The Emperor's 'Borrowed' Robe
Impression as an epistemological theorist or literary critic? As a social or cultural critic? Fairly speaking, let me ask you that, can a reader of Urdu literature classify Narang as one of these? I do not think someone can answer this question so straightforwardly. To look for a detailed answer of the questions, I posed above, rather than isolating Gopi Chand Narang, I would like to explore Narang’s work in a general literary, social and cultural context.
Following literary ethics, I can affirm that a writer must be judged by the quality of his work and the impact he or she has on the individual as well as on the collective social, cultural or literary trends and spirit of his epoch. Has Narang produced such a work on the basis of which Narang can be tested against literary criteria? Has he constructively influenced the literary, social or cultural atmosphere? The answer is emphatic no. I find absolutely futile and weightless argumentatively the writings of Narang’s well-wishers through which they make huge propaganda to prove him highly revered theorists.
Some of them have gone to the extent that they propagate that Narang is one of the main theorist of postmodernism in the West. This is so shocking that I cannot even find words to express this severe absurdity. Frankly speaking, I have always been a reader of Western philosophy, literature and criticism and have never been a great admirer of Urdu literary criticism, because I believe that there is no literary criticism in Urdu.
Most of the so-called Urdu critics have imported certain Western ideas, without comprehending the contextual importance of the complicated themes. Through personal experience, I can understand that how concretely the ideas originate in a particular context and how the ideas are tested against the empirical reality within a different context. Any particular social, cultural or literary theory becomes obsolete if it contradicts with the existing or emerging empirical reality of human life. Transcendental criteria, I mean some timeless principle, annihilating empirical reality of its importance, has never been categorically exercised to judge the invigorating aspect of a theory.
Let me draw the attention of readers to the contextual significance of theoretical and ideological approaches in the West. For instance, in the twentieth century, from Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure onward to French Postmodernist Jacque Derrida, all believed in a very strange idea that reality is not socially constructed, it is claimed, on the contrary, that the reality is linguistically constructed. Well, Derrida, in the first chapter of one of his most important book Of Grammatology, sees the emergence of Cybernetic theory as well as immensely complex system of information as an essential outcome of recent development in the scientific and economic sphere. Despite certain fascistic aspects in Derridean deconstruction, such as debasement of meaning, I appreciate his move of locating his arguments in a concrete social and historical context.
Derridean science of grammatology views suspiciously the whole Western philosophical or metaphysical tradition that, he thinks, is based on Logocentrism. Philosophy based on Western Logocentrism, attempts to justify the difference between signifier and signified, then the difference between signifier and signified; as a totality, is reduced under the philosophy of Western metaphysics of presence. According to that, transcendental consciousness occupies a privileged place. It determines meaning according to its own conditions. Transcendental means an immovable presence, a fixed point.
Derrida’s intention is to liberate the signifier, which according to transcendental consciousness eventually reduces itself as a signified. Derrida extremely motivated by the marginality of Jews in the west developed his strategies to deconstruct all the polarities and dichotomies that occupied privileged location conceptually under Christian theological Logos, Reason or Logic.
The point to ponder is that Derridean deconstruction is implicitly a Jewish philosophy that struggles against the reduction of Jews under the Christian Logos. Jews should liberate themselves from the oppressive Christian philosophy, say Derrida. As a Jewish philosopher, in one of his most obscure, but important book Glas, Derrida challenged the fundamental theme of Logos and trinity in Christian theology.
Let me ask this question to Narang or the other ingredients of his propaganda machine, had he ever tested the western fascistic theoretical work against the concrete aspect of his own society? Did Narang, through his de-contextualised and distorted translations, ever attempted, implicitly or explicitly, to explain the meaning of “Western Metaphysics”, which was so integrated with Derridean deconstruction?
The point I want to lay emphasis on is that the Western theorists do not disregard the significance of the whole social, political and economic developments. They also keep on the agenda their loyalties with their own class or groups.
In this background let me come to your question now that the impression I had about Narang. I firmly believe that Gopi Chand Narang has always been a passive adherent to the western so-called superior theoretical work, who completely failed to conceive the western theoretical process. He also absolutely lacks the principal intellectual traits, which are essential not only to perform subtle analysis, but also to establish his reputation as an honest writer.
Before discovering the truth about Narang’s plagiarism, I had always been suspicious about his stature as a critic or writer. Narang mendacious act of massive plagiarism has just converted my suspicions into a firm belief.
It sad how people in urdu literary world have not done anything about it. that is how such men become great - by borrowing ideas from great men.
ReplyDeleteProf. Mohamad Omar
I agree with Prof Omar. Someone needs to put a stop to these thefts. But who?
ReplyDeleteIt is now a fact that "Prof" "Dr" Narang has committed a huge plagiarism. I think if there is a discilinary committee in India it should move on and take an action against Narang for the sake of individual honesty and literary ethics.
ReplyDeleteIt is a proven fact now that Gopi Chand Narang has committed a huge plagiarism. If there is some respect for literature and criticism in India, a strong action must be taken against Narang. I would also suggest to Mr.Bhinder to investigate other books by Narang. I don't think he has the ability to write a book on his own.
ReplyDeleteNasir Ali
United Kingdom
Anchal.Afzal
ReplyDeleteLyndon Humanities College in Solihull, UK
I am a GCSE student in Lyndon Humanities College in Solihull, UK. I am interested in Literary issues and politics and that’s how I came across this subject; I read the interview on this website, “The World of Urdu”, of Imran Shaid Bhinder which made me more curious, So I done some more research to this ‘shocking’ subject. I read this article by Bhinder, ‘Gopi Chand Narang translator or author’ which was published in 2006, A well known person for his writing and theory’s and so much more, Dr. Gopi chand narang basically got all the fame and awards by copying from English and pasting it in Urdu. If a well known person like Dr. Gopi Chand Narang does plagiarism, what does that show to the youth of tomorrow? Because in my eyes it shows that it is the easiest way of getting ‘fame’. The only way no one knew until know about the plagiarism, because he did not publish it in English, if he did; he would publish the same old words from all the famous writers!
I have to add even though this may be out of the subject, is that ‘Derrida’s books’ are made to confuse people so no one can totally argue back or disagree with the valid reason. If a person does not understand the language that derrida is using, how is anyone going to disagree and prove their point; which I think is the whole game to his writing. Who ever understands his theory would come to this point ‘Deidra purposely created confusion so no one can disagree with his theory’s only because no one understand it, that’s the only reason people don’t disagree if he wrote the same words in a simpler form it would make more sense which I think ‘Derrida’ does not want! I have not read ‘derrida’ academically or personally, I got this point of view from Imran Bhinder’s articles, which have been published in many websites, any way to come back to my point about Disgusting act of (Dr. Gopi chand narang) plagiarism, the articles and arguments now discussed in English on websites. Now this is not only a big topic in Asia it is a big topic to people who everywhere who can read English And Urdu, not only some countries in Asia are victim of war and poverty, Now there are going to be bad accusations about clean writers of Urdu.
[email protected]