Suppose someone writes a book stating that Netaji was a monomaniac and did what he did whole life out of deep-seated megalomania. Then is it imperative to subscribe to such perfidious proposition in the first place by purchasing the said publication and, so, help the proliferation of such literature in the market which would seem to be the object of the whole marketing strategy? No, one does not have to read such stuff to refute certain fundamental facts for one may have already been privy to sufficient credible material to posit one's views to the contrary. At any rate, I propose to read through before I give my considered views about the book and its content, a fact that I have already stated in an earlier observation which you may have overlooked. As for calling something trash, it was not the book that I have anywhere stated as being so but the proffered idea that Bhagavanji was a victim of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) that has drawn my pertinent observation.
Anyhow, from the look of the statement about medieval monstrosity of book-burning that you have brought in --- and let me add here that you need not go thus far into history to cite such cases, for the Nazis committed similar cultural violence against literature they considered anti-German --- it seems that you have already been privy to the contents of the book in question and, in consequence, buy the PTSD affliction proposition, or, perhaps, you are merely arguing on grounds much traversed in past positing of logical principles. Whatever may have prompted you to thus give expression to your thoughts on my observation, I wholeheartedly welcome it as being part of the democratic discourse which is why I have ventured to give back this rather elaborate response, and I will get back to this discussion for sure in detailed analytical articulation when I have finished studying the book which ought to anyhow come my way.
Written by Sugata Bose
No comments:
Post a Comment