This
is in continuation of a previous post, “Hind and Sindh civilizations and getting religion politicized.”
As
I see that, and ,of course, for that matter everyone with a keen eye must have
observed that, History has been proving, as Samuel Johnson dubbed Patriotism,
the last refuge of (not a scoundrel) but all those intellectuals, men of
letters, leaders, communities, nations, sections, or any other such introverted
individuals or groups, who think themselves victim of this or that “injustice”
at the hands of especially those who are ahead of them in any respect, be it
economy, politics, philosophy, science, sports, etc. on the one hand, and on
the other, in development, social luxuries, technologies, etc.
More
than that, I think, in the presence of such a crowd, History hasn’t been able
to acquire its true existence, or rationale.
So
a few new slogans may be devised: Let the History acquire its true existence!
Let the History get rid of the Victims’ Burden!
Isn’t
this true existence of History, another justification for its exploitation to
the benefit of another sect?
I
think, No! And that is why I have titled this post as the “Enterprise of
history.”
To
me, history is a MARSH as well as a PAINTING.
A
historian or reader of History may sink into it, or may learn more and more
details of that painting. Let me assert, it's a continuous painting. There may
be short breaks in this or that tract of the painting, but on the whole it is
continuous and continued; and it must be added as we say and need to save this
human planet: to be continued.
And
it depends on the attitude of a historian and reader of History how they see History.
Further, it also depends on the nature of their historical venture whether History
will prove to be a marsh or a painting to them.
If
they go into History, i.e. write history or read history to find out certain
"principles" which will justify ways of their present or imagined
existence connected with the past, or this or that form of their existence,
they will be trapped in the marsh.
And
if they go into it to learn more and more details of the painting, they will
remain firmly standing on their ground, and will not try to replace their
present existence with this or that or with an imagined existence.
Let
it be clarified here that this imagined existence is painted with the stuff
gathered from the History, and has no future dimension. Or if it has a future
dimension, as presently the violent religionists claim, it consists of the
imagined existence to be imposed on the present part of the painting.
I
am not saying that there is "X History" and we try to find out that;
that there was a history which needs to be discovered. Also, I do not mean that
we are free to write History of our choice or liking; or shape History the way
we want it to be or to look. Or, as the “victim communities” desperately seek
it to be and to look. What I want to bring out is that we need to see the
painting with more and more details.
What’s
the purpose of seeing this painting in and with more and more detail? I won’t
say: in order to keep the continuity of this painting intact! I don’t mean
that.
What
I mean is: it is a continuous painting, and we live and tread inside and within
this painting (though we do strive to go beyond that), and how can it be
imagined that what we live within or inside is a broken or shattered piece of
plane.
And
as it may be objected: why this unbroken continued painting is necessary for
our living. I would reply: as far as other forms of life are concerned who are
on a very raw level of rational existence, it is fine for or with them if they
do not bother about this painting or its continued-ness or its shattered-ness;
nonetheless for the rational human beings, or say forms of life with higher rational
consciousness, it is indispensable that their living has a continued existence
in the form of this continued painting.
I
remember Karl Popper says our minds are like prisons, we cannot escape it. But
we are free to broaden our prisons, and we need to continue to broaden its
walls.
I
think it is same with History. We cannot ignore this painting; or change this
painting in accordance with our wishes or demands. What we are free to do is to
see the painting with more and more details.
Let’s
see what Romila Thapar has got to say in this regard:
Q:
Will it be fair to say the basis of your analysis has been historical
materialism?
A:
Well I would not put it as simply as that. I think anyone who wrote history in
the twentieth century had to take historical materialism seriously. Whether you
accept it or not is another matter. If you reject it, they have to know why. My
influence has been partly historical materialism, partly the French Annales
School, interdisciplinary work and one's own ideas. The nice thing is that the
debate in India between Marxists and others and among liberal historians has generated
a lot of ideas. History has therefore changed.
[P.
109, Voices of Sanity - Harbingers of Peace, Zaman Khan, (Archetypes, Heinrich
Boll Stiftung), December 2008, Lahore]
As
Thapar states historians always need to sharpen their tools, their methodology;
likewise the readers of History also need to be mindful of the fact that
nothing can be brought out of History which may give this or that community
this or that identity or any other imagined identity derived from the past and
/ or posited on the future part of the painting.
What
history does is just gathering more and more details so that the painting is
clearer and more intelligible. And more intact, also!
And
it is here where perennial re-writing of history (the painting) and the
perennial re-reading of history finds their rai·sons d'ĂȘtre.
So
they are sunk in the marsh who are intent upon pasting this or that tract of
the painting on this or that part of the painting, and they do this without
knowing the details of that tract. Pity that they do not aspire to have a total
view of the painting, and thus live inside this painting! They tear the
painting, grab this or that piece of it, and run away with it, and declare this
a mission of theirs that they are here to paint it anew with the colors of
their choice, whilst they are color-blind!
No comments:
Post a Comment