“Entering Life:” Literary De-Extinction and the Archives of Life in Mahasweta Devi’s Pterodactyl, Puran Sahay, and Pirtha

IF 0.1 3区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI:10.1080/10436928.2020.1709715
D. O’Key
{"title":"“Entering Life:” Literary De-Extinction and the Archives of Life in Mahasweta Devi’s Pterodactyl, Puran Sahay, and Pirtha","authors":"D. O’Key","doi":"10.1080/10436928.2020.1709715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, critics and novelists alike have questioned literature’s potential to represent, register, and challenge environmental disaster. Perhaps the most-discussed interventions into this debate are Amitav Ghosh’s lectures on literature and climate change, published as The Great Derangement in 2016, in which Ghosh posits that contemporary novels are failing to come to terms with the “unthinkable” phenomena of climate change, the Anthropocene, and extinction. In this essay, I wish to deepen and complicate Ghosh’s arguments by turning to another Indian writer, Mahasweta Devi (1926– 2016), whose works not only represent the increasing anthropogenic extinctions of human and nonhuman life, but who in doing so calls into question the very archival drives of literature which Ghosh’s lectures implicitly privilege. In her short novel Pterodactyl, Puran Sahay, and Pirtha (1989; hereafter Pterodactyl), originally written in Bengali but translated into the Anglophone postcolonial canon via Gayatri Spivak’s 1995 publication of Imaginary Maps, Mahasweta narrates a story in which a dispassionate journalist, Puran Sahay, travels to a famine-stricken tribal village in central India. There, he encounters two kinds of vulnerability which confound his narrow idea of life: an impoverished adivasi (literally, original inhabitant) community who faces continual dispossession by national development projects, and a prehistoric pterodactyl, suffering from a broken wing. Pterodactyl stages Puran’s encounter with the incommensurable figure of the pterodactyl, an encounter which reveals how his humanitarianism is complicit with the slow anthropogenic violence of adivasi genocide and nonhuman ecocide. Pterodactyl thus opens out onto a plurality of human and nonhuman temporalities which trouble Puran’s narrow anthropocentrism. What often goes unexplored in the criticism on Pterodactyl is how its plot hinges on a creative engagement with extinction, what I will call here literary de-extinction. If de-extinction names a bio-technical regeneration of previously extinct species – think of charismatic megafauna such as woolly mammoths and thylacines, brought back from the dead via frozen DNA samples – then I introduce the term literary de-extinction in order to outline","PeriodicalId":42717,"journal":{"name":"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory","volume":"31 1","pages":"75 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10436928.2020.1709715","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10436928.2020.1709715","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, critics and novelists alike have questioned literature’s potential to represent, register, and challenge environmental disaster. Perhaps the most-discussed interventions into this debate are Amitav Ghosh’s lectures on literature and climate change, published as The Great Derangement in 2016, in which Ghosh posits that contemporary novels are failing to come to terms with the “unthinkable” phenomena of climate change, the Anthropocene, and extinction. In this essay, I wish to deepen and complicate Ghosh’s arguments by turning to another Indian writer, Mahasweta Devi (1926– 2016), whose works not only represent the increasing anthropogenic extinctions of human and nonhuman life, but who in doing so calls into question the very archival drives of literature which Ghosh’s lectures implicitly privilege. In her short novel Pterodactyl, Puran Sahay, and Pirtha (1989; hereafter Pterodactyl), originally written in Bengali but translated into the Anglophone postcolonial canon via Gayatri Spivak’s 1995 publication of Imaginary Maps, Mahasweta narrates a story in which a dispassionate journalist, Puran Sahay, travels to a famine-stricken tribal village in central India. There, he encounters two kinds of vulnerability which confound his narrow idea of life: an impoverished adivasi (literally, original inhabitant) community who faces continual dispossession by national development projects, and a prehistoric pterodactyl, suffering from a broken wing. Pterodactyl stages Puran’s encounter with the incommensurable figure of the pterodactyl, an encounter which reveals how his humanitarianism is complicit with the slow anthropogenic violence of adivasi genocide and nonhuman ecocide. Pterodactyl thus opens out onto a plurality of human and nonhuman temporalities which trouble Puran’s narrow anthropocentrism. What often goes unexplored in the criticism on Pterodactyl is how its plot hinges on a creative engagement with extinction, what I will call here literary de-extinction. If de-extinction names a bio-technical regeneration of previously extinct species – think of charismatic megafauna such as woolly mammoths and thylacines, brought back from the dead via frozen DNA samples – then I introduce the term literary de-extinction in order to outline
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“进入生命:”Mahasweta Devi的翼手龙,Puran Sahay和Pirtha的文学灭绝和生命档案
近年来,评论家和小说家都质疑文学在表现、记录和挑战环境灾难方面的潜力。在这场辩论中,讨论最多的可能是阿米塔夫·高希关于文学和气候变化的演讲,他在2016年出版的《大错乱》一书中指出,当代小说未能接受气候变化、人类世和物种灭绝等“不可想象的”现象。在这篇文章中,我希望通过转向另一位印度作家马哈维塔·德维(Mahasweta Devi, 1926 - 2016)来深化和复杂化高希的论点,他的作品不仅代表了人类和非人类生命日益增多的人为灭绝,而且在这样做的过程中,他对高希讲座隐含特权的文学档案驱动提出了质疑。在她的短篇小说《翼手龙、普兰·萨海和皮尔塔》(1989;《翼手龙》最初是用孟加拉语写的,但通过加亚特里·斯皮瓦克1995年出版的《想象地图》(Imaginary Maps)被翻译成英语后殖民经典。马哈维塔讲述了一个冷静的记者普兰·萨海(Puran Sahay)前往印度中部一个遭受饥荒的部落村庄的故事。在那里,他遇到了两种使他狭隘的生活观念混淆的脆弱性:一个是贫困的土著居民(字面意思,原始居民)社区,他们面临着国家发展项目的不断剥夺,还有一只史前翼龙,翅膀断了。《翼手龙》是Puran与不可比拟的翼手龙相遇的阶段,这种相遇揭示了他的人道主义是如何与土著种族灭绝和非人类生态灭绝等缓慢的人为暴力沆瀣一气的。因此,《翼手龙》展现了人类和非人类的多重暂时性,这给普兰狭隘的人类中心主义带来了麻烦。在对《翼手龙》的批评中,经常被忽视的是它的情节是如何依赖于对灭绝的创造性参与的,我在这里称之为文学上的灭绝。如果说“灭绝灭绝”指的是以前灭绝的物种的生物技术再生——想想那些通过冷冻DNA样本复活的魅力十足的巨型动物,比如长毛象和袋狼——那么我就引入“文学上的灭绝灭绝”这个术语来概述一下
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory
LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊最新文献
Alex as the Product, Producer, and Consumer of Art in the Dilapidated State, in Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange Friendship and Art in Valerie Martin’s I Give It to You Reading As Conversation with the Overarching Blended Author (Or Roberto Bolaño): Joint Attention, Immersion, and Interaction The Objects of Jane Gardam The Book, Meaning, and Densities of Essential Forms in J.M. Coetzee’s Foe
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1