ADVISORY
COUNCIL
|
Haji
Mohamed Idris
(Chairperson) |
Claude Alvares
(Convenor)
|
Website created
by:
Vinay Lal, Associate Professor of History, UCLA, USA
All material on this site is coyrighted:
Vinay Lal, 2005.
Authors of individual pieces hold the copyrightto their own pieces. However,
all material may be reproduced freely, without
permission, though it is requested
that proper acknowledgment be made to the author(s) of the pieces being
reproduced.
|
|
On Books, Publishing, and Intellectual Independence from
the West
by Claude Alvares
Remarks excerpted from the February 2002 Penang meeting
The word 'Multiversity', the patent or the trademark, came from Anwar
Fazal. I don't know where he got it from and in having the first discussions
here in Penang around six months ago, he suddenly just pulled this out,
he must have been thinking about it a little bit earlier, but he is got
a facility for all these things like words and phrases and slogans and
so on.
But the active proposal that was sent to you, that was sent on the Net
and in the printed form ('Recapturing Worlds') was basically drafted seven
years ago and for seven years we have not been able to carry out this
particular thing.
People like Ashis [Nandy] and so on have been working on this probably
for a much longer period. Several people have been thinking about these
things because the entire structure of academic knowledge is, when examined
closely, so appalling, that it is very difficult to be associated with
it. I'm a classic case. I got my certification done at that time almost
by accident, but after that I've just not been able to work in any university
set-up, because it's just not possible to. University and freedom, they
just don't go together, just like school and free-thinking, it's just
not possible. Therefore, if you want to do anything, if you want to protect
your mind and the way you think about things, you've just got to get out
of it. And remain out.
I admire the courage of people like Ashis. Ashis of course created his
own niche in the Centre for Developing Societies, which has remained outside
the formal university set up. Like him others have created different ways
of keeping out of it and still maintaining some relationship with it in
some way. But I was not able to relate to it in any way for many years.
Instead of facing the problem as it is, both my wife and I, we said, what
can we do as two intellectuals living in a state like Goa, that can, in
a certain sense, bring out these issues and deal with some of these problems,
and it was 1986 when we decided to set up the Other India Bookstore. A
few words about this institution that is now more than fifteen years old,
surviving on its own steam, without any grants, and purely as a commercial
proposition.
When we started in 1986, we started because if you went to any bookshop
in the country, you couldn't get books from Africa. You couldn't get any
book written by any African intellectual. It was not possible, unless
it had been processed as a European-seller or something like that, or
came through after having ridden on the backs of the salaries paid to
English printers and English publishers. They made more money on it than
even the African writers themselves.
And as for books by people in India, for books from Malaysia or from
Singapore, or from the Philippines, just forget about it. It was not possible.
We went around travelling and talking to people about this. When we went
to Indonesia, in the university there, there were two journals, both in
English - one was produced by the Indonesians themselves, and one was
produced by the Australians, who are the typical colonial masters of Indonesia,
they direct their intellectual culture. And after discussing everything
and how to get these journals to India and all that, at the end of it
all, the faculty tells us, "But you should still use the Australian
one", because it's in better English, and better produced and so
on.
This was something that we couldn't believe, here were people, intellectuals,
university people, who were telling us that we produce this, and the Australians
produce this, it's both the same thing, in terms of they are both discussing
Indonesian politics, Indonesian society and so on. But when it comes to
the crunch, if you really want something of value, you buy the Australian
journal. And this is more or less the response we got in several other
places. I remember having a conversation with Lat, who is the greatest
cartoonist of Malaysia. I said, look, we'd like to publish your two famous
books Kampung Boy and Town Boy in India. I remember when our kids were
small and we wanted to keep them engaged, because we don't have a TV set
even till today, we used to give them a Lat cartoon book, and they would
go into a totally different mode altogether. They were Indians, and these
are Malaysian cartoons, about, Malaysian life, but it was so extraordinary,
that they could be completely engaged, and there were no barriers of any
kind and they were able to really interact with those children running
around the village with their hair spiked up, those big teeth and so on,
that Lat cartoons are famous for.
But when I asked Lat he said that nobody would look at my cartoon books
in India. This is something that came out of his own perception. He doesn't
know India in that sense, but he had this conception that his books were
only good for Malaysia, that it would fail anywhere else because it was
a sort of a local product. It was the first time that I was hearing an
author who said that I'm not willing to give you my intellectual product
because I think that ipso facto it is going to be a failure. And this
is something that you couldn't really tolerate after some time, for how
long can you go on like this, can you accept this type of an intellectual
world.
I was attending a meeting in Singapore, and there was this fellow who
had written a big thing on the Malaysian environment and he had about
fifty references and all the fifty references were non Malaysian. Then
I said, how the hell could you write a paper like this where all your
source material is people from outside Malaysia. He said that if he put
Malaysian references, nobody would read his paper.
That sort of thing has driven us for sometime. Either we continue this
circus, its very pleasant for most of us, it gets many of us reasonable
jobs, incomes and so on, you continue this circus in the name of knowledge
and freedom and free thinking, or we say at some stage that maybe you
take it seriously but I'm not going to take it seriously. I'm going to
find a lot of people who don't take it seriously anymore. Or they take
it seriously in the way it should be taken but beyond that we said this
is something that is not something that we have done, it is not something
that we have created and certainly we are not going to keep on being conduits,
basically conduits and transmission centres for other outputs from the
centre, there's a centre and a periphery and everything just comes from
one place and goes in the other direction.
It's a grim reality, I mean if you go to any of the book shops in Penang
or any other place, you'll find that by a conservative estimate, about
85-90% of the books printed, written, still are just from either American
Presses or UK presses. Not even from France or Sweden. And there's no
law why this should be so. There's nothing in the United Nations charter
that says that we all have to read only these types of books. Nobody made
this type of imposition. India is a community of one billion people and
nobody told us what we should teach to our students and how we should
teach it and what books are truth and what contains knowledge and so on.
But our immediate practical problem when we used to people was, "you
say a lot about African literature, but where is African literature available?"
and then we realize that there was a specific problem. If you don't have
knowledge about African literature, about African writers, or African
sociology, then how do you prescribe it? For university lecturers this
is a specific problem, you've got to give some source material and there
is no source material available. All your libraries are choc-a-block with
only one type of material.
Then we said okay, this is something that we should do because nobody
has worked on this area and we're going to try and see whether we can
crack it. We then specifically made trips to all these south Asian countries,
we went to Sri Lanka, we went to places like Uganda. In Uganda we went
to their main bookshop and there were no books on the shelves at all,
they had no money to buy books. They had some old journals and magazines,
most of them this Christian propaganda and so on because they are heavily
dominated by Christian communities in many of these African countries.
And there was all dust on it, I can still visually remember it. We went
to Zimbabwe book fair where there was a complete domination of the entire
publication industry in the whole of Africa by Whites, just as they dominated
their dairy farms and so on. The African children, the African public
came to the book fair, they went round and they could only collect the
brochures because brochures were free. They couldn't afford any of the
books. There were no books that any African could buy at the biggest book
fair held in Africa. They had no money to buy it because the prices were
of that kind, published by English people and so on, with fine paper and
so on. But that desire was there, they came for the book fair and then
they were just told that this is not for you because if we thought it
was for you, we would have taken the damn trouble to see that it was made
available for you.
Like in India for example, some trouble is taken, like the national book
trust, a huge organization set up by the government of India that really
produces extremely cheap books, like the Chinese do. Some of these books
are very conventional, but some of them are very good. The children's
book trust in India for example produces hundreds of books for children
that any person in any small town in India can buy.
But that situation does not exist at all in Africa. So we said, is there
some way by which these problems can be addressed. If the problem is making
some books available, we'll try and get it done. So we started importing
books from Africa, we took all the Malaysian books and I think that it
is only as a result of the Other India Bookstore that this entire TWN
publications, CAP publications, other publications in Malaysia could get
into the Indian mainstream. We've got books from the Philippines, we've
got books from Thailand, we've got books from different areas and started
making them available.
And the most unusual thing to report is that they all got sold. Whatever
stocks we bought from Africa, they were all sold. Of course there are
specific problems about getting book consignments there, getting money
transactions done and so on. But still whatever books we did manage to
import got through and we used to go and make specific deals with the
publishing houses saying you give us the books at the African rate because
being Indians we can only afford African prices, we can't afford UK prices.
In many cases we couldn't import the books because the rights had been
taken by the African Book Collective which is located in London so if
you wanted to get a book into India, you had to import it from the London
guys and the London guys were quite terrible. They were deciding who were
the good African writers and who would be not, who would suit European
audiences and what sorts of African themes would suit them so that they
would have a market and in the end they would probably maintain many of
the old stereotypes of African culture and so on. So, business wise, we
found that it was a possibility, it's not that you can't make money out
of this, you can't survive on this, it is possible and people in this
country were interested in books from these other places as well.
I think the common people sometimes are probably far better off than
intellectuals in Universities because intellectuals in Universities have
to submit to the prevailing intellectual doctrine of the time. If you
go for a conversation and you're not able to mention this Derrida fellow,
I thought he was a bull fighter, but I heard that he is a very big name
in I don't know whether its in sociological circles or what circles. I've
not heard of this guy, don't know what he looks like and have not read
a single book of his at all. But if you don't read it I suppose in Delhi
or something and if you then write a paper and you don't mention this
guy, that's the tyranny I mean the common person on the street is not
subjected to that kind of tyranny and he would probably be more liberated
and able to read a book about, say Singapore than somebody from a university
who would say, I can't quote this in my paper, how can I quote a Singapore
intellectual in my paper because it is designed for publication in some
European journal or something and they also probably don't consider Singaporean
writers to be any good.
So this is the framework in which we had to operate. The result is that
in the end we were able to prove several things. We were able to prove
that first of all that there was very good intellectual work in these
areas, by and large, about eighty to eighty five percent of intellectual
work there is as bad as it is in India or as bad as it is in Europe or
in the US, 80 to 85% is basically regurgitation and all this sort of thing
that goes on most of the time. But there used to be interesting work and
you could get that over and you could get it over into the university
system for example my own book, through the Other India Bookstore, not
that I promoted it, I think is used as a reference for some course work
in University Sains Malaysia because they keep ordering every time in
bulk and so on.
So there are these sort of things that are happening but certainly through
Multiversity we could expand this thing in a more coordinated manner because
it's not possible for individuals running a small enterprise like the
Bookstore to make a dent on the scale that is required.
I remember I was discussing with African academics in Makerere and all
these other places, they told us that in the fifties and sixties, all
their English literature courses were only designed on Indian writers.
They were not designed on English writers. But now in this period, Indian
writers have again gone out of the market because the text that is most
easily available, at that time India had a lot of relationship with Africa,
now we have gone back to other relationships and the result is that the
imposition from the UK and from other places has come back again in full
force and so the Africans have only those types of books again on front
of them. And the literature that they felt comfortable with, they are
no longer having in front of them. And the students of themselves of course,
can't even afford these books so most of them just get out of the system.
So if we could work on these sort of things, we could certainly take
one of the primary tasks of Multiversity to really look very critically
at the problem of books. And that's why one of the main initiatives that
we thought in the beginning was can we come out with even a list of five
hundred titles. Vinay says that he's got a list of five hundred titles
on his own. Can we come up with a list of titles which we can tell people
who are bound to ask us you are talking about this, where is the exhibit
is you're saying that there is some intellectual work taking place, where
is it, where is it available. Show us some book, show us some literature,
show us some bibliographies, then we'll probably begin to look at it.
I was showing Uncle Idris a book that has just come out last year in
the English market by a guy called Peter Watson. It's about nine hundred
pages long, and the entire thesis of the book is that in the entire twentieth
century, there was not a single idea that came from any country except
the Western countries. This is another Fukuyama type of thing, but it's
very big, and if you're not fairly convinced, at least he can throw the
book at you and convince you by sheer weight of it. This is the type of
book that is sold and read and reinforces stereotype, not only there,
but also reinforces things here and the conviction of any intellectual
who reads that book is, all the important thinkers and all the people
who contributed, Picasso and all that, are all in bold, and there's not
a single person from any third world country in bold at all except Spivac,
Spivac is a person who has actually worked on themes that were invented
by the West, but Watson thinks that that is the best. Mahatma Gandhi is
only mentioned in a line, not even in bold. And this was published in
the year 2000.
So I'm not saying that we have to go by that. I'm only saying that if
you can work on very specific aspects like book lists, interaction, people
travelling. I used to have discussions with some of these guys: why can't
we go to some of the African universities once in a way, and have discussions
with them. Those guys are really waiting for conversations, which they
can't have. The only conversation they can get is if they get a free ticket
to go to the US or to London or something, otherwise they can't have conversations
with Indians at all. They come as students to Indian universities, but
beyond that they're treated very badly because they're Black and so on.
There's no respect, there's no collaboration of that kind.
But this kind of system was being done some time earlier, it has all
gone again, and we'll have to restore it, we'll have to restore these
inter-linkages once again. One of the things we found, interestingly,
effective in the Bookshop, that's why it's called the Other India Bookstore,
was very strict enforcement of the exclusion principle. What about all
those people in the West who are very critical of Western society, shouldn't
we include them in this process? We had the same discussions in the bookstore
when we started, it's only good books published by Zed and some of them
by people from India, it's the latest Mecca for publishing in that sense,
and they've dominated Third World publishing and so on, and shouldn't
we keep their books also in our bookshop.
And we took a very important decision at that time, that at least for
the first ten years, we would not keep any book in our bookshop, if it
was published, printed and written abroad, meaning basically somewhere
in the UK, or the US, we would just not do it, and they said that this
would just not be possible. But it became possible, and we had to put
in special effort to see that this principle was enforced. And now when
people come to our bookshop, they're really amazed, because the books
that they find there, they can't find in any other bookshop, so it's become
the Other India Bookstore, because when they ask you the name, and then
they go into the bookshop, we don't have to do any explaining after that,
they realize what we're saying. But we excluded because sometimes it's
necessary to exclude.
I remember we had this meeting in Delhi as a prior meeting to this Calicut
conference, on this Vasco-da-Gama thing in 1998 and we were discussing
who were the people who were going to attend at Calicut and so on and
there were a lot of people from Australia, some very lovely people who
were all third world people in spirit who had come to fight and so on.
And we told them that this meeting was being held but anybody with white
skin was not welcome, that would just make problems for the group. So
there was a huge uproar, particularly from the Australians who said that
you can't do a thing like this, you can't have a meeting without us and
so on. I told them that for five hundred years, you've excluded us from
everything, excluded us from knowledge, excluded us from place, excluded
us from the economies, excluded us from everything. Don't you think you
should allow us to have one meeting at which we can exclude you? Just
one meeting.
For the bookstore it was a very practical thing, because with the type
of intellectual climate that's prevailing in the country and elsewhere,
everyone wants to read books still published which are looking fancy,
which carry all these themes of construction, deconstruction, all those
sort of things, they want to have those types of books. And its very easy
for me as a book seller to sell all the literature that's coming out on
the third world alone, coming from Zed press, there's a lot of people
who would buy it, they'd probably pay 600 to 700 rupees because the pound
has gone that high, so they'd pay that price also because people are willing
to pay a high price for their tyranny. They would get a steady market,
there'd be no problem at all. But if we had not excluded, I remember having
conversations with Zed, with Pluto who came to Goa and said, look, you
are people who have got the most amazing network for distribution of literature,
NGO literature, alternative literature in India and we would like to be
part of it. We said no, we can't take any of your books. They said they'd
give us a sixty percent discount on all their titles. We said no, we're
just under a charter, we just put everything to the charter. We said our
charter doesn't allow us to sell any books that are printed and published
in the US or UK.
And, have we gone down? No, not at all. In a sense we've survived and
even other bookstores are complaining because if you get the same books
in every book shop everywhere, then if I'm going from Delhi to Bangalore,
why would I visit a Bangalore bookshop because I'll get the same books
anywhere in Delhi. It's the same uniformity, if I go to a Filipino bookshop
in Manila, I find the same kind of bookshop there except for one bookshop
which is different, all the other books are the same.
An English writer, if he gets his book published, he automatically gets
it reviewed in all the news papers all over the world, he gets it in all
the bookshops all over the world. They never think that reverse courtesy
is possible. They don't think it's necessary. So from the point of view
of good business, if you have different books, then it's worthwhile for
people to come into your bookshop and look at them.
Another thing we found very interesting was, we began with a lot of academic
books in 1986. Fifteen years later academic books, and for some reason
this gender studies, they have become complete flops in terms of sales
for some reason. Either people are losing interest in that kind of work
or whether it's got something to do with the quality of the work, I don't
know. But we have to follow the "does this book sell or not",
we can't keep twenty copies of a book and find that it doesn't sell. And
if you look at our catalogues, the catalogues from the first time and
the catalogues now, you will find a vast difference between, it sort of
reflects on what people at the grass roots are thinking and what are their
preferences in terms of the types of books they want and so on. So that's
another disturbing thing for academics, as it is academics books don't
sell well and if they're going to also be sort of rejected at this stage
then I think that
Maybe it's a good thing, maybe we're reaching
a stage where people in the end realize that all these institutions, university,
courts, parliament and all that is more or less crumbling on its own and
so on. So I think that we have to spend some time seriously on what's
going to happen. I face it as a personal problem because I have three
sons and I think that whatever I do in terms of a person who has been
to a University, who has got himself certified and so on is basically
what do we do with these three guys and how do they get through schooling
without damaging their minds, how do they get to university, do we compel
them to do what other parents compel them to do and so on, very specific
things, what are the ideals we put before them that what is schooling
meant for, what is college meant for. Is it meant to get a degree or is
it meant to get a job and what is a job, is a job in the end getting a
pair of Levis jeans and Ray Ban glasses and driving about in a car and
going to play golf or something. Is that the sort of thing that we want
our kids to become.
And we can very easily get them into that system. Parents all the time,
you either get them into that system or you tell them you move in that
system but you also move out it. We found that our best solution was to
while they were in the system, go along the system but don't subject yourself
to any pressures at all. Whenever you want to get out of the system, you
get out of the system, spend some time outside the system and then go
back into it if necessary. We found that in the end the best way of looking
after, because we were ourselves not able to spend being heavily involved
in lots of activities we were not able to spend, like what most parents
would do, in home schooling and so on, really be able to direct those
fellows. In the end we just decided to take a chance, nature is good enough,
she'll teach these guys how to operate and more or less I think they've
come out with their minds largely intact and with non of the conventional
objectives that you can get from normal children elsewhere, what they
call elsewhere who know exactly that they want to become doctors, engineers,
they want to do and MBA, they want to go to this university. At least
we were able to get out of it and all our work has been in that direction,
to try and even in the publishing house bring out literature which will
more or less try and unsettle people's minds and get them to look very
seriously at this type of very extensive tyranny, where you're not able
to look outside what is given to you. And you've really got to go along
with it and if you don't go along with it, well people will not take you
seriously or you will not be able to make very profound statements at
conferences or meetings and so on.
We've called this meeting so we have people talking, putting things together
on how Multiversity should run. Maybe eventually at the end of these three
days, we will come out with some very specific things in which we can
work out the Multiversity process. But that will again depend on how much
we agree on the things that we should do. What is the area that we have
to criticise. What is the area we cannot accept, what we feel is contaminated
and what we feel is useless and so on. On that sort of consensus we will
do all that.
That's why we've prepared a Multiversity Vision Statement that, needless
to say, is only a draft. It's drafted by me largely, but it's still a
draft and it's only to enable you to have something to work on. It's sometimes
easier to modify something that's before you than to work on something
entirely afresh. But if there's somebody who wants to draft something
entirely afresh, there's perfect freedom to do so, there's no set agenda
in that sense. Specifically what we should do in terms of programs, meetings,
how do we interact with university traditions, how do we interact with
history congresses, how do we interact with university grants commissions,
how do we interact with SAARC and Group 77 and so many other things, that
is something that will unwind over the next two or three years. But to
start with we need to achieve clarity ourselves.
One major question for e.g. is, should we teach history? I don't know.
I remember thirty years ago when I was going to St. Xavier's college,
the text book said that we were discovered by Vasco da Gama. Thirty years
later I was there in Calicut opposing the arrival of Vasco da Gama five
hundred years earlier. This is not history, this is garbage, this is toxic
poisonous stuff. I mean you are giving people wrong ideas about themselves,
their culture, their civilisation. Claude Levi-Strauss said that anthropology
is a science that third world people cannot do, it's only to be done by
conquerors of victimized societies. So victim societies can't do anthropology,
it can only be done by people who have conquered them. So if that is the
case, why should we continue to do anthropology, why don't we just chuck
the whole damn thing out and say okay, you continue to do it and some
balanced people will do some reverse anthropology on you guys, we can
initiate some anthropology on them. But right now, should we teach anthropology,
should we teach psychology, and if so what do we teach in anthropology
or psychology.
So these are very important things because we've got thousands of millions
of students, young people like my sons, I always look at them as the antyodaya
of Gandhi. You think about them going through this system and if it applies
to them and you think of them going to this system, they don't know whether
to take Arts or Science or Commerce. If they get into Arts they don't
know whether to do political science or sociology, they don't know what
to do. Everyone of them is really tasteless, they can't think that they've
got to spend three to four years of life on it. I want to see Multiversity
trying to get them out of that situation and still maintaining their knowledge
of the place where they were born, the surroundings, the traditions in
which they were born, the traditions which have been documented orally
and which are in danger of being forgotten for other reasons. So these
are questions that Multiversity must take up
.
|
|
|