Kannada commonsense is not to be idealised either On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:06 AM, damodar prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :-) > > Bobby, > > I read your blog and was reading it again. > > *Now with this anecdote, I feel much releived. > * > ;-) > > *prasad* > ** > ** > On 7/4/08, Bobby Kunhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On a lighter vein, >> Justice Bhattacharjee (former CJ of Bombay High Court) was teaching us >> "ancient Indian Jurisprudenc" - essentially the smritis and mimamsas, and >> the guy was showing off his knowledge of sanskrit and ended up conversing in >> sanskrit with an LL.M student, who was sitting into his lectures - to the >> consternation of the whole class, until one of our classmates got up on the >> pretext of asking a doubt and abused in Kannada. When Justice Bhattacharjea >> claimed he did not understand a word of this classmate's doubt, he responded >> that the class had not understood a word of what had been going on. >> >> *This post is not up for discussion :)* >> >> >> On 04/07/2008, damodar prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7/3/08, ranju radha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>If news, ideas, viewpoints etc are made known to the readers, viewers >>>> or listeners through a medium then it can not constitute a public sphere, >>>> even when there is a public who gather around that medium however >>>> discretely >>>> in space and time. >>>> >>>> >>>> It may not be the case if you take an Andersnian position and tries to >>>> look at nation as a constituted public sphere. And in the vein of McLuhan, >>>> can't utter "Medium is the message and massage".. >>>> >>>> the wonderful thing about Habermasian public sphere is that it assumes >>>> an ideal *space for freedom of expression.* the medium itself need not, >>>> but the way it extend human senses does the magic, perhaps >>>> >>> >>> >>> Renju,' >>> It would also be worth noting that Habermas himself has critiqued the >>> very concept of "public sphere" in his work structural tranformation of >>> public sphere. In one of the last chapter of this work on "Transformation of >>> Public Sphere's Political Function", he is excplicit not only about the >>> limits of the term but how the *manipulated public sphere is taken over >>> by an acclamation-prone mood that predominates and result is that an >>> opinion climate subsumes public opinions. (* Structural Transformation >>> of Public Sphere, Polity Press, 1989) >>> Habermas also points to the penetration of state and society with each >>> other that brings forth a *middle sphere of semipublic*. (P231, ibid) >>> The State-aligned NGOs are succesful in establishing such semi public >>> spheres were the *urgency to consensus and immediacy to conclude on >>> areas which contravene the entreched understanding* whether it be >>> science, politics, secularism or any sort of trivia. >>> >>> Habermas further states that the politically influential representatives >>> of cultural and religious forces the entreching of private interests in the >>> face of the 'neomercantilism" which leads to *refedualization".* *The >>> apparently progressives in society in the wake of a emergent popular radical >>> politics retreats to the refedualize the public sphere*. Habermas >>> concerns perhaps with the delimits and contravening forces within the >>> modernity. But let us also think critically how the self-proclaimed semi >>> public spheres are shaped in contexts familiar to us. >>> >>> *Public Sphere* from the inception of the term like Communism is a *social >>> fantasy- and *hence* ahistorica*l. But like the impulsivity of >>> historical materialism to locate Communism outside history, Habermas >>> suitably finds a locale and period for claiming the historical specificity. >>> Like the several 'idealized' *semi public spheres of our times, we find >>> the supposedly 'ideal space' as discriminatory*. Habermas and *all those >>> who still adores* the fantasy of 'public sphere" never saw or rather >>> failed *to see the exclusion of different voices - - woman, dalit, >>> muslim, sexual minorities- minoirty voices with a difference*. >>> >>> >>> damodar >>> >>> >>> PS: am also compelled go think of a kerala model public sphere, which >>> could be artificially correct but politically wrong. But now; later. >>> >>> >>> >>> (let me rethink . this s just a first response. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- Dileep R I thuravoor --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
