paper 11 The post colonial literature

ImaginaryHomelands:
               1) Atten Borough ‘s Gandhi  2)Hobson –Jobson.

        Imaginary  Homeiands , a collection  of Salman Rushdle’s Jaknalism From the last decade,  thus provides Several  Services. It Gives Us a non ficion Rashclie database , the direct voice of this upsetter of international business  -as- usual  without distorting media static. It also  unpacks Rushdie longstanding general positions – socialist, secularist, modernist, anticolonialist, anti  American – through short out bursts  keyed to concrete topics.

     Most illuminating,it exposes both the self-righteous side of Rushdie that made his support among literary peers for Shakier in private than in public,and a more recent (and appling) turn to  introspection.

  The 70 pieces divided into 12 Sections. The first three parts of Imaaginary Homeiands gather Rushdie’s thoughts on What he  calls “SubContinental” matters, from  the assinationl of  Indira Gandhi to the Work of novelist Anita Desai, A Particularly representative essay, “Common Welath does not  exist” angrily rejects the marginalizatiol of non – British Writcrs of English.Section-4 Contains Rushdie’s responses to T.V. and movie Subjects , Such as. Indian director Stayjit Ray and Richard Atton Borough’s osar- Winning Gadhi.

Section-5 examines a frequent ushdie concern,the condition of third world migreates in britain and Section-6 focuses on british politics.The next five parts reprint Ruchdie`s reviews of boos by authors from around te world and the finale five pieces should be linked to `stanic verses crisis.’ Rushdie remaks hopefully in his preface that,

``reason is slowly replacing anger at the center of the debate.’’

1] Attenborough`s  Gandhi:

                         The Essay,attenborough`s Gandhi,in which eassiyat talk about the movie `Gandhi.’ As I have mention before that section -4 contain rushdie`s responses to t.v. and movie subjects so here talks about the same.

                       The essay starts with the word ``Deification’’, and he further said that defication is an indian disease,as attonborough might now about it and he has construct Gandhi as a `` Mahatma’’,as it is indian disease to say that ``Avtar’’ will come and do somting good for human being and they maes a human as a ``Avtar’’ and console their humanself and deend over avtar and attonborough has do it in the movie.But he has not describe``Gandhi-a gafty human’’ and Attonborough knew that what Indians like and what oscar-nobel commitlee would be like and for that he has just put the image of Gandhiji as a Mahatma and he has avoided Nathuram Godse`s speech,ploticalthriller also absent in te movie.

                         As Attonboroug`s didn`t include speech of Nathuram Godse``s because he knew that ,no one like d to watch or listen Nathuram Godse as he has killed ``Mahatma’’ in that case Nathuram is a villan and if he has included this portion in to movie than movie might not be selected as a oscar winning movie.Here we can say that Richard AttonBorough has chosen the events,in the movie.Which is distorted the history.

                        We have a mindset that ``Gandhi’’ movie ,made in wastern is must be good. An movie gathered applause for this reson that a western has made the movie on Gandhi and also the character of Gandhi,played by the western man ben kingsley,so it for must be selected for the Oscar,People don`t like to Giticice over western,bthough the movie has lots of misteke but it is our mindset that movie must be good as it was made in western,but kushdie was in against of it and he has criticised the movie.

Rushdie asks:

           `` Why American academy wish to help him by offering In  a temple eight glittering statuettes to a film?’’

                A. The exotic  impulse to see India as the Fountainhed of spiritual  plystical wisdom

                b. The christion longing for a leader`s dedicated to ideals  for poverty and simplicity

                c. A political desire that revolutions should be made purely by non –violence alone.

                           Rushdie says that the british have been mangling Indian history for centurise.Much of debate has been done about this movie that why not subhas chandra bose? Why  no Tagore? Why not Nehru? The answer is that the center is important for nay artistic wor because that creates.

                            There are many powerful sequences in this movie.For intence,the American massare,in court-martial an  englishman asks  the qustion about jalawala bagh to dyer.The scenes say that his actions were tose of cruel and immediately after condemned by Anglo-India .it was false.

                            The British in panjab 1919 afaired of second Indian munity.When Dyer gose to england,he was welcomed as a here.The maganing was  completely changed here.Dyer villan for us and here for them.In the movie Gandhi`s assassinaion comes in the beginning as well as in the end also.In between this there is nothing about Assassatoin.In the movie,Nathuram Godse is member of the Hindu-fanatic Rss, Who blamed Ggandhi as a reason for partition.In the movie is in  crowd that represents him differently,

-          It may be that he represants the crowd that turned aginst Gandhi

-          Godse was `one lone  met’

-          Gandhi is a christ and his assassination is the crucifixion which is done by godse.

           In the movie Godse was not the reprsentative of mob because he was not alone in his wor.The awkward aspects are there in the movie.The movie also omists Gandhi`s Fondness for Indian bilioner industrialist.He died in Brila house in Delhi.

         Gandhiji also repress ents the portrits of most of leader .who struggled for the independence.Sardar patel is a hardworing man whereas he is like a clown here ;jinha is portrayed as count dracula ,the most important change in the personality of Nehru.

        Nehru was not Gandhi `s diciple their debate was famous. Nehru was the urban sophisyicated person  wo wanted to industrialize india while Gandhi was a rural man,indi craft loving and so,there was confined in their ideas.In this film,nehru becomes acolyet of gandhiji.Here Bose was vident.he improved the movie.The message of gandhi was to fight against oppressors without weapon,without biolence but it was all non-sence.The leader in India did succeeds because they were moral than British.The british were smarter.Crefter who fought with politician than opponents.

      Rushdie says that it in a satirized manner that it was best film of 1983,acording to hidden agenda oscar shididh comitte and god help the film  industry.it was expensive movie.Thus Rushdie gives his views about Attenborough `s Gandhi and at the end he significantly said that,

`` Rich man lie emperors ,have always had a weaness for tame men holy men for saints”

v    HOBSON  JOBSON

                      Hobson Jobson, a humourous essay by sulman Rushadie laugh over western.

Hobson Jobson as Salman Rushdie comses from words Ya hussain,these words are from muslim religion and western could not heard the words properly,ya husan ya husan

And they puts the name like hobson.Jobson and here Rushdie laugh over Western that they heard Ya husan ya husan as Hobsan Jobson.

                   Hobson Jobson is a unique lexicon of british India,part dicionary,part social history, a hugegly entertaining compliation of words and phrases here published for the first time with the published for the introduction and notes that shed light on the book’s origins,inflence and cultural significance. A classic work of victorian scolarship, the glossary unlocks the Raj throgh its language and it is the perfect introduction to colonial attitudes and companion to Indian literature from kipling to Rushdie.

               The book,which documents the words and phrases that entered english from Arabic,persian,Indian and chinese sources and the vice versa as Salman Rushdie described as the legendary dictionary of British India.It shows how words of Indian origin were absorded but the culture  of Raj.It encompasses aspects of the history,trade.peoples and geography of Asia.

          As during Breitish Raj in India,they couldnot speak such words of India so that turns them in to their own pronounciation and accent,as they were in power position so what they spoke was right as such words which they turned are,

             

                   India                 Western

                      

                   Culcutta           Kolkata

                   shyamala         shimala

                   vadodara          Baroda

                   Kheda                Kheira

        People believe that Western people has accepted Indian language and also other languages and they call as “ English is more flexible language than other.”In this way they call their language a flexible language but it is flexible for them and flexible according to their prefer,if Indians or other Asian countries people speak in English they laugh over them but as English people are too smart that they knew that they will also become laughing figure when they pronounce our language so they created the dictionary. Imperial power effects in every field,as it’s also effect over language as English people were in power position so what they speak,everyone has to follow them if they were wrong,no one is ready raise voice against them.As now America is in a Power position so American speaks English but according to their pronunciations and such kind of things and no doubt we all like to follow them as English people cannot pronounce  consonant sound “R” easily so they ignore R sound from the word like “Car”, from their language and what we do ? we think that it is a proper way to ignore “R” sound from such words and we also pronounce it like them but American think that they can easily pronounce the sound “R” so they speak it easily so they speak English in their style so now power position change so we all like to follow them.

     The essay as written by post colonial writer Rushdie,so doubt must be their,as Western might have good idea to create dictionary but post colonial doubt is that it is an effect of imperialism,and western who laugh over others,but Rushdie gives a new way to laugh on them.