Recent Posts
Disillusionment
4zPGo+
No.224
There is a certain kind of cognitive dissonance when I read western literature or even anything that isn't in relation with our culture. I enjoy them thoroughly but most do not remain relavent in relation to my daily life due to how different the circumstances that developed these works were.
I linger with the hope that there is still some obscure and experimental sahitya being developed that faces this question of schizo-culture head on. Literature reeks of eurocentricism but there is no doubt that there is a common denominator of universalization in the way ideas and concepts develop. But there is still some doubt in my mind.
Do people from /sa/ experience this?
zvn2R0
No.225
>>224(OP)
>I enjoy them thoroughly but most do not remain relavent in relation to my daily life due to how different the circumstances that developed these works were.
'relevant' in what sense? usefulness? true-ness?
Most literature is moreso like a drink, say like wine. You don't drink it for its nutritional value - not to say there isn't any - but for everything except. You drink to enjoy it. (By most I mean the mode of literature consumed typically)
This aspect still is retained in books you read(in every book to some extent), otherwise they would be too coarse, too dry to swallow.
The thing is, a difference in circumstances doesn't prevent you from understanding those circumstances. This is hinged on what you mentioned in the last line: 'that there is a common denominator of universalisation in the way ideas and concepts develop.' But again, you do admit it. Well, but you must know if there was a difference in circumstances other than what you can immediately understand, you would intuitively acknowledge its difference and feel dissonance, so I don't get what you mean, you seemingly answer it yourself.
>Do people from /sa/ experience this?
this is experienced more in fiction than nonfiction which(nonfiction) is more 'general', in how it relates to everything.
IWfDEv
No.226
>>225
>'relevant' in what sense? usefulness? true-ness?
Identification, which is a cheap "want", I admit.
But Literature and Art, in general, seem to work as getaways approaching some kind of objectivity.
>I don't get what you mean, you seemingly answer it yourself.
I'm aware, I didn't pose it as a question, it was more of a quasi-proclamation of the sentiment.
As you said, in order to be able to appreciate arts you forgo looking at mundane and trivial things that work as placeholders, to get to the heart of whatever the text is getting at, it's just one of those times when you feel no identification with anything whatsoever.
I'd guess that it has more to do with the times we live in, where everything is seemingly thrown out the window but there is still some resemblance, some ties to what was which makes it all the more overwhelming.
aQdgGS
No.228
>>224(OP)
Pleasantly surprised to see such conversations on bhach of all places
I get what you mean. I've thought about taking up Hindi books seriously to understand if there is any deeper meaning or identification I can glean from them.
While >>225 is correct in his own way, I do feel there is an element of cognitive dissonance no matter how much you boil down the book to its basics. And this is all the more true for books which rely explicitly on the setting than any plot. For example, I've never been able to get much into Americana Indie stuff (especially music) because it always feels a little distant and foreign.
On a related note, I feel the same when I see 'Indian' art viewing India from the same condescending and rigid western perspectives of feminism, patriarchy and oppression. I think only Panchayat sheds these lenses to look at India as it is.
