nationalism is a cul-de-sac

Ramta

Member
-

'Aesthetically, nationalism is a cul-de-sac'
12 Dec 2008, 0000 hrs IST


Anthony Stanton teaches at the El Colegio de Mixico, Mexico City. An expert on the writings of Mexican writer Octavio Paz, he was in New Delhi recently to attend an international colloquium on the poet's 10th death anniversary. Stanton spoke to Shreya Roy Chowdhury:

Octavio Paz lived in India for about seven years in the 1950s and 1960s. What did India mean to him?

Paz's idea always was that we can achieve understanding only through the other. It's a partly religious, partly anthropological and philosophical thought that the self can only get to know itself through the other. For Paz, India was fascinating because it offered him a huge variety of spiritual, religious and philosophical traditions on which he could draw upon as a poet.

Which particular traditions did he draw upon?

Conjunction of religions interested him. He was fascinated by Buddhist thought, by Hinduism which he called a Boa Metaphysica, something that absorbs and eats everything. He was also interested in the coexistence of Hinduism and Islam. For India, this was a very difficult problem that had to be dealt with with great tact because a nation cannot suppress any of its main parts. There has to be coexistence and exchange between the different parts. He always recognised that the great variety of India's spiritual traditions is a source of richness but could also be a source of danger. Plurality can also cause fragmentation.

How is Paz relevant today?

Aesthetically, nationalism is a cul-de-sac. There is no way you can go down the road of nationalism in aesthetic terms. It is absurd for a poet to say "I'm only interested in Romanian poetry or Indian poetry or Mexican poetry''. Poets are interested in poetry, all poetry. And Paz was a universalist. Paz was the most universal writer Mexico ever had.

Are Indian writers read in Mexico?

Indian writers are known very little. First, because not many of them have been translated into Spanish. There's very little knowledge of current Indian writing.

What do you think Paz would've thought of the present global situation?

He would've been very worried because he believed in the pacific coexistence of different cultures. The most difficult dialogues are those with other traditions, with other values. At the same time he had a sense of optimism that it is possible to establish dialogue, to understand other cultures. He condemned violence. A lot of his criticism in Mexico was against the extreme Left because they didn't accept democratic values. Paz, in the last years of his life, became a supporter of democratic liberalism, pluralism. He believed in that as the best possible model, not the perfect model because it doesn't solve all the problems but it is the best form of coexistence in modern society.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...alism_is_a_cul-de-sac/articleshow/3824881.cms
Thanks
-
 
Top