ESSENCE OF  TIKAHARAN : A CRITIQUE OF BHALCHANDRA NEMADE

NATIVVISM: REALITY AND APPEARANCE

Mr.Bhalchandra Nemade has retraditionalised the concept of NATIVISM against the concept of INTERNATIONALISM  borne out of anglo-marathi contact [In his language; compelled by ] .In his essay ‘Sahityatil Deshiyta’;now published in his book TEEKAS WAYANWAR  he has discussed it vehementally,and I think it’s milestone discourse in the history of Marathi Criticism . Hence it has become necessary to scrutinize every paragraph of this essay. [I.e. KHANDAN-MANDAN]The essay is the poweric slap on the face of SATYAKTHIY cock; who was trying to hatch the international eggs in the              magazinic poultry farm of Brahmanical Consciousness.The people who are not outinfluencing from their caste-conditioning were discussing internationalism. It’s like talking by a player about breaking the Olympic records who has not completed the 100 meters hurdles in his Mohalla’s competition. This dose of nativism would be more effective in 1960 but unfortunately Mr. Nemade injected it in 1983 after the close down of SATYAKATHA. This article was like a medical treatment after the death of patient. Let it be so as we are always latelatif in our all walks of life especially in our criticism As nativity is outdated, globalization is happening our critique will start to grind each and every aspect of nativism [Mr. Avinash Sapre and Mr. Uttam Kshirsagar have already started this process] and our generation will be expressing the global content in context of globalization.

                                              Here Mr.Nemade suggests that so called Nehru-age and colonialism are two responsible factors for the establishment of internationalism. Now its time to learn that there is lot of difference between modernism and colonialism. The colonialism was ecopolitical agenda of European countries while modernism is                                                    international phenomenon happened because of interactions among many countries including Asian countries like China; Japan and others. Internationalism is the byproduct of liberal humanism which was itself byproduct of modernism Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx were spread in noncolonised countries also. They suggested the answers for those questions which were raised by WISH ayam. Marx was a german; Freaud was also German; yet they spread first in Europe and then in whole world. They help SATYAKATHA to shape its internationalism. It' s meaningless to blame colonialism every time. It’s better to see India as she is! Every society has 4 ayams:

                                                                        Brahmani [salvation-centered]

                                                                        Khetriya [area-centered]     

                                                                        Wish [machine-centered]

                                                                        Chinha [sign-centered]

                                                                        Our wish ayam passed through following phases

                                                                        Interactive

                                                                        Reincarnative

                                                                        Reformative

                                                                        Freedomative

                                                                        Independative

                                                                        Constructive                                                   

                                                                        WISH ayam is machine centered. In wish ayam everything seems either likes machine or factory or commodity In freedomative phase we unconsciously wanted to compete with British. After independence we wanted to construct new India Our think-tank followed factory-line Nehru-age and Satyakatha were byproducts of this line They were competing with west and yet they wanted to keep themselves non-aligned, assuming that they have international say in new world constructions. Unfortunately sometime they imitated west or followed west blindly in this process which created enough space for POSTWISH ayam. Post-wish ayam belong to wish ayam yet it is different from it. Around 1960 it generated three phases

                                                                        Deconstructive

                                                                        Native

                                                                        Uttarpariwartanwadi

                                                                       

                                                           Wish ayam happened everywhere. U.S.A.imported Japanese management from Japan. Will Nemade call it colonialism of Japan? The fact is; commodities produced by modern factory technique reached everywhere. As I said earlier; Nemade couldn’t escape from his KSHETRIYA conditioning which blinded his understanding of WISH ayam. We should understand that TV. and supply of drinking water are two different things. You can’t supply water by stopping the production of TV... for that you have to develop or modify the  structure of your water supply system independently. Population is the major problem of India and I think by exhibiting commodities and semiodities on screen; TV. is provoking Indian family for small family  and I think population-control is as important as supply of water. Besides it T.V.brings knowledge and arts at home like a book. Writers tend to brand TV. as brand of consumerism and a book as a holy ghost of creativity. If we go ahead with Mr.Nemade’s logic we should ban books for water supply as TV. and books, both are semiodity.  Asiad was different matter. To get money from other Asian countries and to set-up election-fund were two aims behind it. Not a stick of it is related with  match-box of colonialism. If our writers don’t read DNYANESHWAR and     TUKARAM it’s not there but our fault. It’s our laziness. Many times it’s better to read a writer like MILAN KUNDERA than V.S.KHANDEKAR. Actually we need vivek in this matter. We must give priority to our good writers but it’s better to ignore our third rate writer. We must recognize that in old times we have very little choice. For example TUKARAM might have read 50 books out of 100 available books but today there are millions of books and you can read at most 6000 to 12000 out of them. There is no choice but to be choosy.