SV: [Y-Indology] De-Essentializing the 'Eastern Wisdom'.

[Guest guest]

Rajiv Malhotra [sMTP:rajiv.malhotra] skrev 11. mai 2001 15:24:

> RESPONSE:

> A: Yes, funding determines what issues the west selects and how they are

> framed. This explains why Middle Eastern and East Asian programs get more

> emphasis than anything Indic, which has nothing to do with philosophical

> relevance as demanded by his point B.

 

True. But remember that the Middle East is not studied for its

philosophies. It produces oil, and that is the lifeblood of the Western

economies. Hence, the Middle East is HOT. As for East Asia: China should be

hot for the US which regards it as a strategic contender (what India

apparently is not due its position). In my contribution to the argument for

a Nordic Institute in India (we were a group of local scholars that

produced a justification), I argued that India IS a strategic contender,

and that it is vital PRECISELY because of its location, jutting straight

into the ship lanes where much American oil is shipped.

 

> B: How does one explain the 'intellectual' success of Buddhist Studies in

> academia, when at least as much philosophical value lies within the

> non-Buddhist areas of IP?

 

I will leave this question to others to answer. I don't know enough about

Buddhist studies.

 

> QUESTION: Using Fosse's A & B criteria (which denies any political or

> ideological basis for scholarship), on what basis does the western market

> 'eat' up the heavily funded scholarship on: sati, dowry deaths, caste,

and

> other 'essentializing' in academic vogue?

 

I was unaware that heavy doses of funding went into sati and dowry death

research. Caste is hot, but that is precisely because caste is enormously

important in Indian society and politics. (It is also an interesting

sociological phenomenon in itself). Sati and dowry deaths seem more like

press preoccupations. However, I will grant you one thing: the popular

press (as against scholarship) is too preoccupied with India's social

problems. This is partly due to sensationalism. If you check what they

prefer to write about, it is usually murder and mayhem, and failing that,

social problems. India is not the only "victim" here. This press attitude

has annoyed me for years. India is an important regional contender, and has

a potential for playing an important global role. We need to know more

about India, not only about its culture, but about its economy, army, navy,

foreign policies etc. "Selling" this point of view has however proven

extremely difficult. A person working for the Foreign Ministry once told me

that they didn't need all that much advance knowledge. They were usually

able to react and produce a policy as the occasion demanded. A representive

of a major Norwegian company operating in India told me they didn't need

Norwegians competent in Indian matters. They got the necessary competence

from their Indian partners (who anyway argued that colonial times were

over, so don't offer us your own experts on India).

 

Are these deemed relevant to

> western society as per B (perhaps for Orientalist construction of western

> self-image)?

 

The West does not need help with its self-image. "Orientalism" has little

or no market with the general public. If anything, the problem here is

Indian self-image.

 

Best regards,

 

Lars Martin Fosse

 

 

Dr. art. Lars Martin Fosse

Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,

0674 Oslo

Norway

Phone: +47 22 32 12 19

Mobile phone: +47 90 91 91 45

Fax 1: +47 22 32 12 19

Fax 2: +47 85 02 12 50 (InFax)

Email: lmfosse