SLAM and de-hegemonising standards

In last week’s column, I focused on the recently concluded literary Seminar SLAM held at Peradeniya. This week’s column is also devoted to focus on some of the key issues discussed at the SLAM.

In last week’s column I wrote; The session titled “Post -War Sri Lankan Literature: Where to? Where from? “as a thought provoking session. The fundamental issues such as the very existence of post-war literature and whether the literati are aware of the contentious issues associated with a protracted conflict which lasted for three bloody decades were discussed.

So far the contribution to the Post-War Literature in Sri Lanka, particularly, in literature in English is minuscule. The issues such the fundamental dynamics of the conflict, politicising the core issues and the aptness of the terminologies associated with the conflict have been, so far, dealt partially or completely left out by the literati, particularly, in English.

The use of the term ‘Post-war literature’ is polemical in a way that it would reinforce some of the much politicised issues of the conflict. In my opinion, since major war had not been waged between two nations, the term ‘Post-War Literature’ is misleading and inappropriate. It should be rather called Sri Lanka’s “Post-Conflict Literature”.

Ferrey and humour

Ashok Ferrey’s session on his novel “Serendipity” turned out to be a “humorous “session generating humour out of the work and out of the writer. The least, what one can say about “Serendipity” is that its meandering narration leads the reader nowhere and that it was indeed a poorly crafted work.

Over the years, Ferrey and some of the Colombo-centric new literati have been trying to carve a niche for themselves. By and large, their literary productions remain in the periphery obviously due to some of the factors they are willing to ignore of. The principal factor that most of the Sri Lankan writers in English still fail to reach the international literary market in a substantial manner, although there are exceptions in writers such as Michael Ondaatje, and Romesh Gunasekara, is that the literary productions are not in conformity with international literary and publishing standards.

Widening standards

One of the recurrent themes of the SLAM was de-hegemonising standards or what they called ‘widening standards’. From a broader perspective, standard can be defined as something which is considered by an authority or by a general consent as a basis of comparison, an approved model or an average or normal requirement, quality, quantity, level or grade.

Standards may differ from county to country and from province to province particularly in the domain of language and literature. What should be borne in mind is that the fact that language does not only represent one level of education and social standing but also class and many other factors. Although de-hegemonising language standards may include diverse dialects and speech communities under a broader umbrella of ‘standards’, it in the long run, would lead to confusion. The situation would create more than one standard and distinction would arise between local standards and international standards of languages. However, it is understood that an international language such as English should be in conformity with international standards. Otherwise, it will be no longer an international language. The central issue is not whether it is appropriate or not to de-hegemonise a language standard but the fact that the process would deprive its (Language) ability to communicate across cultures, professionals and nationalities.

The issue of de-hegemonising language standards was raised in the session “Putting Sri Lanka on the Map-Publishing and Publications today”. Juliet Coombe and Sam Perera participated in the session representing the publishing industry. Sam Perera spoke from the perspective of local publishing industry while Coombe highlighted dynamics in international publishing industry.

The session on publishing apart from generating polemics yielded important insights into the internal dynamics of the publishing industry. It is obvious that if Sri Lanka wants to establish itself or at least carve a niche for itself in the international literary market, it is imperative to recognise the ground realties however much they may be an anathema to a section of literati both in the provinces and in Colombo elite circles.

International standards

In the first place, a rudimentary requirement is that the literary productions from Sri Lanka should be in conformity with international standards. They should be well crafted and edited. What I mean by editing is that a book whether it is a novel or poetry, should go through language and literary editors. In other words, books meant to reach the international literary market should be written in International Standard English. Absence of professional editing is one of the major factors that contributes to the low quality literary productions.

This fact is amply proved by authors such as Arundathi Roy, Amitabh Ghosh and some of Sri Lankan authors such as Prof. Yasmine Goonaratne, Michael Ondaatje and Romesh Gunasekara. Although it is technically possible to publish any sub-standard literary production, it is impossible to make a sale for them in international literary markets. On the other hand, a primary prerequisite of a good literary production is that it should enrich the contemporary idiom and language. If new literati really want to reach international markets and to mark Sri Lanka on the international literary map, it is imperative that they aspire to reach international standards and to look at the fact whether they are making substantial contributions to literature in general and Sri Lankan literature in English in particular.