Mail

I subject both of Tagore's narratives to a syntagmatic and paradigmatic reading using the anthropological semiotic model that first emerged through a rigorous praxis of H. S. Gill during 1976-79 when he applied it to several of his translating, editing and analytic activities from which I construe the thematic configurations embodied in them. The semic configurations that constitute the narratives embody within their lexicalized structures the translation paradox that researchers both within and outside the domain have tried to unravel. Scholars have often tried to circumvent the translation paradox that emanates from the English writings of Tagore by preferring to refer to them as 'transcreations' rather than as 'translations' and the authenticity question (which is central when the translator is not the author himself or herself) is hung in limbo and the same evaluative criterion is not called into action. The problem of translatability is not one of language alone but it is rather of cultural practices and living experiences that find expression in the language being used. (Literary) Translation is typically a hermeneutic act and the paradox of (un)translatability is a paradox of the living reality of experiences conditioned through cultures and traditions that go back to the very dawns of civilization and organization of social structures and institutions that have evolved through several micro-political processes that were at work. It is the material reality of our social life that conditions the politics of the hermeneutics in operation. The act of communication through translation is possible as, despite all specificities, there is an immanent nature of ideas as pure intellections which can be both expressed and comprehended if one is conscious of the anthropological order of the universe in which the discourse is embedded.

II. The Praxis

The Praxis involves the analysis of a discourse. It is like watching as well as unravelling the pattern woven into an embroidered fabric where the distinct image emerges due to the weaving in of several threads towards a single goal. The signification that emanates is of the finished image which is created by a synchronic organization at the manifest level but the pattern at the conceptual level is the result of diachronic associations. Similarly, the textual narrative of a literary discourse is constituted by the arrangement of semantic units that are embedded within their lexicalized structures. Francois Rastier's work Meaning and Textuality focuses on how a narrow structural linguistic approach undermines the semantic import of the narrative and to understand the process of signification one has to unravel the semic configurations that are embodied in the text. In order to interpret the code, one has to understand the organization of the signifiers at the syntagmatic level and consequently interpret the signifieds at the paradigmatic level. The semiotics of the discourse leads to the comprehension of the semiological patterns that constitute the process of signification. The "free association of ideas" (see, for an elaboration of the idea, Semiotics of the Creative Process by H. S. Gill) allows one to comprehend the semiotic and semiological universe of the discourse and thereby to constitute meaning by an act of reading. The dialectics of human intellection is based on an understanding of the multiple forms through which the mind finds expression in order to be able to create a discourse. The following section focuses on identifying and comparing the syntagmatic arrangement of Tagore's narrative in the Bengali source text as well as in the receptor text to understand the complexities involved in the process that leads to the creation of two distinct semiological universes.

A Comparative Reading of Tagore's KarNakuntiisambaada in Bangla and English

Tagore's primary narrative in Bengali is a poetic rendering written in the mode of the epic structure of the Mahabharata and is in the form of a report of the dialogue that happens between Karna and Kunti just before the battle that was to resume with Karna as the commander of the Kaurava forces. The reporter is not mentioned but the absence is actually an implication of the presence and the narrative text that emerges in print is a testimony to that. The whole of the Mahabharata epic was also in the form of a narration by a seer and Vedyagya Vyas Dev is the human agent who is blessed to become the inspired author of the narrative. There are several narratives in the eighteen books of the epic and it works within the mythic paradigm. Even the battle of Kurukshetra was related by Sanjay, a royal minister of the court of Hastinapura who was blessed by Vyas Dev with the eyes of a seer so that the blind King Dhritarashtra could be informed of the course of the war and thereby become a vicarious participant in the war. Tagore too adopts a similar style and chooses a single incident from the Karna Parva of the Mahabharata and to retain the epic style of narration, he titles his poetic piece as KarNakuntiisambaada. But when he translates his title into English as Karna And Kunti, he uses only the dramatic form as a poetic device and the lyrical quality of the primary is completely lost in the translation as the nuances change because the language that becomes the medium of communication is embedded in a cultural context where the epic symbolism of the sub-continent holds little meaning. The conflict that becomes central in the translation then is one between the characters of Karna and Kunti and the only subject that finds a thematic treatment is the angst of a mother who has abandoned her infant boy to save herself from social disgrace and that of a son who lives with a vengeance against the Pandavas as the course of his life is such that he is fated to live under the curse of hatred as he is not in the know of the mystery of his own birth and thereby of his identity. The curse that determines the fate of Karna as well as Kunti in the translation leads to the tragic consequence of defeat and death and, keeping to the spirit of the classical heroic tradition of Europe, Karna rushes forward to meet his inevitable end. The narrative logic in the translation thereby follows a simple linearity of movement whereas in the Bengali version, a layered matrix evolves to create a dialectical tension between the domain of nature and culture whereby the anthropological universe paves the way for the cosmological unity in which Karna finds the psychic equipoise not possible in the turmoil of the former.

The First Sequence: The opening lines of the narrative show Karna in humble supplication by the banks of the holy river Ganges, praying to the Sun God. He is taken by surprise when he sees before him the figure of a lady who later reveals her identity as Kunti, the queen-mother. Leaving behind all notions of shame, she has come to tell him the truth of his identity and birth but implores him to wait till darkness envelops the earth.

The Second Sequence: Kunti recalls the day of the trial of arms in Hastinapura when Karna was humiliated by the Pandavas and Kripa, the royal priest for his mean birth. She then makes her entreaty and says that she has come to re-unite him with his brothers and place him highest among all her sons since he is her first-born.

The Third Sequence: Kunti's revelation puts Karna in a dilemma. His sense of duty puts him in a strange moral predicament when he comes to know about the truth of his real identity. He seems to lose himself in a world of dreams refusing to allow his consciousness to return.

The Fourth Sequence: Kunti's yearning brings him back to reality. The dream-like state is soon torn asunder as underlying the sweetness of his re-union to his mother lies the angry bitterness of the rejection by her when he was merely an infant. He seeks the cause of that early betrayal but realizing her discomfiture, he refrains from insisting on answers to his questions. But the question she has to answer is: why did she choose that particular moment to take him back and unite him with his brothers?

Kunti, well prepared for the question, acknowledges her guilt and, seeking forgiveness, says that only through the fire of suffering would she be purified and free from the burden of bearing it.

The Fifth Sequence: Karna, humbled by her words of repentance, seeks her blessing but refuses to go with her and foregoes any claim to honour or pride in a royal identity. He resolves to free himself from the envy that he fed on and embarks on the path of liberating himself from the bonds of life. He urges Kunti to abandon him once more to his fate, like at the hour of his birth. Nameless, shelter-less, without any glory and to bless him that he may not be swerved from the path of heroic virtue even though he is assured of death and defeat.

Syntagmatics

In this section, an attempt is made to present the outline of the semiotic structure of the discourse without going into the details of textual configuration. The semiological patterns of the ensembles and subensembles of signifying units will be discussed in the next section.

In the first sequence five signifying ensembles by five images or subensembles can be delineated. The first sub-ensemble begins with a "comprehensive" proposition where in a sentence the whole ambience of the narrative is unfolded. On the banks of the holy Janhabi river, ('Janhabi' refers to Ganga but there the name has significance as it refers to the legend of the river being the daughter of Rishi Janhu who had on a certain auspicious day drunk the waters of the entire river). Karna is seen engaged in humble supplication at the twilight hour. His meditative posture and his concentrated worship of the Sun God ('Sabita' refers to 'sun', to the benevolent aspect of Sun rather, and here the Sun is seen setting and hence the light and radiance are gradually fading, calling forth the hour of darkness) is indicative of his internal psychic constitution which is to be soon disturbed, leading to an inner disorder which would witness a violence of the highest order.

The following sentence is an evocation of the central question that the narrative grapples with - identity - and the partial signifiers are propositions in extension of the absent-yet-present subject as it only unfolds the image of a being engaged in meditation at a holy hour when the light is seen fading away, heralding the peace that is present only in the womb of darkness. So, the concluding signifying sub-ensemble indicates the name of the subject - "KarNa naama jaara"- "One whose name is Karna"; and through it is indicated the parentage - "Adhiratha Suutaputra" - "the son of the charioteer Adhiratha" and in the phrase - "Raadhaagarbhajjata" - born from the womb of Radha and the proposition finds completion in [1. d. iv] - "Se-i Aami" - "That is me". The way the identity is revealed is highly complex as Karna indicates who he is by separating the speaking subject from the meditative subject indicating a psychic split within his being which even in an intensely reflective mood, at a holy hour, he is unable to reconcile even some semblance of unity. In [1. e], he now asks the so long absent intruder - "Kaho More Tumi Ke Go MaataH" - "Tell me, who you are, mother".

Now if one compares the first signifying ensemble with the translated text, one sees that the proposition begins as a statement of obvious facts - "I am Karna, the son of the charioteer, Adhiratha, and I sit here by the holy bank of the Ganges, to worship the setting sun. Tell me who you are". The order of the syntactic structures has changed and there is the unnecessary emphasis on 'I' which is repeated twice in the same sentence and is counter-pointed against the 'you' in the next line making the conflict apparent as a conflict between Karna and Kunti. But this ego-centricity is not there in the primary text and the emphasis that is created evocatively is to indicate the mood of meditative reflection through the play of thickening light that darkens with the fading rays of the sun into complete darkness and protection of the mother's womb, where there is complete silence and peace - a condition that Karna never had the fortune to enjoy or revel in. The psychic disorder that makes the subject split his internal self into the speaking and the meditative/reflective self can never be imposed as the subjective 'I' as in the English translation as it is in this inner tension of the sub-conscious that the drama of the rape of desire occurs; the desire to know and thereby withdraw into the state of passive oblivion. The reference to his mother - "Radhagarbhajato" and the reference to Kunti as "mother" are significant absences in the translated text and one thus witnesses a complete reversal of the psychic order and further, the tonal quality of the mood evoked is also lost. The rhythm of the Bengali version has a slow temporality and the spatial dynamics that is operative hinges on indeterminacy as it is truly the twilight hour when truth and existence teeter on the brink of collapse - a final collapse and the human question becomes obfuscated in a feeling of crucial nothingness that intensifies with the gathering darkness. The translation shows Karna full of confidence and well aware of his identity and he seeks to ask the stranger who she is in no uncertain terms. The soft, gentleness of the opening lines and the flowing rhythm imitates the flow of the river and encapsulates within its core the continuum of time (and thought) that flows by unhindered (if no intrusion happens). The disjunction/distortion of the translation is thereby apparent and the causes for it would be traced later.

PREV | TOP | NEXT