Parrotisation in post-colonial intellectualism

Rokeson Nongmaithem *

The heavenly light source, the Sun, rises from the East and sets in the West ! For an individual in the East, it could be interpreted as the ultimate testimony that the fundamental elements of a proper civilisation emanate from the East. But isn’t it evident that those elements become less enthusiastic about being stuck in the East ?

Remember, the Sun sets in the West ! As soon as the light fades away, the civilised fox comes in. Or at least, it is supposed to be articulated as such. The fatuous talkativeness is planted and shuffled with the pre-existing one throughout the Tartarean East, where nothing owns value until value gets poured to wash the villainy out of the hoaxed.

This evergreen forest is the one that would lure the mimicking parrots whose roisterous contour reflects the enduring mentality of the ostentatious fox.

One characteristic that defines a parrot is the capability to recite the spiel obliviously, the farcical but tantalising narratives circulated by another species. Wouldn’t it be futile for a parrot to be unable to fulfil such a faithful characteristic ?

Perhaps the parrot should be more concerned about the ritual of deification within the clamorous realm as a being with recitative capability in an intellectual market. The benevolent and welcoming nature of the market feeds the parrot, thus compromising the birdly existence, confining it in a suppositional cage.

But from the lens of an unfaithful parrot, the creature in the suppositional cage is well-trained to possess the capability to chant the songs as the owner demands.

The supposed one who could fill the gap between the yet-to-be-deified and the faithfulness would be terrifically appreciated. Hymn after hymn, with the lyre of the cage, paving the path to enlighten the Tartarean realm, is the ultimate destiny for a well-trained, faithful saviour.

The lingering essence of the suppositional cage within the dynamic and melodious rhythms of the lyre coaxes the entirety of potential protagonists to the racine of the supposed one.

Such an ecosystem wouldn’t be too kind to welcome those who couldn’t recite the faithful fatuousness. Or wouldn’t it be logical to epitomise such nature of unfaithfulness as wretched elements, desperately in need of being segregated from the rest? The creature in the suppositional cage would’ve mastered the art of realising the state of existence within the compact space.

Still, such a daring challenge wouldn’t be a part of the training-absolutely out of the syllabus. In such a way, the nature of compromising the birdly existence is essentialised, and the concept is even indoctrinated to justify its need.

Imagine being tagged as one who doesn’t yet achieve the intellectual capability to comprehend the ecosystem of the outside cage – a lifetime sobriquet for lacking sight from the suppositional cage or simply for not submitting to the supposed one.

However, grasping one’s perception of that ecosystem would remain a conundrum as the individual experience plays a significant role, and that experience varies even among those with sobriquets. What type of bird is to be for a parrot to be a parrot ? A faithful one ! The supposed one ! Perhaps unfaithfulness is the negation of being a parrot and the characteristic that nullifies its identity.

The perennial scientific validations must be essentialised, but the necessities can be made oblivious. Or if questions of necessities reach the point where the supposed ones can’t let them go unanswered, then the pre-training ecosystem of the forest has to be buried far away, even beyond the comprehension of the unfaithful ones – those with sobriquets, yet-to-be-[re]parrotised.

Even the concept of a new forest could be passionately circulated and fill the gap between those inside the suppositional cage and the outside – making a shared ecosystem, a standard suppositional cage.

From the lens of a deified one, those validations could be pivotal not necessarily to accustom the ecosystem as a Tartarean realm but for serving as the ultimate tool to de-parrotise those who wouldn’t be coaxed easily into the ritual of deification.

The concept of a new shared ecosystem would hardly sustain its existence but ludicrously summon its demise, the demise that follows every new forest, the new forest proselytised by the ostentatious fox. The forest is already shared, accommodating and entertaining all the protagonists, even without this new concept.

It’s worth recalling that such a chronicle occurs in the forest of fatuousness, where the faithful parrots are the deities of value and the supposed ones – itching to deify the yet-to-be new parrots for the new forest. But how does the unfaithful one emerge in this ecosystem whose tantalising nature lures the parrots – the mimicking bird – if it is the architect of the civilised fox?

Perhaps there might be a past where the new chroniclers refused to entertain, and those individuals who experienced such an ecosystem transmuted into the unfaithful in the new.