-By Kamal Raj Sigdel
A game of chess, power politics, disequilibria of triode, regression … one hardly agrees with the other in interpreting current tides of politics in Nepal. Whom to believe? Nobody speaks seriously.
I hardly sleep these days. Being a so-called well aware citizen, I keep on wondering and even pondering at this deadlock as to dig out its crux – the bottom reality and its solution. Last night, as I was rummaging through my books dumped long into an old container, I happened to see a book inscribed "Foucault". I grabbed it immediately and start reading. I felt as if my quest ended at him. I had consulted all of the books – philosophical, political, economic, fictional and even psychological – at my disposal, but none of them solved the riddle. It is only when Foucault convinced me in his "The Eye of Power" that the king and the parties are playing a game of "Look and Gaze". It is in fact a very interesting interpretation for the present power politics in Nepal. When I read it, I sat with solace and found that all are making fuss with up and down consultations while the reality is something else.
Had there been Foucault for consultation he would have certainly wrote another book "The Problem of Look and Gaze in Nepalese Politics". Being much aware of all these pantomine shows in Daura-Suruwal dress-ups, I am thinking of supplementing Foucault. But I'm horribly afraid whether this deadlock will last as long as I complete the book.
It is quite interesting to see the trap of "Look and Gaze". The king has a curious "gaze", oftentimes the daily newspapers zoom in, at which the political leaders are subject. While in receiving audience with the king the political leaders always have a mere "look" and the king always has a controlling and dominant "gaze". At that time the king's gaze is somewhat the "male gaze" while the emaciated leaders pose their "female look" with their anti-regression cadres in momentary pause outside the palace (perhaps waiting for some miracle to happen).
Once they come out of the palace and intermingle with the Dionysiac mob at Ratnapark the relation goes topsy-turvy. Now the leaders swell up like balloons, pose straight up at some highest rooftop, jumping out of the window they start roaring themselves hoarse. This time they have really a powerful and dominant "gaze" at the king. The crowd excited in their hottest republic slogans feels that the king must have a frail "look" at them.
[Date June 2004]
A game of chess, power politics, disequilibria of triode, regression … one hardly agrees with the other in interpreting current tides of politics in Nepal. Whom to believe? Nobody speaks seriously.
I hardly sleep these days. Being a so-called well aware citizen, I keep on wondering and even pondering at this deadlock as to dig out its crux – the bottom reality and its solution. Last night, as I was rummaging through my books dumped long into an old container, I happened to see a book inscribed "Foucault". I grabbed it immediately and start reading. I felt as if my quest ended at him. I had consulted all of the books – philosophical, political, economic, fictional and even psychological – at my disposal, but none of them solved the riddle. It is only when Foucault convinced me in his "The Eye of Power" that the king and the parties are playing a game of "Look and Gaze". It is in fact a very interesting interpretation for the present power politics in Nepal. When I read it, I sat with solace and found that all are making fuss with up and down consultations while the reality is something else.
Had there been Foucault for consultation he would have certainly wrote another book "The Problem of Look and Gaze in Nepalese Politics". Being much aware of all these pantomine shows in Daura-Suruwal dress-ups, I am thinking of supplementing Foucault. But I'm horribly afraid whether this deadlock will last as long as I complete the book.
It is quite interesting to see the trap of "Look and Gaze". The king has a curious "gaze", oftentimes the daily newspapers zoom in, at which the political leaders are subject. While in receiving audience with the king the political leaders always have a mere "look" and the king always has a controlling and dominant "gaze". At that time the king's gaze is somewhat the "male gaze" while the emaciated leaders pose their "female look" with their anti-regression cadres in momentary pause outside the palace (perhaps waiting for some miracle to happen).
Once they come out of the palace and intermingle with the Dionysiac mob at Ratnapark the relation goes topsy-turvy. Now the leaders swell up like balloons, pose straight up at some highest rooftop, jumping out of the window they start roaring themselves hoarse. This time they have really a powerful and dominant "gaze" at the king. The crowd excited in their hottest republic slogans feels that the king must have a frail "look" at them.
[Date June 2004]
No comments:
Post a Comment
Only genuine comments please!