From: iview-AT-technologist.com
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 12:58:23 -0700
Subject: Re: To Enrica...Re: Taslima Nasreen and her head


Dear Enrica,

Yes, I know that Ms. Nasreen is supported by the west...which neither
knows nor cares to know much more about the east than those images that
aspire to western means and ends.

My argument is only that women must unite, and patriarchal symbols are
an *obstacle* to such unity.  I see what you mean about the use of
language as a "symbol."  However, language is not, to my understanding,
an "icon" -- to which status the west and western/westernized feminists
have raised Ms. Nasreen, to her own detriment.

Furthermore, my question is what is Ms. Nasreen's purpose...to be an
icon or to help women unite?  Are non-western women headed for more
"divide/conquer" fiascos of western origin?  "Divide/conquer" leads to
more bloodshed...it is a patriarchal tool for ultimate self-destruction. 
What brand of feminism is this that we must raise up icons all the
time...don't we have any confidence in our beliefs...in ourselves?  Are
most women throw-aways and the rest extraordinary exceptions of symbolic
proportions???  I'm sorry, I don't buy that.  The sad truth is, from my
observation, that an educated elite group of South Asian women are
marching ahead leaving most of their sisters behind in the dust, and
racing towards westernized forms of self-glorification.  This is
embarrassing at best.  I fervently pray that we can save Taslima
Nasreen, the *human being*.  I cannot, on principle, support the icon.

The recent communication I've had from Bangladesh tells me English
newspapers don't have the story...but bangla papers may...I'm still
researching this.

Best regards,

-Manjusree
Cambridge MA 
USA  


Enrica Garzilli wrote:
> 
> Dear Manjusree, I am a pragmatic woman.
> Taslima is already there. We cannot conceptualize and impose our
> thinking and our thought on people. If THEY regard her as a symbol and
> this is useful to the cause, why not? The important matter is not the
> person, Taslima. She comes much much later. The important matter is
> people, means and results.
> We have much better -- incomparable in fact -- writers, and much
> "better" symbols. But Taslima is famous in the West as well in the East.
> She is a recognized sybol. And it is a matter of fact that people, all
> of us, need symbols. Also you, in your mail, use as a symbol a jargoon
> that is not easily understandable to us, not English mother tongue
> speakers. You are using language as a symbol, as a castal communication
> and means of recogniction.
> That's all. And she is well supported by feminist groups here in Europe,
> and by PEN, etc.
> She perhaps uses us to become famous, why not to "use" her?
> 
> Enrica
> 
> iview-AT-technologist.com wrote:
> >
> > Symbolism is a patriarchal conceptualization of an exaggerated and
> > self-delusional image of itself.  I think that Ms. Nasreen has
> > out-patriarched the patriarchy.
> >
> > However, if indeed women, in our struggles, require a symbol of a woman
> > fighting for the rights of all women, we already have Behula...to whom
> > Dr. Rinita Mazumdar's poem has done elegant justice.
> >
> > -Manjusree
> >
> > Enrica Garzilli wrote:
> > >
> > > iview-AT-technologist.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Partha,
> > > >
> > > > I oppose Ms. Nasreen's tactics...anyone who leaves out her sisters is
> > > > suspect in my eyes.  Secondly, she has my support if in fact she speaks
> > > > also for her sisters who have equally opposed fundamentalists.  I didn't
> > > > find that evident in her letter to the world's myriad and complex
> > > > Governments to save her.  I pray they can.  She seems mightily
> > > > self-righteous about visiting her ailing mother in Bangladesh.  Such
> > > > dramatics don't impress me.
> > > >
> > > > I really don't see your point about international support for her and
> > > > her being exempt...I never suggested she is exexmpt from receiving world
> > > > support to save her.  I simply don't support her sensationalist tactics
> > > > that seem to catapult her to center stage.  Of course I oppose
> > > > fundamentalists, fanatics, fascists yadda, yadda, yadda...and if as you
> > > > say we don't get "befooled...by...bigots," that's news to me!
> > > >
> > > > -Manjusree
> > > >
> > > > Partha Banerjee wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have my own reservations about Taslima, her sensationalism (and bad
> > > > > writing), and all. However, that does not exempt her from getting our
> > > > > support from an international arena. This is all we can do to support her
> > > > > voice of dissent and oppose barbarism practised by fundamentalists and
> > > > > fanatics and fascists. We do it in Bangladesh, we do it in India, we do it
> > > > > in USA. And we don't get befooled by double standards and
> > > > > confusion-creating tactics of the bigots.
> > > > > __________
> > > > >
> > > > > >Partha,
> > > > > ...
> > > > > >I feel that Taslima Nasreen should not have left her bangladeshi
> > > > > >sister writers in the dust in her own climb towards international fame
> > > > > >and acclaim...she seems to have a tendency to turn to those who support
> > > > > >sensationalism vs those who support universal human rights.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Lest anyone misundertand me and think me cold-blooded and heartless, I'm
> > > > > >actually moved by Ms. Nasreen's plea to other Governments, and I hope
> > > > > >the outrageous death threat against her cannot be carried out.  The
> > > > > >thought occurs to me, nevertheless, that perhaps she might also turn to
> > > > > >her sister writers who have not only made greater contributions to
> > > > > >bangla literature, but have struggled even harder in protesting
> > > > > >oppression and abuse of Islamic women without leaving Bangladesh.  I
> > > > > >don't presume to know statistics but base my comments on recollections
> > > > > >of my readings by literary analysts and exchanges with other writers.  I
> > > > > >pray for her life and her mother's good health.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Best regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >-Manjusree
> > >
> > > I have interviewd her and had the opportunity to talk to her for quite
> > > some time informally.
> > > I asked her about her relationship with feminist groups in Bangladesh
> > > and India. She told me that many of them wanted to use her name to have
> > > publicity, to become famous. That's very possible.
> > > However, I also had the impression of a certain ambiguity from her and a
> > > certain will to be "the first", to be the heroine of the situation (I
> > > have written all that in the report of the JSAWS, and her lecture, and
> > > reported the recorded  reaction of people present.)
> > > Like a hero, she wants to be isolated and alone. She wants to fight by
> > > herself. For sure she is very childish... (besides the opportunity to be
> > > alone in terms of results)
> > > However, she is a symbol. That is important, not HER private figure and
> > > personality. Sho cares of her in person?
> > > The importance is in people who fights not in her name but taking her
> > > name as a symbol of funfamentalists' oppression and prevarication.
> > > WHat do you think about it?
> > >
> > > Enrica
> > > --
> > > Dr. Enrica Garzilli                 University of Perugia (ITALY)
> > > Istituto di Linguistica                      Piazza Morlacchi, 11
> > > 06123 Perugia                  Tel./Fax: +39-75-585 3755 (office)
> > > Editor-in-Chief,
> > > Intl. Journ. of Tantric Studies, Journal of S. Asia Women Studies
> > > htpp://www.asiatica.org/
> > > *****************************************************************
> 
> --
> Dr. Enrica Garzilli                 University of Perugia (ITALY)
> Istituto di Linguistica                      Piazza Morlacchi, 11
> 06123 Perugia                  Tel./Fax: +39-75-585 3755 (office)
> Editor-in-Chief,
> Intl. Journ. of Tantric Studies, Journal of S. Asia Women Studies
> htpp://www.asiatica.org/
> *****************************************************************