Q: Tagore’s Perspectives on “Nationalism.” Provide the with most appropriate references and annotations.
“Nationalism’ is the
identification with one’s own nation and support for its interests, especially
to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations,” according to the Oxford
Dictionary. Excessively, “Nationalism”
is the idea of promoting the interests and loving of a particular nation.
Mostly, it includes interests in the sovereignty of their own country or
homeland. Nationalists think that the best way to make this happen and avoid
control or oppression by others is for each group to have their own nation.
Rabindranath
Tagore (1861–1941) was a
prolific and accomplished poet, novelist, and playwright and is perhaps best
known for his literary output, a massive corpus comprises superb writing in
both Bengali and
English.
Tagore’s most influential works regarding the loving of Indian are “Ghare-Baire” (The
Home and the World) (1916), “Where
the Mind is Without Fear” (From Gitanjali,
1910), “Atmaparichay”
(1914), and “Swadeshi Samaj”
(1904). Mostly importantly, “Jana Gana
Mana” is the national anthem of India, expresses a heart
touching voice to a country lover. At the initial lines, it outs, “Jana-gana-mana-adhinayaka jaya he --/
Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.”
In the 20th century, Tagore
contributed his inspiration on the development of India.
Tagore was
concerned with the development of Indian national identity. In this essay, it excerpted
from a larger work on nationalism that considers the specific challenges faced
by India in
developing a national self-consciousness, and the need for that consciousness
to be grounded in Indian cultural sensibilities. On the other hand, “After Death: Twenty Years” by Birendra Chattopadhyay, exposes the dreams of Rabi, which expresses, “A light of humanity had filled your life, Poet.--/ We too
had learnt to dream from you.”
In his book, “Nationalism”,
he shows, “Man’s history is being shaped
according to the difficulties it encounters. These have offered us problems and
claimed their solutions from us, the penalty of non-fulfilment being death or
degradation.” In this book, Tagore
highlights the aggressive and materialistic nature of Western nationalism. He criticizes the
mechanization and dehumanization that nationalism brings. Tagore promotes the idea of universal
humanism. Importantly, “Nationalism”
in Iyengar’s
account, as well as in the accounts of some other critics mentioned above, is
an awakening of a nation to “self-consciousness.”
This “unself-critical Indian
nationalism” was, Ashis Nandy argues, “primarily a response to western imperialism and like all
such responses shaped by what it was responding to’ and thus, ‘this version of nationalism
was limited by its time and its origin.” Even, Tagore did not believe
in indiscriminate veneration of traditions, but stood for unshackling of reason
by opening up the doors of society. In the result, he wrote in Ancient Treasures (1892).
Additionally, his “Gora” is
concerned more with the issue of social conservatism and parochialism-the
predicament of a caste-ridden Indian society that grappling with new ideas.
Throughout this, Tagore’s
views on nationalism were complex and nuanced, reflecting his deep
understanding of India’s unique cultural and spiritual heritage and a critical
perspective on Western-style nationalism.
Tagore’s vision for Indian
nationalism was rooted in the cultural and spiritual identity of India rather
than political or territorial sovereignty. He argued that Indian nationalism should not be insular or
parochial but should embrace a broader humanistic outlook.
In conclusion, Tagore’s “Nationalism for India” has supported the Swadeshi movement’s goals of self-reliance and
economic independence, and he was critical of its potential to foster
narrow-mindedness and hostility towards the other cultures. Moreover, he
founded the Visva-Bharati University in Santiniketan,
which aimed to provide a holistic education that integrated the best
of Indian and Western traditions. In
addition, Amartya Sen
expresses, “Tagore’s vision of nationalism,
while noble and spiritually enlightening, was too idealistic and sometimes out
of touch with the immediate and practical needs of the Indian people under
colonial rule.”
Comments