Representation of the ‘National Self’— Novelistic Portrayal of a New Cultural Identity in Gora

Dipankar Roy,Visva-Bharati, India

 Abstract

Any colonial rule involves a systematic and ruthless attack on the culture and heritage of the colonized race. This often results in a total loss or at least maiming of the sense of ‘self’ for the colonized people. The masculinist self of the colonizer labels the self of the colonized as ‘effeminate’. In reaction to this, the nationalist consciousness of the colonized people often tries to replicate the macho virility of the colonial masters in an act of fashioning a ‘nationalist self.’ In the context of Indian colonial history we see development in similar lines. But, the codification of the dominant strand of the nationalist consciousness in overt masculinist terms often have strange reverberations. This paper is about such an act of fashionning selves and its after-effects. To study the issue in the Indian colonial contexts I have chosen Rabindranath Tagore’s novel Gora as a case-study. The conception of this novel’s central character is largely modelled on the issue of an ‘ideal’ national self.  The author, however, by observing the dialogic principle consistently in the text, problematises the dominant ideas connected with the figure of ‘nationalist self’. How he does it will be my main concern in this article. Whether it is possible to arrive at a general tendency of the nature of India’s colonial encounter with the British in relation to the issue of the development of the national character will be dealt with in the concluding section of this essay.

[Keywords: Gora, Nationalism, colonialism, nationalist self-fashioning; identity, dialogic, Western]

I am talking of millions of men who have been skillfully injected with fear, inferiority complexes, trepidation, servility, despair, abasement.

Aime Césaire, Discourse sur le Colonialisme¹

To speak a language is to take on a world, a culture.

Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks²

                   [i]t is not the literal past, the ‘facts’ of history, that shape us, but images of the past embodied in language . . . we must never cease renewing those images, because once we do, we fossilize.

Brian Friel, Translations³

This paper will focus on the ways in which the process of the nationalist ‘self-fashioning’ is represented in the text of Rabindranath Tagore`s Gora, a text which, incidentally, completes exactly one century of its existence this year, in 2010. Rabindranath began writing Gora in 1907. The serial publication of the novel began in the month of Bhadra ( August-September) of the Bengali year  1314 (A.D. 1907) in the Bengali magazine Prabashi and the novel was completed in the Phalgun (February-March) issue of the magazine in 1316 (A.D. 1909). The novel was first published in book form in 1910. Even after a century of its appearance Gora as a novel, remains significant even today because of its complex representation of caste, class, race and religious issues. To the educated Bengali Gora has remained till today, an important part of his self-understanding. It is a text against which the Bengali intellectual impulse would constantly test itself. It is, by all means, a literary milestone in the incessant process of ‘national imagining’. Gora continues to help us comprehend the role of the intellectual within the ‘collectivity’ of nation-building. As a bilingual individual, the problem that haunts me, like many others, is how to relate myself with the heterogeneous population of the country.  The issue of a normative ‘national self’, so insistently dealt with in Gora, remains a still burning one in these troubled times– times rift from within by large-scale violence, secessionism and growing ‘nation-state’ and ‘citizen-subject’ divide.

            In the beginning, I would like to mention the main co-ordinates of the present discussion. At first, a brief exploration of the colonial conditions responsible for the ‘loss’ and the subsequent ‘recovery’ of ‘self’ of the colonized will be made. After that, the element of ‘cultural miscegenation’ involved in the act of ‘fashioning’ selves will be analysed. In the last section, I shall move from the ‘macro’ to the ‘micro’; from the ‘societal’ to the level of literary representation (Gora, in this instance).

            It is important to bear in in mind that we are dealing with a text borne out of a complex colonial encounter. This experience turned out to be debilitating and invigorating in an irreversible way. Colonization can never be merely viewed as the unleashing of processes of economic exploitation. It always has cultural aggression as its necessary corollary. It destroys civilizations. It empties the colonized subjects of all their traditional belief-systems, cultural practices, ritualistic moorings. It undermines their very sense of self. The loss of ‘self’ under colonialism– when humanity reduced to a monologue— results in the colonization of minds. Addressing this loss in psychoanalytical terms, Ashis Nandy writes, “This colonialism colonizes minds in addition to bodies and it releases forces within the colonized societies to alter their cultural priorities once for all.”4  The ‘encounter’ with the West— its knowledge, and culture gave rise to a class of Europhone intellectuals in the colonies whose condition of ‘bilingualism’ brought along the painful realisation of their lost ‘selves’ and called for an urgent need for ‘self-fashioning’ in order to formulate some kind of anti-colonial nationalist consciousness. In the Indian context, the condition of ‘bilingualism’ of the western-educated intellectual class under the British rule was greatly instrumental in the construction of nationalist consciousness. David Kopf in his thesis, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance writes:

The Orientalists served as avenues linking the regional elite with the dynamic civilization of contemporary Europe. They contributed to the formation of a new Indian middle class and assisted in the professionalization of the Bengali intelligentsia…They both historicised the Indian past and stimulated a consciousness of history in the Indian intellectual. It was they who transmitted a new sense of identity to Bengalis^.5

Fanon, with his psychoanalytic approach, formulated his concept of the formation of the Other by the colonized: “…alterity for the black man is not the black but the white man.”⁶ Fanon’s observation is applicable to the Indian colonial context too. The ‘superior’ standard of the colonizer’s civilization gave rise to a sense of ‘lack’ among the Indian subjects who developed their knowledge of western civilization through colonial education. Homi K. Bhabha identifies the act of mimicry which the colonial subject in India was involved in. Bhabha writes, “[From such] a colonial encounter between the white presence and its black semblance, there emerges the question of the ambivalence of mimicry as a problematic of colonial subjection.”⁷ So, a desire for emulation got enmeshed in a drive for disavowal of the colonizer’s civilization. This gave rise to the elements of ambivalence and hybridity in the anti-colonial discourses of nationalist self-formations. Anti-colonial feelings were replicatory of colonial idioms to a certain degree in India.

Nationalist Self-fashioning

The replicatory tendency of the colonized people had another strong psychological drive behind it— the desire for revenge. To do to the enemy exactly what the enemy has done to him, so that colonizer and colonized would meet eye to eye, is the fantasy of envy and violence that has been the leitmotif that keeps coming back in the mainstream masculinist anti-imperialist discourse. The discourse of identity was primarily articulated by men. Gender was very central to any articulation about the self. The  fantasy of counter-machismo has a touch of Oedipal complex in it; the fantasy of the one of wanting to have what the other has. Rey Chow writes: “The fate of the native is then like that of Freud’s woman: even though she will never have a penis, she will for the rest of her life be trapped within the longing for it and its substitutes.”⁸ Thus, the process which psychoanalysts call ‘identification with the aggressor’ gives rise to a case of cultural co-optation. Nandy writes: “In the colonial culture, identification with the aggressor bound the rulers and the ruled in an unbreakable dyadic relationship.”⁹ As a result of this many Indians saw their salvation in becoming more like the British, in friendship or in enmity. The rising nationalist consciousness during the later half of the nineteenth century in India resurrected the traditional idea of kshatriyahood (nature of a warrior-caste, Hindu parallel of chivalrous knights) —a martial Indianness which became a sort of interface between the ruler and the ruled. This idea of Kshatratej (potency of a warrior-caste) —the indigenous version of counter-machismo became a major driving force behind the anti-colonial protest, violent in nature, during the first few decades of the twentieth century. The immensely courageous but ineffective terrorism of Bengal, Maharastra and Punjab, led by semi-westernized, middle-class, urban and most often bilingual youth is a clear example of that.

            In this way, the nationalist consciousness was formulated by championing the first term of the three-point scale of type-differentiation: purushtva (the essence of masculinity), naritva (the essence of femininity) and klibatva (the essence of hermaphroditism). The emergent nationalism, which to a great extent, essentialised a Hindu culture showed one more maneuvering strategy— to redefine the Indian masculinity largely in spiritual terms.

            Therefore, the need arose to transcribe the macho martial Hindu masculinity into the terms of all-renouncing tendency of the sannyasi (religious mendicant) in order to valorise the spiritual principle of the rising nationalist consciousness. This particular ideological maneuvering was designed to serve many purposes. The  resurgence of the spiritual Hinduism would relink the nationalist generation with the country’s ‘Aryan’ past. The masculine spirituality of the Hindu race would distinguish itself from the ‘barbaric’ virility of the Muslim. This would also result in a  successful incorporation of the overt masculine tendencies of the colonizing West for reformulated nationalist race without disturbing the race’s inner core. The reinterpreted and reconstructed figure of the sannyasi was to prove the easy interchangeability of martial and spiritual values— Kshatratej and Brahmatej were projected as the two sides of the same coin. This caught the imagination of the young, middle-class western-educated colonized subjects. Bankimchandra Chattopadhyay’s novel Ananda Math is the obvious example where attempts are made to bring into the centre of nationalist imagination the so-long marginal figure of the sannyasi through the projection of santandals; a militant group of ascetics who take active interests in the political future of a subjugated race. It was the phenomenal entry of Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) into the national scene with his victorious return to the country after participating in the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago in September, 1893 that made it all too easy for the legitimisations of the spiritual principles in the national life. To quote Tapan Raychaudhuri:

though a vivid interest in the Hindu religious spiritual heritage was very much a part of the Bengali intellectual concerns, in the nineteenth century the expression of this new religiosity was modally within the limits of a colonial middle class life-style. The social origins of the young men led by Vivekananda. . . . were in no way different from those other well-known protagonists of the new enlightenment, Children of bureaucrats, men in the learned professions or zamindars, they were also products of the Western education dispensed in Bengal’s schools and colleges.¹⁰

            Indira Chowdhury, in her book dealing with the nationalist ‘self’, quotes Swami Vivekananda’s letter from America to his disciple Alasinga Perumal to highlight how his version of asceticism successfully blended the strength of the kshatriya with the potency of knowledge— a merger, most likely to be possible within the precincts of ‘Celibacy’:

strength, manhood, kshatra Virya + Brahma Teja. Our beautiful hopeful boys— they have everything, only if they are not slaughtered by the millions at the altar of this brutality they call marriage . . . educated young men will stand aside from the world, gird their loins,  and be ready to fight the battle of truth.¹¹

            Thus, Vivekananda’s construction of masculinity was buttressed with the militant virility of the kshatriya as well as the sterner self-denying aspect of the brahmanical asceticism. The ‘new’ masculinity was to be for the Hindu a more desirable masculinity as its aim was to subvert the colonial projection of a ‘superior’ western masculinity. This way was born the figure of the devoted nationalist sannyasi whose spiritualism was directed towards the moral and political purposes of the emerging ‘nation’— its embodiments in political figure like Aurobindo and other Swadeshi activists who devoted their lives for the cause of liberating the Mother Country.

            The close intertwining of the processes of the construction of the ‘self’ and imagining of the ‘nation’ created a curious effect of simultaneity. The temporal coalescing of their processes of arriving point, therefore, to their common telos. This was to bring an end of the British Raj and transform India into a modern nation-state. The strong bonding existing between the search for the lost self and the construction of the nation created a sense of interchangeability and a high degree of sameness— so much so that it created a common discursive framework. The biographies and autobiographies written during the last years of the nineteenth century are proofs of the fact— the birth of the nation could be and should be encoded in the form of the birth of a ‘new individual’. The first comprehensive social history of nineteenth century Bengal was written in the form of a biography [Sibnath Sastri, Ramtanu Lahiri o Tatkalin Bangasamaj]  and Surendranath Banerjeea, the foremost political leader of his tines in Bengal entitled his autobiography A Nation in Making. History therefore, witnessed a unique case of the merger of the concepts of ‘Nation’ and ‘Self’ in the colonial period of India. We shall take up this theme in greater length, when we shall enter into the chronotopic plane of Tagore’s novel Gora.

            But the narrative of nationalist self-fashioning was hardly an unruptured ‘grand narrative’. It had its share of fissures, overlappings, splittings and even ruptures. Its inner tensions could be made visible if one could only decode its natures of ‘constructedness’; its process of qualified appropriation and rejection of the West, its workings as an ideological sieve. Let me make a very brief attempt to analyse the specific notes of discord in the construction of the nationalist ‘self’. While discussing the ‘drama of consciousness’ performed in Black Skin, White Masks of Frantz Fanon Benita Parry diagnoses the dilemma involved in ‘fashioning/disavowing black identity’. She records this as due to the longing for a transition from Négritude to universal solidarity signalling dis-alienation and the transcendence of ethnicity.¹² Nationalism, for Fanon in the later stages of his critical formulations, became a necessary stop-over for the journey towards an international dimension and of universalising value. We can refer to his statement made in the Second Congress of Black Artists and Writers in Rome in 1959:

The consciousness of self is not closing of a door to communication. Philosophic thought teaches us, on the contrary, that it is its guarantee. National consciousness, which is not nationalism, is the only thing that will give us an international dimension. . . It is at the heart of national consciousness that international consciousness lives and grows. And this twofold emerging is ultimately the source of all culture.¹³

Similar aspirations can be identified in the construction of the nationalist discourse of our country as well, as its formulation chronologically followed the shaping of currents and cross-currents in the cultural history of Bengal which has traditionally been collectively labelled as the ‘Bengal Renaissance’. Historians have, on numerous occasions, emphasized the heterogeneity of cultural experience of this movement and attempts have been made to identify incompatible elements within it and how the leading figures of it imbibed almost contradictory essences from this collective experience. Rabindranath Tagore was one such figure in whose shaping of ideas was recorded the problematics of this so-called ‘Renaissance’. In this respect we shall later refer to S. C. Sarkar’s Bengali article Rabindranath o Banglar Nabajagaran. Sumit Sarkar, too, in his article, ‘The Radicalism of Intellectuals’ writes:

On the model of the famous Russian Westerner-Slavophile dichotomy, S. C. Sarkar in an influential and important paper made a sharp distinction between two trends within our ‘renaissance’, ‘westernism’ (or ‘liberalism’) as contrasted to ‘traditionalism’ (or ‘revivalism’). ‘Westernism’ explicitly proclaimed by him to be more progressive, was further defined by him to include the components of social reform, rationalism and secular humanism.¹⁴

            Now, we quote one relevant comment from S. C. Sarkar’s Bengali essay: “The future enlightened unified India must rise above the Hindu-non-Hindu dichotomy in order to embrace humanistic ideals, therein lies the correct realisation of western ideals.”¹⁵ These words echo somewhat similar sentiments articulated in Fanon’s words quoted a little while ago. What,is Rabindranath’s ideological position in this ongoing conflict between ‘liberalism’ and ‘revivalism’? Does it undergo any susceptible changes in his long career as a creative artist and an avid polemicist? Let us get back to S. C. Sarkar’s text:

From 1907 onwards there can be perceived a susceptible turn in Rabindranath’s writings. For ten years after this, the tide of writings flooded the country was the creation of the matured Rabindranath. In them, the side to which his face turned from Orientalism is not Hindutva, but the dream of a new India — that can not be but labelled as Western perspective in our analysis.¹⁶

                Professor Sarkar, in order to establish the synthesising, universalising nature of the western perspective in Rabindranath quotes from Tagore’s essay ‘Rajbhakti’ written in 1906 as a forecast for the shape of things to come, “O my nation . . . in front of your seat Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, are waiting for a long time, being attracted by the call of the Almighty.”¹⁷ At the end of this long essay, S. C. Sarkar, however, sticks to his conviction about Tagore’s western perspective which had remain unscathed even after the two world wars. He concludes by referring to Tagore’s essay Sabbhyatar Sangkat written almost at the very end of the poet’s life in 1941. In his view, Rabindranath, in that address, critiqued not the western perspectives but the perverted distortions of such perspectives manifested in the British rule in India and the age-old beliefs in the benevolent nature of the British imperialism.¹⁸

            Thus, we are confronted with a strange kind of psycho-existential bind at the heart of the nationalist ‘self fashioning’; a contradiction that seems almost insurmountable. The essentialist national ‘self’ is fashioned in the codes of western, overtly virile masculinity and the universalist, nationalist consciousness— almost its alter ego— has also drawn largely from the western value-systems. The western episteme seems to be at work in both cases, with two completely incompatible results. Ashis Nandy’s study, An Intimate Enemy can help us overcome this impasse. According to him, forces unleashed by the post-Enlightenment Europe to propagate all-encompassing spirit of ‘reason’ and the unitary model of nation-state resulted in absolutizing the ‘West’—a domain of vigorous, enterprising, rational race to whose masculinist spirit the ‘non-West’ must bow down. The colonial experience only helped to legitimise this kind of western consciousness as the mainstream which engulfed all other dissenting voices. This necessitated for the newly-fashioned western ‘Subject’ to construct the ‘Oriental-Other’. Nandy writes:

Colonialism replaced the normal ethnocentric stereotype of the inscrutable Oriental by the pathological stereotype of the strange, primal but predictable Oriental— religious but superstitious, clever but devious, chaotically violent but effeminately cowardly. . . the cultural arrogance of post-Enlightenment Europe (which) sought to define not only the ‘true’ West but also the ‘true’ East.¹⁹

The immediate reaction of the East, especially those classes of the East which received western education, was an act of vehement disavowal of its supposed ‘effeminacy’ by fashioning a counter-masculine ‘self’. We have discussed this construction in the earlier section. Now, let us look at Nandy’s  analysis of the existence of the other-West as well as of the other-India. Nandy recognises traces of certain Apollonian elements in the western civilization— articulated through the benign, tolerant tendencies of Christianity which lost out to the onslaught of the imperialist ‘self’ of the West. Nandy also wants us to direct our attention to another India (distinctly dissimilar from the nationalists’ construction) “which is neither pre-modern nor anti-modern but only non-modern.” In his words:

It coexists with the India of the modernists, whose attempts to identify with the colonial aggressors has produced pathetic copies of the Western man in the subcontinent, but it rejects most versions of Indian nationalism as bound irrevocably to the West— in reaction, jealousy, hatred, fear and counterphobia. This is the underside of non-modern India’s ethnic universalism.²⁰

Nandy identifies Rabindranath Tagore and Mahatma Gandhi as the two leading counter-players in the battle of supremacy between the ideologies of the ‘official imperial West’ and ‘virile’ anti-colonial ‘East’ on the one hand and the oppositional, marginal voices of both alternative ‘West’ and ‘East’. Although, chronologically speaking, Tagore’s fictional representation of the ‘nationalist’ self in Gora predates Gandhi’s strategies of ‘self fashioning’ it is important for our present purpose to cast a cursory glance at Gandhi’s maneuvering as this could make explicit the ‘constructed’ nature of the ‘nationalist’ self. While Nandy refers to the oppositional tendencies in Tagore as ‘classical universalism’ in Gandhi he sees its manifestation in the form of ‘folk-based, critical traditionalism’.  It is, therefore, extremely interesting to note  that the act of fashioning a folksy, rural Indian ‘self’ posited at the centre of traditional organic community (gemeinschaft), and simultaneously ‘provincialising’ the western epistemology of ‘nation-state’ and ‘citizen subjects’ is to a large extent built upon the other, alternative cultures of the ‘West’ of which perhaps the ‘West’ itself has lost track of. To quote Nandy:

…Gandhi’s partiality for some of the Christian hymns and Biblical texts was more than the symbolic gesture of a Hindu towards a minority religion in India. . . some of the recessive elements of Christianity were perfectly congruent with elements of Hindu and Buddhist world-views and that the battle he was fighting for the minds of men was actually a universal battle to rediscover the softer side of human nature, the so called non-masculine self of man relegated to the forgotten zones of the Western self-concept.²¹

Nandy also refers to the fact that “Gandhi himself said that he had borrowed his idea of nonviolence not from the sacred texts of India but from the Sermon on the Mount.”²² Therefore, it seems that the counter-hegemonic discourse of the colonized is articulated by the act of highlighting the ‘marginalised’ elements of the hegemonic culture of the colonizer. This brings us back to Rabindranath Tagore, as ‘Brahmoism’ the religious sect to which Tagore belonged was built also largely upon the building blocks— western in nature— like ‘organized religion’, a ‘sacred text’, ‘monotheism’ and a ‘patriarchal godhead’ (Parampita). Tagore’s comments about Raja Rammohan Roy, the founder of Brahmoism is extremely relevant here, made in his essay, ‘Purba o Paschim’ (1908) : “Rammohan Roy . . . one day stood alone in order to align India with the whole world on the basis of humanism (manusatva in original Bengali). No custom, no prejudice could obstruct his views.”²³ In our scheme of things, therefore, a split occurs in the ‘self’ fashioned by ‘nationalism’, brought about by ‘national consciousness’ of such kind.

            New Historicism has taught us that literature is one and at the same time ‘form’ and ‘forum’ for ideological contestation. Gora written between 1907 and 1910 is an important artifact in that respect. The period of its composition is the period of consolidation for nationalist discourse; the temporal background of the novel is the period for the formulation of such discourse. The novel is situated at that point of history where the emergence of the nationalist ‘self’ and its problematization in the form of a ‘split’ occur simultaneously. A detailed analysis of this text can give us newer perspectives to look at the textual strategies embedded in the novel that to a large extent conditioned its reception and the nature of the narrative of conflict between ‘nationalism’ and ‘nationalist consciousness’ that continues to arrest the imagination of the Bengali intelligentsia till a hundred years after its composition.

Dialogic Elements in Gora

            In an essay published in a leading literary journal the noted Bengali littérateur, Debesh Roy comments that he can not recall of any other novel, written in any language of the world apart from Gora where the search for a motherland has become the main story; the only notation to be exchanged between the main characters of the novel, the main offspring for emotion and the basis for logic.²⁴ He compares the ‘process of becoming’ present in Gora’s character with that discernible in the character of Hans Castorp in Thomas Mann’s epic novel The Magic Mountain (published in 1924, 16 years after the publication of Gora). The points are relevant as the text’s narrative strategies create an effect of simultaneity between the hero’s search for his true self and for the nation to which he belongs. In the beginning of his book, The Illegitimacy of Nationalism Ashis Nandy quotes a comment made by Tagore, “A country is not territorial (mrinmaya) ; its is ideational (chinmaya)”²⁵ The nature of the manifestation of this chinmaya nation, its multi-layered encoding in Tagore’s perceptions, torn between deep influence of European Romantic idealism on him and his readings of the country’s rich philosophical tradition has been dealt with by Dipesh Chakrabarty in his essay ‘Nation and Imagination’.²⁶ But the present concern is to trace the process of internalization of the nationalist concerns, and the interplay of diverse currents and cross-currents within the psyche of the hero of the novel. It seems that the process of ‘self-fashioning’ involves a curious case of merger of the process of ‘subject’ formation and the ideational conceptualization of the ‘nation’. In coping with nationalist cross-currents as inner vectors Gora has real-life counterparts in flamboyant, contemporary iconic figures of Swami Vivekananda and Brahmabandhab Upadhyay.²⁷ Both of them were restless spirits who were always struggling to overcome their inner contradictions. The point I am trying to make is that the fictionalised act of fashioning ‘selves’ were very much a part of contemporary concerns for a longish period of time during the compositional years of Tagore`s major political novels. The ‘split’ existing between strands of ‘nationalism’ and ‘nationalist consciousness’ are recorded in almost all of them.

            Before we enter into the discussion of the text of Gora it is important to state that it must be kept in mind that any literary text has ‘verbal-ideological life’ which is different  in nature from the real world. Of late, there has risen a tendency among cultural historians and social scientists to take up literary texts as supportive examples for cultural theories — a kind of critical practice where texts serve the purpose of being discursive planes where theories of social science can be fitted into.²⁸ Literary works usually have a far more complicated nature, heavily nuanced multifaceted structure for such kind of straightforward critical correspondences. One must be reminded of Mikhail Bakhtin’s remark in this respect, “When a man is in art, he is not in life, and vice versa.” (Estetika, p-5) We, therefore, need critical models which are more flexible and more dynamic— capable of decoding the multi-layered language of a novelistic ‘chronotope’.

            Mikhail Bakhtin in his essay ‘Discourse in the Novel’, while discussing the dynamics involved in the nature of relationship between ‘centripetal’ and ‘centrifugal’ forces of any verbal-ideological world brings up the concept of ‘heteroglossia’:

…the centripetal forces of the life of language, embodied in a ‘unitary language’ operate in the midst of ‘heteroglossia’…Stratification and heteroglossia widen and deepen as long as language is alive and developing. Alongside the centripetal forces, the centrifugal forces of language carry on their uninterrupted work…The authentic environment of the utterance, the environment in which it lives and takes shape is dialogised heteroglossia.²⁹

            According to Bakhtin while poetic genres largely develop under the influence of the unifying centralizing, centripetal forces of verbal ideological life— the novel and other similar genres which were being historically shaped by the current of decentralizing, centrifugal forces offer, with the help of the creative potentials ingrained in their artistic forms, an autonomous, well-defined plane where the play of dialogisation of discourses of—heteroglossia takes place. I shall try to show in Gora how the unifying discourse of ‘official nationalism’ which is centripetal in nature, is engaged in a dialogic relationship with the discourse of ‘national consciousness’, which is centrifugal in nature. This happens in and around the act of fashioning a nationalist self— exemplified by the shapings of Gora’s character and the search for the ‘imagined’ nation; and the innumerable comments uttered from the subject positions occupied by characters like Paresh Babu, Binoy Anandamoyi and others.

            Let us begin with the formulations of the domains of the material and the spiritual and their mutual alterity in this nationalism when it attempts to give shape to a modern national culture that is non-Western, as articulated by Gora:

It is just because India has desired to acknowledge, fully, both the opposite aspects of subtle and gross— inner and outer, spirit and body— that those who cannot grasp the subtle aspect have the opportunity to seize upon the gross, and, their ignorance working on it, results in these extraordinary distortions…it would never do for us to cut ourselves off from…the One who is true, both in forms and in formlessness in materials as well as in spiritual manifestation…or to commit the folly of accepting instead…the combination of Theism and Atheism, dry, narrow and unsubstantial, evolved by eighteenth-century Europe.³⁰

       And when Binoy asks Gora about the whereabouts of his India—his ‘imagined community’ Gora’s answer is extremely rhetorical:

“And where is this India of yours?” pursued Binoy.

“Where the point of this compass of mine turns by day and by night,” exclaimed Gora, placing his hand on his heart. “There—not in your Marshman’s ‘History of India.’ ”…“I may miss my task, I may sink and drown, but that port of a great Destiny is always there. That is my India in its fullness—full of wealth, full of knowledge, full of righteousness. Do you mean to say that such India is nowhere? Is there nothing but this falsehood on every side! This Calcutta of yours, with its offices, its High Court, and its few babbles of brick and mortar! Poof!” (p-17)

            Sudipta Kaviraj in his essay ‘The Imaginary Institution of India’ comments that the narration of nation (of Gora’s kind in this case) is accompanied by the formation of a national collective-self and its entry into some sort of a narrative contract with the history of the nation— narrated as a history of a community.³¹ Let us see the articulation this type of narrative drive through Gora’s voice: “This message of India some may understand, some may not— that makes no difference to my feeling that I am one with all India, that all her people are mine ; and I have no doubt that through all of them, the spirit of India is secretly but constantly working.” (p-104) This feeling is just one step away from the merger of processes of fashioning the nationalist ‘self’ and imagining the nation. Echoes of the programmatic nationalist discourse for the construction of a new Bengali race can be heard quite distinctly in Gora’s utterances:

…said Gora to himself, “it has always been the rule in our country for those who have to bear the burden of the welfare of all to remain aloof. The idea that a king can protect his subjects by mixing intimately with them is entirely without foundation…The Brahmin too should preserve this aloofness, this detachment…Gora was ready to-day to devote himself to the realisation of the life-giving mantram of the Brahmins. He said to himself that he must keep absolutely uncontaminated. “I do not stand on the same level as others.” He said, “for me friendship is not necessary, and I do not belong to that common class of people for whom the companionship of woman is a sweet to be enjoyed. (p-385)

For a man like Gora it would not do to be deluded by his own desires— he must be indifferent to joy or sorrow. He was a Brahmin of India, it was for him to worship the Divine Being on behalf of India, and his work was that of religious austerities. Desire and attachment were not for him and Gora said to himself, “. . . I am a sannyasi, in my realisation and worship it can have no place.” (p-378)

            The words quoted above are perhaps the truest possible articulations of the reformulated idea of nationalist ‘masculinity’—one that blends the virility of Kshtratej with the wisdom of Brahmatej, one which is ascetic in nature and of a man who follows celibacy and shuns romantic involvements and most importantly one who is devoted to the cause of the colonized nation. To get back once again to Indira Chowdhury’s discussion, “The devoted nationalist sannyasi…was dedicated to liberating the Mother Country. Vivekananda’s reconstruction of this alternative masculinity, powerfully redirected the purpose of spirituality within Hindu religious norms.”³² The act of ‘self fashioning’ delineated through Gora’s character is encoded in staunch ‘Hindu’ idioms. The discursive formations of Hindutva find articulation in Gora’s voice:

you (Sucharita) must understand that the Hindu religion takes in its lap, like a mother, people of different ideas and opinions ; in other words, the Hindu religion looks upon man only as man, and does not count him as belonging to a particular party…it shows respect not merely to one form of wisdom but to wisdom in all aspects…We fail to see that through this diversity Hinduism is coming to realise the oneness of all. (p-296)

Now let us see how the dominant discourses are ‘dialogised’ by the centrifugal tendencies of that period. Paresh Babu’s observation regarding the nature and the existing manifestations of ‘Hinduism’ will conform to Bakhtin’s notion of ‘dialogised heteroglossia’ if they are quoted alongside Gora’s comments regarding ‘Hinduism’:

“In other words,” commented Paresh Babu, “you (Sucharita) mean to ask me why I myself do not call myself a Hindu ?…there is a very deep inner reason, and it is that there is no way of obtaining entrance into the Hindu society. At any rate there is no royal high road, though there may be some back doors. That society is not one for all mankind it is only for those whose destiny it is to be born Hindus.” (p-355)

If I live in England long enough and follow their customs, then I can be included in the English Society…Now for a Hindu it is just the opposite. The way for entering their society is altogether closed, but there are thousands of way out…The Hindu society insults and abandons men, and for that reason nowadays, it is becoming increasingly difficult to preserve our self-respect. (p-356)

If we look closely at Gora’s and Paresh Babu’s speeches we shall notice while Gora’s speech exudes the confidence in the lenient face of Hinduism (having a touch of Ramakrishna Paramhamsa’s famous dictum Jato Mat Tato Path in it) arrested in a synchronic idealistic state, Paresh Babu’s comments point our attention to the diachronic metamorphoses of Hinduism and its contemporary state of affairs. Readers are given an opportunity to choose their pick.

            Gora’s vow of celibacy and choice of the life of an ascetic, built around his love of country— ‘so overwhelmingly self-evident’ and which draws out all his wealth and life, in his own words, “my blood, the very marrow of my bones ; my sky, my light, in fact my all” (p-70)— a goal which is in turn, legitimised by Gora’s comment to Binoy, “We must select for ourselves the field on which we would focus our attention and forgo our greed for all the rest outside it, else we shall never find the truth at all”(p-69) is made to face the heteroglossia— through the discourse of romantic love uttered by Binoy.

“Gora,” said Binoy ecstatically, “I can tell you for certain that one means by which in a single moment man’s whole nature can be awakened is this love—no matter what the reason is, there is no doubt that amongst us the manifestation of this love is weak and therefore all of us are deprived of a complete realization of ourselves. (p-375)

The ‘split’ in the project of fashioning nationalist ‘self’—brought about by the articulation of the national consciousness—synthesizing in spirit, is clearly discernible in the dialogical encounter between ‘centripetal’ and ‘centrifugal’ forces— Gora’s and Binoy’s conflicting discourses: “I see !” exclaimed Binoy. “Either Binoy’s course or Gora’s. I am out to fulfill myself—you to give yourself up.” (p-69) As a matter of fact, the dialogic principle is most consistently observed in this text of Tagore. The chronotopic plane of the novel is the battleground not only for the rival discourses of Hinduism and Brahmoism, present in the novel with their orthodox faces, but also for the conflict between the monoglossic tendencies of these discourses and the universalising discourses of national consciousness.³³ The conflicts between two orthodox discourses, or between the orthodox and liberal discourses are represented in the novel through innumerable exchanges of dialogues involving mostly Gora and Haran Babu—Binoy, Sucharita, Paresh Babu, Anandamoyi providing necessary counterpoints in turn. The text of Gora seems to be a perfect example of Bakhtin’s principle, “A unitary language is not something given [dan] but is always in essence posited [zadan]—and at every moment of its linguistic life it is opposed to the realities of heteroglossia.”³⁴

            On a deeper psychological level, the overt masculinity of Gora’s character is counter-balanced by the positive androgynous natures of Binoy and Anandamoyi. Binoy is soft-natured, sensitive, romantic and not at all domineering— one who is less likely to lead a team of followers. His emotional resolves are achieved after much trepidations. His characteristic bent is very much like what we call the ‘caring’-type. His suavity at times seems somewhat effeminate in comparison to Gora’s macho, virile demeanor. In short, there are manifestations of certain characteristic qualities in Binoy which during the period of the rise of the ‘masculine’ nationalist ‘self’ are categorised as woman-like i.e. qualities which befit the female-folks. On the other hand, Gora’s mother Anandamoyi’s character shows signs of robust mental strength, clarity of thought, power of differentiating customs and superstitions and most importantly rigorous reasoning ability. These are all qualities which would have suited immaculately with the image of a ‘liberal’ ‘male’ social-reformer of Bengal in the nineteenth century. Binoy’s and Anandamoyi’s characters are fictional representations of the breaking down of male/female ‘binary opposites’ of nationalist discourse and also projections of alternative ‘androgyny’. Ashis Nandy has pointed out how Mahatma Gandhi changed the colonial culture’s ordering of sexual identities, from Purusatva  > Naritva > Klibatva to Naritva > Purusatva > Kapurusatva³⁵ Nandy also refers to Gandhi’s act of picking out the doctrine of power through divine bi-unity which was prevalent in some of the vamachari sects. Their equation was as follows:

                                                         Purusatva

       Androgyny

                                                         Naritva

Nandy writes. “manliness and womanliness are equal, but the ability to transcend the man-woman dichotomy is superior to both, being an indicator of godly and saintly qualities.”³⁶ Whereas Binoy’s ‘self’ shows positive androgynous qualities, thereby serving the purpose of acting as the ‘double’ of hyper-masculine Gora, it is Anandamoyi’s everyday womanliness which enables her to touch the true spirit of synthesis found in the rich Indian tradition.

            But one idea which is most seriously dialogised in the novel is the idea of ‘national’ community and the element of caste-ism ingrained in it. This happens not through the encounter of two contradictory consciousnesses but due to severe internal splitting that take place within the process of change discernible in Gora’s consciousness. The narrated form of his India— the ‘imagined community’ uttered by Gora himself:

But there is a true India, rich and full, and unless we take our stand there we shall not be able to draw upon the sap of life either by our intellect or by our heart. Therefore, I say, forget everything— book-learning, the illusion of titles, the temptations of servile livelihood; renounce the attractions of all these and let us launch the ship towards its post. . . . I at least can never forget the true and complete image of India.(p-18)

gets severely fractured once Gora’s encounter with the subaltern India takes place:

But Gora saw the image of his country’s weakness, naked and unashamed, in the midst of the lethargy of village-life where the blows from outside could not work so readily. He could see nowhere any trace of that religion which through service, love, compassion, self-respect and respect for humanity as a whole, gives power and life and happiness to all . . . In these villages the cruel and evil results of this blind bondage were so clearly seen by Gora in all kinds of ways (p-368)

Homi Bhabha, in a different context, identifies this ‘split’ as the one between the ‘pedagogical’ and the ‘performative’ in the production of the nation as narration.³⁷ Here, we must refer to one small incident of ‘silence’ present within the narrative framework of the text that can give us important clues about the ‘split’ between the empirical life of the nation and the officially narrated nation. In chapter XVII Gora and Binoy go to visit the neighbourhood for doing the rounds of their regular social work. On reaching there they come to learn about the sudden and extremely unexpected death of Gora’s enthusiastic follower, Nanda, the youthful son of a carpenter. Nanda, we are told, has been a very accomplished cricket player. In the mixed company of the elite and the subaltern members of the Sports and Cricket club founded by Gora in the neighborhood “Nanda stood easily first in every kind of manly exercise.” (p-78) Nanda could have been an ideal signifier for the virile young generation of the emerging nation in its anti-colonial struggle. But Nanda dies even before the early glimpses of his potential could be noticed. And the manner in which he dies— spread of tetanus infection in a small wound inflicted by a chisel as Nanda had been treated by a local exorcist— speaks volumes of the chasm existing between the elite, nationalist projects of fighting with the imperial rules and setting up indigenous institution of nation-state and the real mass of illiterate subaltern classes, living amidst poverty, superstition, caste systems, unhygienic surroundings and other social evils. Sumit Sarkar in his essay ‘Early Nationalist Activity in Bengal’ gives a list of social groups attracted by the Swadeshi movement and their class orientations speak everything for the class-character of the ‘constructed’ nationalism. In his words: “The groups attracted by Swadeshi comprised educated youths, lawyers, teachers, journalists, doctors, zamindari officials some (though by no means all) big landlords, as well as section of the clerical staff of government office firms and a few industries.”³⁸ Thus, we are back again to S. C. Sarkar’s argument that both the ‘Revivalist’ nationalism and the ‘Liberal’ national consciousness were products of the ‘Bengal Renaissance’.  The advocates of both ‘nationalism’ and liberal ‘national consciousness’ were in no position to bypass the cultural bind unleashed by western civilization. In the text, the impasse is recorded by a comment made by Mohim, the pragmatic elder brother of Gora: (to Gora)‘ “Is this the kind of Hindu you are ?” broke out Mohim. “For all your caste-marks and tikis, your English education has got right into your bones.” (p-63)

The Desire of the Metropolitan-West

            Parallels are sometimes drawn between the traits of ‘in-betweenness’ present in the conceptions of character in Rudyard Kipling’s Kim and Tagore’s Gora. Both characters are treated as curious cases of ‘cultural miscegenation’. But there is a fundamental difference between the predicaments of the two characters. Kim is an orphaned Irish boy who lives like any other Indian street-child in Lahore. He is vaguely aware of his whiteness which is, however, tanned by the Indian sun and he has picked up the Indian tongue exceptionally well whereas for Gora, the disclosure of his foreignness comes at the very end of the novel (chapter XXVIII) and up to that point Gora struggles really hard to live up to his status of an upper-cast pious Hindu in a society that is going through rough times due to the arrival of the Christian missionaries and the establishment of ‘Brahmoism’. His attempts are directed always towards bridging the gap between ‘self’ and the ‘Imaginary Other’ which is manifested to him in the guise of the saviour of his country:

Gora had a firm conviction in his mind that the majority of events in his life were not accidental and that they were not merely the result of his own individual wishes. He believed that he had taken birth for the fulfillment of some special purpose of the Ruler of his country’s destiny (p-377)

Those whom you call illiterate are those to whose party I belong. What you call superstition, that is my faith! So long as you do not love your country and take your stand beside your own people, I will not allow one word of abuse of the motherland from you. (p-50)

We have already shown that this emotional drive of jealously guarding or even resurrecting the country’s Hindu heritage in a newly ‘fashioned’ spiritual, masculine way is a colonial construction that is tied to the cultural bind, borne out of the country’s encounter with the colonizer’s civilization.

            If we can break into the unconscious of the text we shall see that Gora’s character is a migratory signifier of the colonized’s ‘desire of the Other’ and the textual strategy of deferment of Gora’s true identity to Gora offers different perspectives within the text as well as the text’s relationship with the reader so as to make sense of colonial experience retrospectively. This idea can be represented in the form of triangles:³⁹

While the first triangle is a representative of the general process of how meaning is produced in a text, the second triangle is the specific conditions of the text Gora. In the first triangle position 1 might be seen as that of pure objectivity and position 2 might be seen as that of pure subjectivity and a subject in position 3 understands both kinds of limitations retrospectively and arrives at her own interpretation. As regards to our text, Gora’s character is posited at position 1 as the authority figure who is lost in the sense of his own supremacy (that is born with a special mission, that he is not equal to others– that he is the protector of Hinduism) and Anandamoyi occupies position 2 as she is endowed with the knowledge of Gora’s Christian blood as a result of which she thinks that she is in possession of a pure private meaning: that all of Gora’s attempts to become an ideal Hindu will be futile as the Hindu society will not accept him once the secrecy of his birth is disclosed. The reader’s position is at the third point of the triangle. She understands the futility of Gora’s gestures of traditional Hindu piety and also Anandamoyi’s faith in Gora’s uniqueness as well as her apprehensions regarding the possible disclosure of the secret. But, the alert reader understands that Gora’s western genealogy is a symbolic representation of the cultural bind faced by all colonized subjects (“what is often called the black soul is a white man’s artifact”, Fanon).⁴⁰ Thus, in the novel Gora’s search for authentic forms of patriotism and his true self is, somewhat like the purloined letter of Poe’s famous story— a signifier of the unconscious desire— in search of a stable signified. The deferment of Gora’s arrival at a stable subjectivity and true patriotism is, thus, a sign of the character’s presence in the novel as a free-play of a migratory signifier. As the inter-subjective perceptions regarding Gora’s nature are revealed in the text, they in turn determine in what the characters in the text do and are. Binoy’s perceptions of Gora’s nature, Anandamoyi’s and those of Sucharita are examples of colonized’s, arrival at ‘subjectivity’ in respect to the ‘desire of the Other’.

    He (Binoy) said: “Our scriptures say Know thyself— for knowledge is liberation. I can tell you that my friend Gora is India’s self-knowledge incarnate. While the minds of all the rest of us are scattered in different directions by every trifling attraction, or by the temptation of novelty, he is the one man who stands firm amidst all distractions, uttering in a voice of thunder the mantram: “Know thyself”. (p-60)

…said Anandamoyi, “Whatever I have learnt comes from Gora all the same!—how true man is himself and how false the things about which quarrels divide man from man. What after all is the difference, my son, between Brahmo and orthodox Hindu?  There is no caste in men’s hearts— there God brings men together and there He Himself comes to them. (p-183)

…she (Sucharita) thought to herself: “Gora’s words are not mere words, they are Gora himself. His speech has form and movement, it has life ; it is full of the power of faith and the pain of love for his country. His are not opinions that can be settled by contradicting them. They are the whole man himself— and, that too, no ordinary man. (p-122)

            The migratory nature of ‘Gora’— the ‘signifier of unconscious desire’, can be traced by the embedding in the narrative of Gora’s disappearance. Gora gets arrested by the Police due to flimsiest of reasons—for trying to protect a group of young students from the wrath of a police constable and picking up a fight with him—not for any great ‘nationalist’ cause—and disappears from the narrative of the text from Chapter XXX and returns in Chapter LI— after his release from prison—more than 100 pages of the text later. But the ‘phonocentrism’, very much in evidence in Sucharita’s consciousness quoted above, ensures the metaphysics of Gora’s presence even in absence not only for Sucharita but for other characters as well. Therefore, as regards to the text’s unconscious, the signifier of desire never disappears completely but keeps on coming above the surface in different guises— as different signifieds for different characters.

            The disclosure of Gora’s true identity from the point of view of the textual strategies— is an act of exhausting the signifier of all kinds of commonly perceived signified. Gora’s self is not to be conceived in any conventional racial or religious categories—he is neither Hindu nor Christian—not even a non-Hindu or non-Christian. He is neither Indian nor an Irish, not even a non-Indian or a non-Irish. So since the signifier has no fixed signified it has the capacity to stand for almost any racial, religious combination. We have, once again arrived at internationalism—the universalism where national consciousness should ultimately lead us on. And S. C. Sarkar tells us that Tagore’s sense of universalism is largely built on his unshakable faith in the positive aspects of western civilization.⁴¹ The colonized can never be completely freed from the cultural persuasions of the metropolitan West. The ‘West’ permeates all the liberal actions of colonial subjects, albeit in a varying degree—and in this respect Gora’s call for the low-birth Lachmia in the ‘Epilogue’ of the novel is perhaps the most famous fictitious account of a gesture made by an enlightened nationalist to show his universalist liberal self. This is due to the bilingual intellectual’s inescapable cultural bind; his irreversible gaze towards the metropolitan ‘West’.

Notes

1. Aime Césaire, Discourse on Colonialism, Joan Pinkham (trans.), New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 1972, p-22.
2. Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks, Haakon Chevalier (trans.), New York: Grove Press, 1965 p-38.
3. Brian Friel, Translations, London: 1981, p-66, quoted in Benita Parry, ‘Resistance Theory / Theorising Resistance or Two Cheers for Nativism’ in F. Barker, P. Hulme and M. Iversen (eds.) Colonial Discourse / Postcolonial Theory, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994.
4. See Ashis Nandy, The Intimate Enemy; Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1986, p-xi
5. David Kopf, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance: The Dynamics of Indian Modernization 1773 – 1835, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969, p-275. For the analysis of socio-political conditions and their nature behind the rise of ‘bilingualism’ see, Gauri Viswanathan, Masks of Conquest : Literary Study and British Rule in India, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998, and the effects of ‘bilingualism’ on the cultural sphere of colonised India see, Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered; Perceptions of the West in the Nineteenth Century Bengal, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1988, Partha Chatterjee, The Nation and its Fragments; Colonial & Postcolonial Histories Princeton: New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1993 and Jashodhara Bagchi, ‘Shakespeare in Loinclothes’ in Svati Joshi (ed.),  Rethinking English : Essays in Literature, Language, History, New Delhi: Trianka, 1991.
6. Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks
7. See Homi K. Bhabha, ‘Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse’, October 28, Spring 1984, p-132.
8. Rey Chow ‘Where have all the natives gone?’ in Angelika Bammer (ed.) Displacements: Cultural Identities in Question, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1994, p-128.
9. See Ashis Nandy, The Intimate Enemy, p-7.
10. Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered; Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal,  p-219 quoted in Indira Chowdhury. The Frail Hero and Virile History, Gender and the Politics of Cultures in Colonial Bengal, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2001, p-126.
11. From Complete works of Swami Vivekananda vol. V, Calcutta: Mayavati Memorial Edition, Advaita Ashrama, 1989, p-117, quoted in Indira Chowdhury. The Frail Hero and Virile History, p-126.
12. Benita Parry, ‘Resistance Theory / Theorising Resistance or Two Cheers for Nativism’, in F. Barker, P. Hulme and M. Iversen (eds.), Colonial Discourse / Postcolonial Theory, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994. p-221.
13. See Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, Constance Farrington, (trans.) Harmondsworth: Penguin,  first published in 1963, (rpt. 1974), p-199.
14. See Sumit Sarkar, A Critique of Colonial India, Calcutta: Papyrus, 1985, p-60.
15. Sushobhan Sarkar ‘Rabindranath Thakur Ebong Banglar Renaissance’ in Banglar Renaissance, Calcutta: Dipayan, 1950, (rpt. 1997), p-143.
16. Ibid, p-155.
17. bid, p-156.
18. Ibid, p-162.
19. Ashis Nandy, The Intimate Enemy, pp-72, 74.
20. Ibid, p-74, 75.
21. Ibid, p-49.
22. Ibid, p-51
23. See Rabindranath Tagore, Rabindra Rachanabali: Janmashatabarshik Sangskaran, Volume – 13,Calcutta: Paschimbango Sarkar, 1961, p-54, quoted in Sushobhan Sarkar, ‘Rabindranath Thakur ebong Banglar Renaissance’ p-157.
24. Debesh Roy, Gora; Chirakaler Samakal’, Desh. 23 January, 1999. pp-25-31.
25. Ashis Nandy, The Illegitimacy of Nationalism ; Rabindranath Tagore and the Politics of Self, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994, (rpt. 2000) p-xii.
26. See Dipesh Chakrabarty ‘Nation and Imagination’, Studies in History 15.2 n.s. (1999). especially section, ‘Imagination as a Problem’.
27. See Ashis Nandy, ‘Brahmabandhab Upadhyay: Tagore’s Political Double’ in The Illegitimacy of Nationalism, pp-51-67 and also Jyotirmoy Ghosh, Nayakar Sandhane Rabindranath, Calcutta: Dey’s 1995, (rpt. 1998) pp84-144.
28. Dipesh Chakrabarty’s discussion ‘Nation and Imagination’ immediately comes to mind. There Dipesh Chakrabarty formulates that Tagore’s prose-works are attempts, in a realistic mode, to identify the defects in the nation for the ‘purpose of reform and improvement’ and his poetical works are romantic explorations of the sublime and beautiful in the nation – thereby straitjacketing Tagore’s oeuvre in a reductionist manner. See the section ‘Prose, Poetry and Reality’ in ‘Nation and Imagination’, Studies in History, p-115, 1999.
29. Mikhail Bakhtin ‘Discourse in the Novel’ in Michael Holquist (ed.) Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist (trans.) The Dialogic Imagination, Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1981, pp 270-71.
30. Rabindranath Tagore, Gora, New Delhi: Macmillan, First Edition in January 1924, Macmillan Pocket Tagore Edition, 1980. (rpt. 1999) All subsequent quotations are from this text unless otherwise stated.
31. See Sudipta Kaviraj ‘The Imaginary Institution of India’ in Partha Chatterjee and Gyanendra Pandey (ed.) Subaltern Studies (VII) ; Writings on South Asian History and Society, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1992, p-16.
32. See Indira Chowdhury, The Frail Hero and Virile History, p-131.
33. To go back once again to the comparison between the nature of Hans Castorp’s self-fashioning and that of Gora, while The Magic Mountain is a fictional representation of the dialogic play performed upon Castorp’s consciousness between the much-articulated binary opposites of the Western civilization, the Apollonian and the Dionysian principles represented by the consciousnesses of Settembrini and Leo Naphta respectively in the novel, Gora represents a richer and more complex texture of dialogised heteroglossia.
34. Mikhail Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination, p-270.
35. Ashis Nandy, The Intimate Enemy, pp-52-53.
36. Ibid; p-53.
37. Homi Bhabha, ‘DissemiNation : Time, Narrative and the Margins of the Modern Nation’ in Homi Bhabha (ed.) Nation and Narration, London: Rutledge, first published 1990. (rpt. 1995) p-297.
38. Sumit Sarkar, A Critique of Colonial India, p-42.
39. I am greatly indebted to Elizabeth Wright’s article, ‘Modern Psychoanalytic Criticism’ published in Ann Jefferson and David Robey (eds.) Modern Literary Theory, London: B. T. Batsford Limited, 1986, 2nd edition. There she uses Shoshana Felman’s schematizations quite brilliantly. See p-159.
40. Homi Bhabha, ‘Foreword’, Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks, p-xv.
41. See Sushobhan Sarkar, ‘Rabindranath Thakur ebong Banglar Renaissance’.

Dipankar Roy (Born 1970) studied in Ramakrishna Mission, Baranagar, Scottish Church College, Kolkata, University of Calcutta and Jadavpur University. He is currently doing Ph. D on Tagore’s novels at the English department, Jadavpur University and working as a Senior Lecturer at the Department of English and Other Modern European Languages, Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan. He is nterested in Walter Benjamin, postcolonial theory, Hindusthani classical music and photography.

Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities (ISSN 0975-2935), Vol 2, No 4, 2010, Special Issue on  Rabindranath Tagore, edited by Amrit Sen, URL of the Issue:  http://rupkatha.com/v2n4.php, URL of the article: http://rupkatha.com/V2/n3/03CulturalIdenityGora.pdf