Reading the short stories of Temsula Ao: looking towards an alternate-narrative
- Part 1 -

Kumam Davidson Singh *

Violence has been a way of life. This is what Temsula Ao writes about in her volume of short stories "These Hills called Home: Stories from a War Zone" , the kind of violence which is historically and politically located. But as she writes in her preface "Lest We Forget" she is neither condemning nor justifying, but she is doing something beyond that.

At the surface, it seems she is refusing to take a political stand. But underneath she is echoing the difficulty of taking such a stand. She is completely aware of the situation, violence, and dilemma. But as I said she is not taking a political stand in the usual sense, but she might be looking for a rather powerful alternative, the creation of an alternate-narrative as opposed to mere counter-narratives.

A careful reading of the situation in Nagaland or some other states of Northeast (the tendency of homogenising is also there when one addresses as northeast) India where AFSPA has taken toll of lives, one sense a lurking danger of sticking to a counter-narrative. The kind of narrative that refuses to talk of a negotiation because mere speech and dialogue hasn't helped; might not help in the years to come. Limiting one on a side with a strict sense of nationalism and thereby overlooking the statement and opinion of the "other" is highly problematic.

Here I am using the term "other" by getting away from the colonial and post colonial "self/other" power relations. I can no longer stick to binaries. I suggest strongly one to read the usage of the term "self other" in my entire paper as of "differences" only. I don't have any other alternative except taking away the inherent power relation from the "self-/other" in the context of my paper as well as the alternate-narrative that I am trying to create.

In all its possible sense, until and unless the self other is not redeemed of the unequal power structure, I cannot address any dialogue or negotiation. Therefore I emphasize on the differences in term of history, politics, culture, language, race and every other possible definitions which I am sure there are. What is needed is not a counter-narrative but an alternative which can open a space of less violent negotiation and dialogue because the crisis is not just politics, but also identity.

The conflict is not just between the centre and the state but also between the states and other communities, ethnic or tribal groups. In short the conflict is multilayered, multidirectional and very complex. And please bear in mind when I use this idea of an alternate narrative I am warning people of the danger of counter-narratives that emerged in post colonial writings.

Many post colonial writings get trapped in the structure of counter-narratives. For instance, this kind of narrative can be derived from Chinua Achebe or Ngugi Wa Thiong'o's writings. I understand the anxieties they suffer from the colonial experiences. However, if those experiences reduce and inspire one to sheer counter actions, it might not be that enabling.

What happens in the mentioned writings above is that in trying to write back, they end up only countering European narrative and culture. They somehow fail to go beyond the already existing structure of the power relationship "self/other". When they call the "other" racist, they end up not giving any scope for the European to become not racist.

The narrative still follows the same earlier structure by just reversing it. So the problem is in creating mere counter-narratives. But then why is the need of this kind of an alternate narrative? One has seen so much of antagonism in many states of northeast. Often people refuse to go into a proper dialogue. The positions are so hostile while ironically the cultural, historical and ideological knowledge of each other often turns out to be very limited in many cases.

For instance, addressing as "Northeast" or "Chinky" shows such lack of knowledge and responsibility and also an overdose of generalisation and stereotype. The readiness of acceptance on each side is so bound by each own historical experiences. Perhaps that is the reason why Temsula Ao wants to look at history, the past and memory as a way to redeem the present and look forward to the future. She doesn't look for condemnation or justification but something beyond that. And that's where I see a possibility of an alternate-narrative emerging out of her short stories written in English.

English in India was the Colonial language and now it is the post colonial language. I am not reducing the centre and northeast states discourse into a mere post colonial binaries. The historical and political merger cannot be reduced to a post colonial situation; it might better be termed a colonial experience for that matter. In any case, I am not ready for an equation of post colonialism and the situation of the northeast states vis-à-vis the Indian Government completely.

I am rather conveying the use of the post colonial language and the concept of "self/other" but which takes a radical departure here. Coming back to Temsula it is clear how she is looking at memory, individual or collective and a strong need for responsibility. Responsibility and memory seems to be the basis of her approach. I can't help but quote Temsula in her preface, "But what do you do when it comes to someone else's memory and when that memory is of pain and pain alone? Do you brush it aside and say, it doesn't concern me? When this people say that 'it doesn't matter', they mean that there is an inherent callousness in the human mind that tends to ignore injustice and inhumanity as long as it doesn't touch one directly."

This is strongly suggesting at the lack of responsibility and a need for it. But I would like to differ slightly. I do not agree the use of the word "callousness" because one cannot simply generalise and assume every single situation as just mere "callousness" because that might not be the reason so. I would rather suggest "indifference" or "difficulty" or even "sheer helplessness" because people have to get on with their lives, struggle every single day for a livelihood in the midst of the lurking violence and threat.

Of course I am not deviating from the need to take this kind of responsibility; I am rather looking at the use of the word "callousness" which is not appropriate in all its sense and context. People have seen so far so much responsibility, sacrifice, unity for the common cause, and in effect people have been victimised without much of a reward often. This is enough indication of the responsibility people take. Only that the nature of that responsibility needs a little theorisation and proper explanation.

It has been such a violent history in the case of the case of these states; it needs the attention of the people around the country and beyond. A symposium on Sharmila in Harvard University in US or a BBC talk with Muivah is worth talking about. And please be careful not to misread my references to US or BBC because I am not pertaining to any "centre/periphery" positions, just giving instances. Let's look at Temsula further.

The Preface which is an introduction to the volume of short stories seems to be formulating certain ideological positions. When she says, "On the contrary, what the stories are trying to say is that in such conflicts, there are no winners, only victims and the results can be measured only in Human terms." This is why I say she is perhaps looking for an alternate position, an alternate narrative which might even counter the existing "counter-narratives" that refuse any dialogue.

She is also revisiting the past and engaging trying to explain how nationalism was built up, and how the Naga psyche was "revolutionized" with so much disillusionment and victimisation overtime. Therefore she is suggesting how history and memory can be inculcated as a way to absolve the present and look to a better future. She looks at the racial ideology as the catalyst.

The preface is worth quoting many times, "Our racial wisdom has always extolled the virtue of human beings living at peace with themselves and in harmony with nature and with neighbours. It is only when the Nagas re-embrace and re-write this vision into the fabric of their lives in spite of the contradictions of a fast changing world, can we say that the memories of the turbulent years have served us well."

If history is going to become the catalyst for a peaceful present and future, it becomes a daunting task to define the mode of approach for this kind of history, the kind of history which is filled with at first a violent and oppressive merger and events thereafter of bloodsheds and secondly a nostalgia of a previous history before these events which sometimes is referred to as one's "unique history". So how does one negotiate with history and memory? It seems one need a very serious and conscious approach at history.

Since Temsula is not looking at a complete erasure of history, one has to look at history as important events to be understood rather than just using it to take counter positions which is often dangerous. Temsula is also lamenting at the youth of the present times whose situation she referred as, "the sudden displacement of the young from a placid existence in rural habitats to a world of conflict and confusion in urban settlements is also a fallout of recent Naga history and one that has left them disabled in more than one."

There have been so much violence and further perpetuation will destroy these states completely, even if it might be different in the case of some states. Temsula instructs her stories as not about "condemnations" or "justifications", one cannot deny that a sense of condemnation is inherent. But the condemnation should not now affect a responsible dialogue wherever possible. And please take this seriously; every historical claim might not be justifiable if it is going to bring rows of bloodsheds again.

Bet it Kuki separatist movement, erstwhile separatist movements taking place in many other regions, Greater Nagalim,etc. We need to talk, we need to face each other and not in the old fashion (one is often critical of the other without realising the limitations of his/her own position and approach). Not just what we talk about, how we talk about is also of much importance. Days of repitive strikes and blockades will furtehr degenerate the condition of the already pitiable conditions and perhaps perpetuate mostilities even more. That is the reason why I am consistently emphasing an alternate-narrative at this moment. It is simply so crucial.

to be continued...

REFERENCES

1. Ao, Temsula, These Hills called Home: Stories from a War Zone, Zubaan and Penguin Books, 2006, New Delhi.
2. Ao, Temsula, These Hills called Home: Stories from a War Zone, Preface/Lest we forget, Zubaan and Penguin Books, 2006, New Delhi.
3. Ao, Temsula, These Hills called Home: Stories from a War Zone, Preface/Lest we forget-X, Zubaan and Penguin Books, 2006, New Delhi.
4. Ao, Temsula, These Hills called Home: Stories from a War Zone, Preface/Lest we forget-X, Zubaan and Penguin Books, 2006, New Delhi.
5. Ao, Temsula, These Hills called Home: Stories from a War Zone, Preface/Lest we forget-X, Zubaan and Penguin Books, 2006, New Delhi.
6. Ao, Temsula, These Hills called Home: Stories from a War Zone, 85, Zubaan and Penguin Books, 2006, New Delhi.
7. Temsula, Ao, Laburnum for My Head, Penguin Books , 2009, New delhi.
8. Hutchens, Benjamin C, Levinas:A Guide for the Perplexed, 19, Continuum, 2006, accessed here at , 8:00 pm 27 April 2012.