A remark on Arts in the Maldives

As a maldivian, and as an aspiting artist myself (visit my gallery), I thought we were quite creative. In general there is good taste amongst us. I am thankful that we can distinguish readily the ‘katu’ and ‘ori’ type of styles. But when we take a closer look at the visual arts, there is a whole different story to it. We are indeed ‘katu’ and ‘ori’. Why else would we be making copies of Hindi movies and Hindi songs? (And really bad versions of that too) Are we so incapable of coming up with a good idea for a movie? Or a nice melody for a song? With the number of film companies and teenagers going around with guitars on their backs, you might think of that we were bursting with creative energy. Even in the popular business of graphics design, where one would expect to see new ideas, you could hardly come across a piece of work that inspires you to stop and admire for a while. Website designs are terribly disappointing. Posters, brochures and all such print media clearly lack any originality.

Maybe the whole creative process is aimed in the wrong direction- commercialization. I know of a vocalist who records a song (sung to a Hindi tune of course) and gets paid 1000/- for it. Making money is easy in the ‘Albom’ industry and the movie industry. And we as the audience let them get away with substandard performances, either because we think that ‘rajje aa balaafa evaru rangalhennu!’ Or that we are too rich so we might as well pay, or we just don’t care.

Maybe it’s the first response that is the common consensus. And that maybe the reason for arts in Maldives not to flourish to its potential. And perhaps the current condition is fitting to our current social condition: our inability (or reluctance?) to express ourselves. Art is supposed to portray what the artist feels, or think and if there is nothing for the artist to express, what results would be as blank as his emotions.

I recently came across the website of the National Art Gallery of the Maldives. One thing that strikes you when you browse through the gallery is that how ‘Maldivian’ all the art works look. Palm trees and beaches, underwater scenery of fish, native children playing, and fishermen going about their daily chores. Is this only what all Maldivians are about? I am sure there is more to being a Maldivian than carrying a fishing rod. That ideal has long been lost with the newer generations who know that even though we are portrayed as a nation of fisherman ( “mas veri kamakee dhivehin ge ley naaru”), we are not so.
We are a nation that imports almost everything- economic, social, cultural, and even academic. And one has to wonder why art has not had any impact on it by such influences. Why are we so reluctant to experiment and to change? Is it because the public will buy or see whatever that is produced without question?

We should not let our artistic expressions be limited to or be confined by what the society ascribes to as being ‘maldivian art’. New avenues need to be explored; new forms of art have to be introduced. Art has to be seen more as an outlet of creative expression than a commercial enterprise.

Note: I salute all Maldivian artists (but not those in the movie and song industry) for their inspiring works of art.

My Problems with Dhivehi Language: Part 1

While working at IGMH as a clinical assistant, I found the psychiatry OPD to of most interesting. People came with odd complaints, and the doctor would write off prescription drugs and write the diagnosis as anxiety disorder, depressive disorder etc. My interest was not piqued by the way medicine was being practiced, but by how difficult it was for the patients to describe their feelings.

How does an average Maldivian describe such concepts as ‘emotional trauma’ when there is no word/phrase for it? How about ‘soul’, ‘mind’, ‘self’ ‘psyche’ or ‘soul searching’? Let alone describe them as being ‘depressed’? Sure. There are words like ‘dhera’ and ‘hithaama’, but can they be used to describe the myriad of emotions like sadness, despair, anguish, angst, melancholy etc.?
A discussion of any topic on Oprah’s shows would certainly be a difficult if not impossible task.

'The limits of my language mean the limits of my world’ stated Ludwig Wittgenstein. While one can feel such emotions even in the absence of words to describe them, it has lead to the emotionally stale society that we are. Take a look at the atmosphere at one of our football games. The silence can truly be compared to that of a crowd listening to a sermon at Friday prayers. We love football. But we don’t dare show it. The only times the crowd shout is for a goal, and when the opposing teams’ goalkeeper takes a goal kick. A distant observer might as well think that the spectators are there by force. Or, go around the airport where loved ones leave or return daily. But hardly a shout of joy or a cry of sorrow escapes. We see Arabs (Muslims) hugging when greeting but I suppose that would only be frowned upon. Maybe the newer generations have noticed this and started greeting people with open arms (literally speaking), but then again they might be doing it just to be cool.

It is not only the emotional sphere that is limited by language. The way we think is clearly affected.
See if you can translate the following to Dhivehi without twisting your tongue.

- the idea of a thought
- proceeding to a conclusion by reason or argument rather than intuition
- abstract thinking
- the unexamined life is not worth living
- ethical issues
- moral values
- ideas and opinions
- I maintain that the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific research – Albert Einstein
- when sensation, attachment and possession are not, then love and compassion come into being – Krishnamurti

The difficulty is obvious. ‘Language is a crucial tool in the process of thinking. If we don’t have a language that is rich in vocabulary and language that has a subtle and complicated syntax, we are not going to be able to think in very complicated ways. Just imagine trying at the discursive level to carry out any kind of process of thought with a truncated or narrow vocabulary’. In comparison to most of the languages that we have borrowed from, Dhivehi language is very much impoverished in its vocabulary and its syntactical structure.

Are we capable of abstract thought if we don’t know what ‘abstract’ mean? Or of ‘scientific thought’ if we don’t understand it. If we (the lucky few) are not acquainted with English we might as well have been the dumbest people on earth. Sure. We are taught in the English medium. But the English is substandard. While over 98% or so of the population is apparently literate, there are few who read. The concept of commercial magazines saw an increase in reading before it started to become gossip columns. The reason also might be that there are few books available at the local stores which prefer to sell only textbooks. You might as well forget it if you want to buy a book on culture, art, science, religion or philosophy. When the government took their time in constructing a new building for the National Library, it seems few or no thought was put into stocking it with good books. A lack of writers in Maldives is also a cause for concern.
As is evident, the lack of words to describe such key concepts effectively hinders good communication and discussion of good ideas and development of critical thought.

The center for linguistic research has done little to address this issue. I remember a sign on the
operation theater of IGMH. It read ‘falhaa kotari’. One can only imagine what a patient being taken into the theater would feel after seeing that. Clearly the person who put that sign up did not understand the difference between surgeons and butchers. The center as the leading authority on language has failed to address the issue of the word ‘kaley’ (you) too. The community has effectively banned its use citing it as being rude. Even Soadhu, on Heyyambo, while not being able to say that it was okay to use the word ‘Kaley’ could not provide an alternative. So all Maldivians would have to go around speaking without a word for ‘you’. Imagine. The center, meanwhile, is busy teaching a Bachelor’s degree in Dhivehi Language when such key concepts are missing.

‘If evolution of language is not determined by its utility then what is it determined by?’ was a reply when I posted this in a language forum. Dhivehi as a language needs to evolve to meet the demands of the influx of knowledge and new ideas. The emergence of the practice of speaking in English by parents to their children is recognition on their part of such limits in Dhivehi language. Prior to writing this I was against such practice. But I want to be able to say ‘I love you’ or ‘I’m proud of you’ to my son, and to let his thinking develop unhindered by the limits of his mother tongue.

So what needs to be done? Translations of major work from all areas which define a society and which develop thinking; art, science, religion, and philosophy, is a must. The reluctance to borrow words from English, or other languages for that matter needs to be overcome. The Dhivehi language curriculum needs to be reformed and the distinction between language and Dhivehi literature has to be made. (What’s the point in making you read Dhon Hiyala aa Alifulhu at CHSE?) We have to be less arrogant about the mightiness and greatness of Dhivehi language by citing that ‘atoll’ is a Dhivehi word taken into English or by saying that we have terms for each stage in the development of a coconut that is all too commonly heard on debate competitions. We can still retain the so called ‘Dhivehi vantha kan’ even if we borrow from other languages like we have been doing so for centuries.

Prologue

an excerpt from what I wrote a couple of years back:

........to begin with, nothing is more infinite than our capacity to fool ourselves or delude ourselves. By this I mean that we take a lot of things for granted, without even knowing if such a thing or matter could indeed exist in the framework it proposes. We grow up in an environment that is full of uncertainties and misconceptions, both about the physical and spiritual realms. Not that our parents are to take the blame, since they always tell us that we will know when we grow up whenever we ask a question about something. So we wait till we grow up, and by that time we have forgotten what the question was. You know how an awfully long time one has to wait to grow up. But it is such questions that we ask in childhood that are the most intriguing and interesting. ‘Why is the sky blue Ma?’, ‘ Why is that the birds can fly and I can’t? ‘ , ‘why can’t I go out to play? , ‘Why is it that I cant hit him when he hits me? ‘ , ‘Where do we go when we die? ‘.‘Do I get to go to heaven?’ All such questions certainly encompass all the fields and knowledge that philosophy provides: aesthetics, ethics, logic and so on. When we grow up, we still want to go to heaven, but we don’t want to die.

Similar questions may arise, but we never try to find out. We push them aside on the basis of a mere technicality ‘ I am not a moralist to answer them’, ‘ I am not a physicist to answer that question’. And, as they say, just because you don’t know doesn’t mean that your kid should not know it. Well, we can always turn out a little bit of an amusing story all the time, like the way our great-great-grand parents told us a lot of things which we now take as a sacred truth, while it may as well be just a joke related by a worried grandpa to his grandson for fear that he may start to ask questions the rest of his friends may not like. But there are times when one has to sit back and really reflect upon what is going on.

Let us imagine that you are in a movie theatre where you’ve been all your life, you were born into the theatre, your parents were born here, and even your grandparents were there, and have been living there, and so on and on, back as far as there were humans and movie theatres. The movie theater is where you are comfortable, it’s cool, there are lot of shadows, no bright lights, just an image on the screen, that is cast day in day out, night and day. And for example imagine that the movies you are seeing is the Simpson’s. It’s not so much that what the Simpson’s represent are totally wrong, but there is something rather misleading about what’s on in the movie theatre, there is a distorted appearance of what reality is. But if you have been born into this movie theatre, you’ve lived there, your parents have lived there, and even you grandparents, and friends and every one lives in the theater, your view of the way the world looks, of what is true and what is false, and what your opinion is would be construed and created by what you see in the theater. What if, someday, for whatever reason, you decide to leave this movie theater and you walk up the isle and walk outside in to the lobby and to the outdoors. Suppose you are going outside on a bright sunny day, you know you cannot see quite well outside as you can see inside, because the sun will hurt your eyes, and there is this slight tendency for you to go back in to the coolness, the darkness, and the shadows of the theater where you are comfortable.

What philosophy does is to get us out of the movie theater. To make us begin to realize that those opinions, and beliefs and those sort of truths that we’ve always held to be sacred are not really truths. They are just there. They are things that our parents had taught us or our state has told us or our churches taught us, so philosophy will attempt to move us out of this movie theater or as Plato calls it in the Apology, the Cave.

So what I have given is an attempt to visualize, what needed to be done in terms of movement from the areas that we think we know, my opinion, into what Plato calls. The Absolute Realm. - the Truth, or Knowledge.

Moving out into the open is what is felt when one attempts to read philosophy or begins to think like one. I used to live in a theatre of my own, and one day I decided to take a walk, and here I am. Not much of a philosopher, yes, but certainly aware that the theatre has been a mental prison all along. But to break out of that prison, you have to know that you are locked up in the first place. A lot of my friends find it hard to believe that there could be such a state of affairs. Of course, they too are not to blame, since there are a lot of groups, people, and the like, claiming that their brand of nonsense is a lot better than the others.’ What I say is the truth, what they say is mere heresy’.

Philosophy can tell that neither group has enough evidence/proof to claim any of these.And there are things that can be known instantly, like the Truth and Knowledge, which is far more sublime than the opinions that we hold onto.

So how do we begin to get rid of such misconceptions and ideas that our put into our heads? First we have to know that we are in the theater, being shown and being controlled by what the state or any other authority prefers us to be shown. Some people in the theater may not know that what is cast is indeed put there by someone. For him it is a fact of life. He does not know that there can be a lot of other movies, that there can be a lot of other stuff that can be projected there. He doesn’t know that there is a life out there, outside the theater. And he is as sure as his existence that what he believes in is the truth, for he does not know anything else. He is not allowed to go out, not forcefully, but by just showing amusing and easy to understand stuff on the screen, much like we are not allowed to read certain books and see some channels on the TV. And there are problems for the people who indeed do take the time out and decide to take a look outside.

It is like seeing a rare book, which you approach curiously and open slowly. With the first words that you read you feel the knowledge hit you, like the time when you walk up to that little crack in the curtains and peer out. The facts in the book hit you as strong as the light from the outside hits your eyes. Some of us would shut our eyes, like some people who close the book and never open it and say “this is not my interest”. It is the easy way out. But it is those who have the courage to face the other side that would take a second chance, and be mesmerized by the light and the colors. He would find a way to get out, even though it is forbidden. When he returns from his walk, he would relate it to his friends and his parents. He would begin to describe the sky and the trees and the birds. But would his friends believe him? No. For they have not seen what he has seen. They would point at the screen and say, ‘ that is what is real, what you saw was all a dream!’. And he gets to, for the first time, make enemies out of his friends. This is not a story I am telling. This is what happened to Galileo when he told that the earth was not the center of the Universe, this is what happened to Socrates when he tried to get the Athenians into asking questions about the nature of life and death and God and so on. They both were condemned by the state and put to death. Einstein faced a similar welcome to his theories, and so does any one else who come up with a new perspective. And we later on realize that this person was indeed right and live on what he or she has told us.

So take a little time and think about life and other such matters that you were intrigued by when you were a child, for your kids certainly will ask them from you, and believe me, they won’t take authority for granted like the way we do.........