Durga Bahadur Gharti, who has been deeply engaged in continuous research and literary criticism, has been teaching at Tribhuvan University for a long time. Gharti, an established critic in the psychoanalytic stream of criticism, has already presented his studies and analyses in a concise manner through half a dozen critical books. His latest book, Cultural Studies, focuses on various aspects of cultural studies and criticism. In a conversation with Deepak Sapkota, literary critic Durga Bahadur Gharti shared his thoughts on why he has been inclined towards psychoanalytic criticism for a long time.
Apart from being drawn to cultural studies, what are the other reasons?
Since culture is an integral part of human life, it is interconnected with all aspects of human existence. Culture is a blend of beliefs, traditions, and social behaviors that people collectively adopt in society. Language, festivals, rituals, ceremonies, attire, food, education, entertainment, lifestyle, and more constitute culture, and we cannot exist outside of it. Psychoanalysis is also linked to culture. Society establishes certain rules for collective welfare and unity, which are implemented as traditions. While individuals always seek freedom, society binds them with rules and restrictions. In such situations, individuals may experience negative psychological impacts, which we term as mental illnesses. Psychoanalysis emerged from the study of such mental illnesses. Culture is also related to social psychology. As for my attraction towards cultural studies, it is both my interest and a necessity. Having grown up in a mixed cultural environment, both Aryan and Magar cultures have flowed parallelly in me since birth. Nowadays, the influence of various cultures entering Nepali society in the name of religion, festivals, rituals, fashion, etc., has sparked my interest. This influence is now reflected in literary creation and criticism, which are increasingly focused on cultural studies. Universities have also incorporated cultural studies into higher education. These are the reasons that have drawn me towards cultural studies.
Recently, in the field of research and studies, ‘civilization’ and ‘culture’ seem to be gaining more priority over ‘class’. What do you think is the reason behind this growing attraction?
Culture is a traditional concept, while cultural studies represent a modern and postmodern approach to thinking about culture. It is influenced by Marxism. However, the foundation of cultural studies was laid not by the classical theories of Marx and Engels but by the influences of Antonio Gramsci, Louis Althusser, the critical theory of the Frankfurt School, and others, which came to be known as Neo-Marxism. While Marx and Engels emphasized class and class struggle, the Neo-Marxists focused on groups. Neo-Marxists do not accept economic determinism. Raymond Williams argues that societal change occurs not due to economic reasons but because of cultural factors.
British cultural studies began to emphasize groups over class, while American cultural studies focused on the terms “culture” and “civilization.” This perspective spread globally through Anglo-American globalization and digital media. Since culture is considered the determinant rather than economic factors, culture is seen as the totality of life, and issues of locality, groups, tribes, and minorities have become more specific than class distinctions, scholars have recently shown increasing interest in civilization and culture.
How should cultural studies be viewed? From an ideological perspective, where does this methodology stand?
Cultural studies is an intellectual endeavor that examines how cultural practices are related to power dynamics and how they shape society. It studies the power relations existing in society. In society or the state, there is a power relationship between the dominant class and the subordinate class. The dominant class tries to maintain power based on ideology, while the subordinate class may either accept or resist it.
Cultural studies opposes high culture, and postmodern cultural studies do not even acknowledge the distinction between high and low culture. Cultural studies critically examines sports, art, literature, music, theater, dance, media, politics, ideology, gender, groups, tribes, race, nationality, and more. In short, it can be said that cultural studies stands close to both Marxism and postmodernism.
Strengths and Limitations of Cultural Studies in a Multicultural Country Like Nepal
In Nepal, a highly multicultural nation, each ethnic group has its own distinct culture while also experiencing cultural blending. The influence of new cultures is increasing. Due to the impact of media and modern technology, cultures can easily penetrate one another. Additionally, globalization has facilitated the spread of Western culture in Nepali society. Such cultural fusion has raised concerns regarding identity. Cultural studies analyze these influences, cultural activities, and their outcomes, which is its strength.
Even within a single culture, there exist complex relationships between its elements. Intercultural relations are even more intricate, making it difficult to determine which culture is superior. As a result, cultural studies may fail to capture the complete reality, as they tend to focus only on existing occurrences, leading to potential gaps in research. The diversity of methods and subject matter, the disruption of traditional cultures, and the lack of clear boundaries are some of the limitations of cultural studies.
The Relationship of Cultural Studies with Politics, Economics, and Aesthetics
Cultural studies are fundamentally the study of politics. Politics is related to power dynamics, which are not only linked to those in authority but also to those who possess knowledge. Foucault perceives knowledge as power, and those with power govern. Representation, identity, and resistance are central themes in cultural studies. Since it advocates for the working-class and subordinate groups, it emphasizes writing history from below. Power relations exist between two parties, and economics is at the core of this dynamic, although cultural studies do not fully accept economic determinism.
The relationship between the dominant and subordinate classes also has economic roots. In aesthetics, Marxists consider beauty as secondary, whereas Romanticists view it as primary. Marxists argue that economic factors shape ideology, including aesthetics. For them, aesthetics is determined by economic causes, whereas Romanticists perceive beauty as an intrinsic sensory experience essential to art, independent of class. Psychology also supports the notion that aesthetics is an individual experience rather than a class-based phenomenon. While social psychology can be applied to discussions of aesthetics, cultural studies have largely overlooked this aspect.
The Role of Past and Present Critics in Cultural Studies
In the past, Nepali literary criticism saw the remarkable contributions of scholars like Vasudev Tripathi, Indra Bahadur Rai, Krishna Chandra Singh Pradhan, Mohanraj Sharma, Ishwar Baral, Govinda Bhatt, Dayaram Shrestha, and Krishna Gautam. Looking at today’s criticism, does their legacy feel like a distant memory? Will the current generation revive that glorious history?
Cultural studies prioritize rewriting history over merely repeating it. The mentioned scholars were intellectual leaders of their time, but the new generation must carve out its own path. The contemporary era presents different circumstances, problems, and necessities, with distinct experiences, aspirations, and perspectives. Criticism follows creativity, and great literature inspires great criticism. Thus, in the sociology of literature, it is believed that significant criticism emerges from remarkable works.
Strong criticism cannot exist without strong creative works. At present, literature explores distinct themes, problems, and styles, and criticism is evolving accordingly. It is premature to compare the new generation of critics with the great scholars of the past; time will naturally determine their legacy.
The Current State of Literary Criticism
Nepali literary criticism is progressing dynamically, with ongoing exploration of new possibilities. There is a noticeable decline in impressionistic criticism and an increase in objective criticism, which relies on epistemological inquiry and analytical material. Unlike subjective praise or condemnation, objective criticism is based on factual analysis. Traditionally, Nepali criticism has been influenced by impressionism and value-based judgment.
In Eastern philosophy, Charvaka’s views were largely disregarded, while in Western criticism, Matthew Arnold emphasized that criticism should go beyond merely explaining a text. He believed that independent interpretation of a text could make criticism as creative as literature itself. W. H. Hudson argued that criticism does not necessarily require definitive conclusions. Today’s criticism leans more toward interpretation and analysis rather than mere textual evaluation. Those seeking literary praise may not find it in criticism, but that is not the critic’s fault.
The Divide Between Academic and Journalistic Criticism
There seems to be a “cold war” between academic and journalistic criticism, with both appearing to be at opposite poles. Why is this so?
There is no rigid classification between academic and journalistic criticism in any discipline; rather, these are distinctions based on practice. Academic journals have specific formats and guidelines to ensure uniformity and facilitate clarity. Similarly, universities establish certain research standards for convenience. However, this does not imply that criticism is impossible without structured formatting.
In the past, criticism did not follow strict methodologies; its sole objective was to uncover truth and facts. Critics interpreted materials in their own ways and reached conclusions. Over time, various epistemological, metaphysical, and evaluative frameworks have been developed, supported by analytical software tools. The key focus should not be on whether a critique is published in an academic journal or a newspaper but on how it evaluates, interprets, and assesses a text. Therefore, distinguishing between academic and journalistic criticism is unnecessary. A well-written review can appear in a newspaper, while a journal article may fail to provide deep insights. Ultimately, the quality of criticism depends on its subject matter and presentation.
The Responsibility of Critics and Writers in Literary Development
It seems that critics and literary analysts have retreated from their responsibilities. But are writers themselves practicing honest literary devotion?
Criticism is often compared to a mother nurturing a child. Naturally, every creator considers their work valuable and dear, but society operates based on specific values, norms, and aesthetic sensibilities. These frameworks influence how art and individuals are evaluated and commented upon. A critic is, after all, also a reader of literature.
Criticism should analyze how literature evokes emotional experiences, its moral consciousness, and its ideological representation. Praise alone cannot elevate the value of a literary work; it must prove its own worth. However, criticism can broaden the horizon of possibilities. Both sincerity in creation and integrity in criticism are equally necessary.
To meaningfully incorporate recent intellectual debates into literary criticism, a few crucial steps must be taken:
- Interdisciplinary Approach: Literary criticism should actively engage with disciplines like political science, economics, psychology, and cultural studies. Since literature reflects societal realities, integrating contemporary discussions on power, ideology, representation, and resistance will make criticism more relevant.
- Objective and Analytical Methods: Criticism should move beyond mere praise or condemnation and adopt a systematic approach based on epistemological frameworks. Engaging with diverse theoretical perspectives—Marxism, feminism, postcolonialism, psychoanalysis, and deconstruction—can deepen literary interpretation.
- Awareness of Socio-Political Contexts: Literature does not exist in isolation; it is shaped by historical, social, and political forces. Critics should analyze the relationships between state mechanisms, ideologies, class structures, gender dynamics, and identity politics to provide insightful perspectives.
- Avoiding Bias and Superficial Criticism: Criticism should not be influenced by personal biases or ideological agendas. Instead, it should be neutral, well-reasoned, and intellectually rigorous to uncover deeper meanings in texts.
- Engagement with Contemporary Debates: Literary criticism should actively incorporate recent discussions on globalization, digital culture, environmental concerns, migration, and marginalized voices. This will ensure that criticism remains relevant and reflective of evolving societal conditions.
Ultimately, literary criticism should strive to be an enlightening intellectual exercise—free from favoritism, grounded in objective analysis, and capable of unraveling complex social, cultural, and political realities embedded in literature.
News Source: Kantipur Media
