern post colonial deconstructionist pre-raphaelite absurdist piece of art.
dont just keep piling shit on top of shit, is all i'm saying.

kiri said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ray of Light... said...

what i meant was, unlike the nail cutter tale or the social commentary on Chennai's party scene or even the bashing of the Orkut boy...this one seemed well forced (for the lack of a better word)...now on the other hand i havent read all your stuff...so maybe i just managed to hit the witty and insightful ones...or actually the ones with interesting titles, preferably with profanity in them...you're definitely good at that...

eternal flunky said...

i dunno man... i'v read only a few shortstories of his and that book about the ocean of stories... i thought he had a nice imagination... but gah!!! fuck all that!!! let the pe(ah)ens stare the peahens and the roots dig with the roots...
i think its crazy, reasoning about things... on one level u may say everyone's bound to write what they want to write... on another level, since ppl are writing to get read-at some point of time (even journals are written in the manner of a suicide letter i think)- and if they are writing for others to read then others might as well tell em what they think.... so everyone can keep saying what they want because they feel it and have a right to spout it while they still have a mouth or can hold a peahen .... hmmm... and guys like me can sit and wonder

Abhinav said...

@ray of light,
i am very very flattered that you didn't just read the most recent post.. thanks. and thanks for the compliment on the profanity i am very proud of it. i think used well, words like fuck are absolutely brilliant devices in any narrative.

@eternal flunky,
well, a friend of mine told me that haroun and the sea of stories was fabulous.. i confes i haven't read it, but i will on such strong recommendation. but his supposedly serious stuff, well, i am not a fan.

eyefry said...

Heh. "Raging loony fantasist" is just an extreme example, not a description of Rushdie, god forbid. Here's my drift: I like books. I like anything that's written with style and wit and flair for the language. If I'm dazzled by the sheer power of a writer's skill at storytelling, then goddammit that's all it takes to make me happy. Anyway, fuck all that. What be the source of your bad mood?

Abhinav said...

well, the source of my bad mood would be that rushdie is making pots of money cos he's smart enough to know how to, and i'm not.
quite simple, isn't it? :)