Selling Nostalgia: Mud cafe and Bengal's Ghosts

What is the most conspicuous sound of Bengali nostalgia? Surely, the sound of Tagore's song would be among the tops. Whose voice? In the Manish lifeworld it's undoubtedly Debabrata Biswas's firm voice. Yes we do have the package ready. It's the world of startups and Kolkata has it's unique form of culturally packed startup known as Mud Clay Coffee and More. You go there to find a heterotopic ambiance of a sepia frame, traditional mats, cane chairs, good food and of course an endless loop of Debabrata Biswas's songs.

The place is out of the world package giving you an interesting sandwich of past and present, tradition and infusion. You can see books by Ranjan Bandyopadhyay - otherwise cosidered trash by many. It is there as it markets supposedly scandalous past of Tagore and his family. Perhaps also questions the saintisation tendency of Bengalees which Tagore himself was opposing throughout his life (as Chatterjee mentioned in , “On Civil and Political Society in Postcolonial Democracies,” in Civil Society: History and Possibilities, ed. Sudipta Kaviraj and Sunil Khilnani, 165-178. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

It's an inconclusive fleeting late capital consumerist end of another busy day. Perhaps an excellent end with your lovely friend with a cup of Darjeeling tea.
Ranjan Bandyopadhyay, the word Mud, sepia and of course Debabrata Biswas's songs...
Who cares for a conclusion.

Everyday menaingmaking and the absent structure:The lost workshop trail and Derrida interaface

There was a pre-Kaleidoscopic time, and it is mentioned in past, but that does not mean that it is over! It is not over because the meaning of the pre-Kaleidoscopic time is never settled just as none of the meanings are well settled ever. This story is rooted in moments before the Kaleidoscopic beginning in a workshop in 2010. He was looking for an avenue to vent out himself, and he planned this blog. However, the workshop gave Kaleidoscope unique experiences. It was then disappeared in an unfinished trail and lost (not completely) in the layers of time. What today Kaleidoscope experienced Derrida would have said "Différance it is." Derrida in his relatively little easier books Speech and Phenomena (1973) and Writing and Difference (1978) talks of an impossibility to settle with the meaning of the signifiers because there are too many signified attached and each of them is directing to some newer bunch of them. Its like a never-ending circle of meaning making which is Différance indefinitely.




Perhaps the 'something missing' in nature of the discourse enables kaleidoscope to connect, to bring out the long lost flow of narratives after a while - the time which seemed lost, but was snoozing in a long pause. While Kaleidoscope in his textual experiences with Derrida was afraid of the loss of signified and being lost in the game of signifiers can now see another dimension to it. It is because of the lack of settled nature of the communications itself he could trace the trail of the qualitative workshop that happened and moved his understanding about the issue seven years ago. Its not that he lost the entire connection to the intellectual vibration created in the workshop through his work and rework on the article which finally got published with Routledge along with other participants of the workshop! Meanwhile he, just like others started making other meanings through life experiences. However, he found the trail back in track immediately the moment of another series of short but intensive game of signifiers - the discourse in a little coffee-shop. Kaleidoscope could immediately connect to the cloud of intellectual vibration that he had to leave for a while in a long snooze!


The meaning making in Différance is troublesome as it continues to question what Kaleidoscope's species ultimately communicates - ultimately, its communication that enables them to coordinate actions and rule the world. However, todays immediate connect and revival of the vibration after the long snooze assures Kaleidoscope that it is this Différance that makes the connection possible. The meanings were never objective, unchanged and moreover, hence was never settled at all. Kaleidoscope knows even today it was "the indefinite referral of signifier to signifier... which gives the signified meaning no respite... so tat it always signifies again!"




Therefore, thoughts can be exchanged, untold stories can be collected, an article - a book might be born with Différance, over a cups of Darjeeling tea - perhaps fleeting like a Himalayan forest ground. There will be more stories to be told.


Hence, Kaleidoscope like many others continues to survive all the disruptions as he knows none of the meanings are well settled and that is a wonderful thing. The trail continues between researchers, between books and articles, between blogposts and between words and discourses.




Yes kaleidoscope now understands there are "certain relationships, unperceived by the writer, between what s/he commands and s/he does not command of the patterns of language that he uses. This relationship is... a signifying structure that critical reading should produce... production attempts to make the not seen accessible to sight." (Derrida, J. 1976. Of Grammatology. 158, 163)

Postmodern encounters: Juxtapositions from classrooms to shoppingmalls

What makes culture so fascinating? Several answers you might encounter but the most fascinating one for Kaleidoscope is the filter effect that culture entails!

Kaleidoscope, when started studying diffussionism and later on encountered Rirzer with globalisation and mcdonaldisation always wondered what makes people from all over the world become the same? and then he encountered glocalisation as an accomodative space. However in postmodern times while there is a rise of global spread of capitalism and forces that make seemingly dissimilar people to become similar to a large extent, there is also a parallel rise of identity consolidation and rise of newer  and micro identities.

School days 1995-1996

Kaleidoscope can remember one of his teachers at his rural and least known school, who always promoted anti-superstitious narratives. He often talked of how easy it is to explain things scientifically. Kaleodoscope often relives that day when the teacher showed both of his hands saying "see boys, i dont wear any ring containing fortune bringing stones! Do you think that i am any less fortunate than those who bear them?"  Yes the impact was massive! The teacher along with several others brought 'Viggyan Manch' - the platform for promotion of science and rational mind to the school. It institutionalised such mindselt among many!

Kaleidoscope, however, lost that impression as he could also remember the same teacher uttered 'you know muslims are by race a bit aggressive'. Kaleidoscope couldn't relate this statement with his muslim friends and their families but nevertheless he continued to have a mixed and confused impressions.

Mall Days 2017s and the like

Kaleidoscope in continuation to his yearly marketing extravaganza today went to one of the important malls 'Mani Square.' When his store instructed him to comeback after 30 mins for the items he bought needed alteration, he went to food court and found what is presented in the photograph (see below).

Yes, a palmist and fortune teller in a shopping mall with an immediate backdrop of Coca-Cola. Kaleidoscope took the photo when the person left the chair for a moment- yes, no prsonal game here lets accept reality Sui generis!

Juxtaposed Kaleido

The filtering effect is continuing with all forms of juxtapositions, multiple realities and expressions of dominant forms of cultural filters. Capitalism makes it all possible in 2017. All are sold, from crossword to palm reading from potatoes to pizza.  Kaleidoscope could feel the strong presence of essentiality of cultural filters. Filters always surrounding you - filters that shapes you - makes you and breaks you.  While belief and cultural filters in 1990s have enabled the Viggyan manch inspired teacher to discard stone bearing rings but embrace the stereotypes about Muslims today one can actully read Einstein or Marx in the second floor order a piza at food court and explore his/ her palm and then take a ola to go back home and count number of likes on the facebook life. Meanwhile kaleidoscope like many othrs knows it is postmodern chaos wrapped in late-capital wrapper with jucy layers of feudal past.

Post-structural liberation - are we embracing newer prisons?

The  most dangerous philosophical idea in recent times has to be the post-structuralism. Kaleidoscope learned it with much care and attention at one point of his life because it suited his otherwise bohemian self. Post-structuralists demands you question everything in the name of deconstruction and allows you to do things in your way, your own way. It sounds creative, isn't it? It gives you the freedom to do whatever pleases you and gives you power to claim it as your own way of doing things and point your fingers towards anyone who is questioning you. Perhaps this is the beauty and most deadly force of the theory.

Why was it required?

Lets make it straight, we have had enough with uncles and aunties from the neighbourhood lecturing us what to do, how to do and when to do. Similarly, we have had enough with the professors with wrinkles demanding us to follow their template of positivism or whatever philosophy. Yes, Kaleidoscope too was bored and exhausted everywhere, listening to some stereotypes of doing certain things in some supposedly known pathway, seriously!

Yes, the disgust was not for people like Kaleidoscope only, even scholars of highest reputation (whom people refer to but never actually read) were equally frustrated and they challenged it. The most prominent among those Kaleidoscope can remember is that of logocentrism - the search for universal idea about certain things like beauty (Kaleodsocope knows the definition of sexy, like you do!), truth, right and so on. Well Derrida (1978) (dont worry hardly anyone reads him) wanted to dismantle logocentric attitude of our practices. Imagine a theatre - what is there? A set of actors representing a situation. The situation has some cue to the real life. Yes, you heard it right, Kaleidoscope is taking a materialist stand here and firmly believes that everything in idea or in mind has a real - material cue. So, the resulting theatre is a combination of real life experience and ideas of the director. Derrida wanted to have a theatre where actors are not guided by any director, any text of any author! Yes, a state of condition where logocentric forces are withdrawn. Although Derrida was less sure about the actual condition of such a stage where script will absent, Foucault (1980) searched for "rules that determine the conditions of possibility for all that can be said within the particular discourse at a given time" Hence, when Kaleidoscope thoroughly read him he could actually see the existence of governmentality within his very self as a set of conduct of all possible conducts.

Yes, whatever Kaleidoscope does is scripted, foretold and whatever he does not do is forestalled. Kaleidoscope like all others continue to live in a prison-house of words (for Derrida) of conducts (for Foucault).

Therefore when Kaleidoscope sees a young girl shouting out Jeans ka Haq... jine ka haq (right to jeans right to live) in Lipstick Under My Burkha he finds a liberation. The black is beautiful, the acid attack victim is beautiful in the ugly face of society in which Kaleidoscope strives to live, the fat is desirable, one's own body and self even if doesn't match logocentrically is beautiful - is meaningful - is worth a life to live happily. Happiness is happiness, love is love you term it straight, gay whatever - that's your logocentric problem!

Kaleidoscope wont let the aunties and uncles determine what he wants from his life and how does he want that. Kaleidoscope knew for sure what post-structuralism meant to him, but less sure about it what it means to his generation but could sense what it means to the coming generation, which even if has never read Derrida or Foucault would continue to practice "post-structural" way of life. Why is that so? simply, because its an era of mass and rapid diffusion and weathering away of old logocentrisms - does it bring and form new logocentrisms? Yes it does, and here lies the problem.

The post-structuralism of present time

Even the prominent post structuralists like Derrida or Foucault didn't know clearly how that stage without script was possible - surely Derrida didn't claim it to be anarchic - anarchy in itself has numerous logocentrisms. What they did was demanded and trained us to question the very foundation of knowledge as logocentric and attempted to discover the alternatives. Knowing fully well, the alternatives would also create newer logocentrisms and hence the prison cell can only be altered not that Kaleidoscope's species can ever make every prison to dust and enemies of logocentrism free!

Hence, the cycle would continue.

Meanwhile everything that is happening in the name of post-structuralism is not post-structural. It is rather a play of different logocentrisms originated from different societies. The whole idea of cultural diffusionism can be seen as origin and dispersion of logocentric traits from one place to another. Hence, what Kaleidoscope's time experiencing is an ever complicated and complex interplay of logos which were hitherto unknown. Therefore, instead of liberating, Kaleidoscope's species from logocentrism the present mode of existence is embracing newer logocentric traits and actually binding the species even with newer dimensions and micro identities. Earlier it was the primordial identities of country, religion, caste and the like. Now we have increasingly newer identities like Nationalist and antinationalist countrymen, Nationalist/Antinationalist Hindu/muslim country men and the like. There are JNU breeds, JU breeds, IIT breeds, IIM breeds among the aspiring academicians and an even more complex classifications among the left-out 'subalterns' from lesser known universities. There are beer lovers and whisky lovers. Beef lovers and beef haters - you want logocentrism you get it everywhere.

There actually is no post-structural world surrounding Kaleidoscope but the reflections of such world in the name of post-structuralism dangerous:

take these few examples:

"What is corruption? It is just a system of getting things done?"
"I will do it in my way, fuck your morality!"

the arguments continue.

Kaleidoscope knows he is inhabiting in a peculiar world of the games of ever increasing number of logocentrisms which are often legitimised in the name of post-structuralism!