westerners and symbolism- blog by Rajiv malhotra

[Guest guest]

[This is interesting . The reply by Elst follows- kishore patnaik] MY REJECTED POST IS BELOW. PLEASE JUDGE FOR YOURSELF: Koenraad

Elst: " Indians and some other Orientals (like some dwindling groups in

the West) take symbols very very seriously, and we don't. " This is not true of westerners, but a major blindness of scholars today. Ronald

Reagan's funeral and week-long ceremonies were a larger than life

display of the American Grand Narrative. Americans do take their

symbols, narratives, history (much of it falsely and chauvinistically

taught) very, very seriously. This notion that westerners don't take

their Grand Narratives seriously is what I call postmodern blindness.

It pretends that western myths are universal, and hence claims there is

no " western " myth as such (having elevated western myths to universal

truths, ethics, human rights...) Secular westerners

circumcise, bury their dead (as opposed to cremation that is cleaner,

cheaper and better ecologically), have church weddings, have laws based

on Biblical notions like " retribution " and so forth, give their kids

Biblical names... Kennedy's assassination was a terrible

blow to the American Grand Narrative. Thereafter, Jacqueline Kennedy

filled the symbolic role of American Camelot, until she married a

" foreigner " Onassis which was very hurtful to Americans' sense of

national symbolism. Despite this devaluation of her symbolic value, she

remained symbolically special as the honors upon her death demonstrated. The

Brits have their royals as pride of national identity or else they

would not support their extravagances. Princess Diana's wedding was the

zenith of English symbolism, and her death was the British equivalent

of America's September 11 – a blow to the Grand Narrative of the nation. The

French have their pride of Cannes, wines, cosmetics, fashions, Paris,

etc. – btw, French cultural exports create more jobs than any other

industry, so symbolism is serious economic stuff. Symbolic

capital is a well understood asset category in western society, hence

much is done to protect it; in the political realm it is called soft

power (J, Nye of Harvard coined the term). When I used to

work in Brussels, I asked many times why Belgium needs to exist as a

separate nation. Why not merge half of it with France and the other

half with Holland? When you answer this you will automatically

understand that symbolism is very, very important to those highly

rational and progressive Europeans. Bottom line:

Different societies have different kinds of symbols, but they do have

them and value them. It's a classical western blind spot to say that

Orientalists are very, very stuck on symbols but that the westerners

being rational have evolved on beyond this nonsense. In fact,

Westerners spend more on their " nonsensical " symbolism, project them

worldwide more assertively (as any trademark attorney will confirm),

and value their identity as " Westerners " which is based largely on

symbolism. END QUOTE

-- Love is a fruit in season at all times, and within the reach of every hand.~:~ Mother Theresa ~:~