Kamikaze Marxists

Shocked and surprised by full blown chauvinistic appeal by Dr Hiren Gohain on his speech at mass meeting of KMSS. He is probably "Last of the Mohikans" of Marxist metamorphosis to nationalist, of course a dearly chauvinist as already "Bagha Bagha" Communist are metamorphosed themselves fully into "progressive nationalist" in Assam. It is concern moment for working class struggles in Assam. Although some of his recent articles and engagement with nationalist progressive bourgeoisie of Assam, denial to self-determination of some ethnic communities such as Karbi, Bodo etc, we assumed that Dr Gohain Sir still believe in pan Assamese nationalism. Reasoning a demand of ULFA he is trying to proclaim "yes, why with India?" and let loose all the cannon. There are many also, who are in favor of a sovereign Assam. It is understandably taken as many love this land affectionately. Pain of this land is felt by them with pure passion and conviction. But nationalist appeal by DR Hiren Gohain SIR at mass meeting is evoked some questions. 

"The more strongly the working-class movement develops the more frantic are the attempts by the bourgeoisie and the feudalists to suppress it or break it up. Both these methods—suppression by force and disintegration by bourgeois influence—are constantly employed all over the world, in all countries, and one or another of these methods is adopted alternately by the different parties of the ruling classes. In Russia, particularly after 1905, when the more intelligent members of the bourgeoisie realised that brute force alone was ineffective, all sorts of “progressive” bourgeois parties and groups have been more and more often resorting to the method of dividing the workers by advocating different bourgeois ideas and doctrines designed to weaken the struggle of the working class. One such idea is refined nationalism, which advocates the division and splitting up of the proletariat on the most plausible and specious pretexts, as for example, that of protecting the interests of “national culture”, “national autonomy, or independence”, and so on, and so forth. The class-conscious workers fight hard against every kind of nationalism, both the crude, violent, Black-Hundred nationalism, and that most refined nationalism which preaches the equality of nations together with ... the splitting up of the workers’ cause, the workers’ organisations and the working-class movement according to nationality. Unlike all the varieties of the nationalist bourgeoisie, the class conscious workers, carrying out the decisions of the recent (summer 1913) conference of the Marxists, stand, not only for the most complete, consistent and fully applied equality of nations and languages, but also for the amalgamation of the workers of the different nationalities in united proletarian organisations of every kind. Herein lies the fundamental distinction between the national programme of Marxism and that of any bourgeoisie, be it the most “advanced”. Recognition of the equality of nations and languages is important to Marxists, not only because they are the most consistent democrats. The interests of proletarian solidarity and comradely unity in the workers’ class struggle call for the fullest equality of nations with a view to removing every trace of national distrust, estrangement, suspicion and enmity. And full equality implies the repudiation of all privileges for any one language and the recognition of the right of self-determination for all nations.

To the bourgeoisie, however, the demand for national equality very often amounts in practice to advocating national exclusiveness and chauvinism; they very often couple it with advocacy of the division and estrangement of nations. This is absolutely incompatible with proletarian internationalism, which advocates, not only closer relations between nations, but the amalgamation of the workers of all nationalities in a given state in united proletarian organisations." -Lenin on "redefined nationalism"

But if we go back some years in history of political activities of Assam, those days of "Kalakhar"edited by Dr Hiren Gohain, we have seen a Marxist with commitment to working class and peasant movement, who was beaten at street by ultra nationalist thugs. Its ironical as Assamese nationalism also non other then other Bihari, Tamil, Gujrati, etc nationalism of modern India. Regional nationalism which are mostly based on "language" are on the verge of self destructive, self exposure to its own contradictions and conflicts. Mostly brahmonical in structure, most of all regional nationalism are deposed, degenerated in own conflicts of self induced historical division of labor or caste and class. Regional nationalism are composed itself to full grown oppressive national bourgeoisie now that what LENIN warned about.

"The difference between Lenin and Luxemburg on the national question may be summarised as follows: while Rosa Luxemburg, proceeding from the struggle against Polish nationalism, inclined to a nihilistic attitude to the national question, Lenin saw realistically that, the positions of oppressed and oppressor nations being different, their attitude to the same question must be different. Thus, starting from different and opposing situations, they proceed in opposite directions to reach the same point of international workers’ unity. Secondly, while Rosa Luxemburg disposed of the question of national self-determination as incompatible with the class struggle, Lenin subordinated it to the class struggle (in the same way as he took advantage of all other democratic strivings as weapons in the general revolutionary struggle). The fount of Lenin’s approach to the national question, missing in Rosa Luxemburg, is the dialectic: he saw the unity of opposites in national oppression, and the subordination of the part – the struggle for national independence – to the whole – the international struggle for socialism. Rosa Luxemburg’s strength regarding the national question lies, as elsewhere, in her complete devotion to internationalism and her independence of thought. This led her, via Marx’s method, to see how the position of Poland had changed vis-à-vis Russia between Marx’s time and her own. It caused her, contrary to Marx, to oppose the national struggle of Poland, but at the same time, and again contrary to Marx and Engels, led her to support the national movement of the South Slavs against Turkey. Marx and Engels had argued that to halt the advance of Tsarism the unity of the Turkish Empire had to be defended; and the national movements of the South Slavs, which were engulfed in Pan-Slavic ideas, and were blind weapons in the hands of Tsarism, had to be opposed. Rosa Luxemburg made an excellent analysis of the new conditions in the Balkans since the time of Marx. She concluded first that the liberation of the Balkan nations suppressed by the Turks would rouse the nations of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The end of the Turkish Empire in Europe would also mean the end of the Hapsburg Empire. Secondly, she argued that since Marx’s time the national movement of the Balkans had come under the dominion of the bourgeoisie, and hence any continuation of Russian influence was due only to suppression by Turkey. The liberation of the Balkan peoples from the Turkish yoke would not enhance the influence of Tsarism, but would weaken it, as these peoples would be under the leadership of a young and progressive bourgeoisie which would clash more and more with reactionary Tsarism. Thus, in the case of the Balkan nations, Rosa Luxemburg’s attitude to their national strivings differed greatly from her attitude to Poland." - Tony Cliff

If we monitor above scenario we can a get similar picture of India. Yes even more complex one - multi linear Nationalism, layered social structures in south Asian diaspora. Possible clashes in Kashmir and many places and ethnic questions, infiltration in Northeaset India, so its viable that "progressive national bourgeoisie" is looking for a solution, even in frustrated situation its thrives on "chauvinistic" nationalism. But its very important to know is it only crisis of "Oxomiya" in Assam? Probably not, its a crisis of all regional national bourgeoisie of India under aggressive "globalization" and capitalist agenda. If it is noted as written by Dr Hiren Gohain, to appeal against ruling state on behalf of Assamese nationalism, such kind of appeal from all corner of India will weaken the proletariat struggles in India. Further more its a trap to lure regional nationalism to to divide working class in many dimensions.

Face-off:

Imperialism is the stage of capitalism in which a few economically advanced states dominate the rest of the world. Imperialism reveal itself as a system during the last years of the nineteenth century, but its cruel dynamic also drives the process known as "globalization" today. Humankind continue to live in a world in which a handful of strong nation with imperialist order use their economic and military power to subjugate and exploit weaker nations. Our world is still one in which the strong nations regularly face off against each other--threatening, preparing, or unleashing wars whose basic aim is to secure a competitive advantage for one nation over its rivals in imperialist plunder. One of the consequences of imperialism is nationalism and ultra nationalism to fascism. 

But as capitalism spreads around the globe, it also gives rise to powerful movements of resistance and it will grows proportionately . Initially, the revolt of workers and peasants in countries oppressed by imperialism almost invariably takes the form of nationalism. That is why it is crucial for socialists to understand how to approach nationalism and how to assess the various struggles for national liberation today. Its duty of socialist to understand why it is time for not to play in dirt, not to carried away in emotional waves and downplay working class movement of poor people for all kind of economic demands.

The historically progressive nature of capitalism in relation to feudalism, however, did not mean that Marx and Engels automatically supported every national movement. Marx and Engels welcomed the 1857 Indian uprising as a "national revolt,". But Marx and Engels did not allow economic criteria to dictate whether they would lend support to specific national movements. Rather, they gave or withheld support on the basis of a political assessment of each movement in the international context.

A clear distinction must be drawn between two periods of capitalism with respect to the national question. The formation of bourgeois-democratic society and its state characterizes a first period of waning feudalism and absolutism. Indian National movement during this period are mass movements that draw all classes of the population into politics. In contrast, after 1947 a second period of fully formed capitalist states is characterized by long-established constitutional regimes and a highly developed antagonism between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. When the right of nations to self-determination shifts from the political realm to the cultural realm, it proceed towards Lenin declared as - "aggressive bourgeois nationalism, which drugs the minds of workers, stultifies and disunites them in order that the bourgeoisie may lead them around by the halter." That is why Lenin stated repeatedly that socialists "take from each national culture only its democratic and socialist elements; we take them only and absolutely in opposition to the bourgeois culture and the bourgeois nationalism of each nation." 

Lenin proclaimed - "our banner does not carry the slogan 'national culture' but international culture, which unites all the nations in a higher, socialist unity, and the way to which is being paved by the international amalgamation of capital."

"I am not sure to the extent to which Marx saw the Asiatic mode of production as a core concept grounding his discussions of India, China, etc. I have not really thought that through, but certainly the Asiatic mode of production is not something on which he expended a lot of intellectual effort. There is the long section in the Grundrisse on pre-capitalist modes of production that talks about the Greco-Roman mode of production and the ancient Asiatic mode of production. There he is really talking about India, as far as I can tell. But beyond that, Marx wrote a lot journalistically about India, and the phrase “Asiatic mode of production” does not, to my knowledge, occur in those writings. I also used to think that there must have been a long essay somewhere by Marx describing the feudal mode of production. But there isn’t. It’s just a few scattered comments here and there, as far as I can tell. Marx is not Max Weber. Weber was a scholar who spent perhaps most of his intellectual effort on trying to figure out the uniqueness of modern Western capitalism vis-à-vis earlier social forms. He wrote voluminously on China, India, ancient Judaism, ancient Greece and Rome, and the European Middle Ages. With Marx, the concerns are very different. He does look at these kinds of issues sometimes, but he always does so with contemporary concerns in mind, not only about the structure of capitalism, but also to figure out the problems of resistance to and revolution against capital. Thus, Marx’s interest at the end of his life in the Russian and Indian villages develops because he thinks that these were possible sites of resistance to capital that could become allies of the Western proletariat. To the extent that he is concerned with the non-West or the non-core capitalist countries like Ireland in his own time, it is because of their relationship to the problematic of capital and labor inside the core countries. Sometimes he thinks these relationships can reverse themselves. Accordingly, in the late 1860s, Marx feels that an Irish revolution could become the lever that might spark proletarian uprising inside Britain. Similarly, he argues that the Russian communal village could be the starting point for a global communist development if it could link up with the proletariat in the West. These are not isolated questions for Marx. Certainly he never addresses Ireland, India, Russia or anyplace else for the sake of elaborating a philosophy of history. There may be a very interesting philosophy of history there, but that would have to be teased out." - Kevin Anderson, Marx at the margins

On ethnological notes of Marx: 

[In a multitude of variants, the same basic conditions prevailed in Asia, Africa, parts of Eastern Europe, Russia, Canada, Australia, South America, the West Indies, Polynesia-wherever indigenous peoples had not wholly succumbed to the tyranny of capitalist development. After reading Morgan's portrayal of "primitive communism" at the height of its glory, Marx saw all this in a new light. In the last couple of years of his life, to a far greater degree than ever before, he focused his attention on people of color; the colonialized, peasants and "primitives?" 

That he was not reading Morgan exclusively or even primarily for historical purposes, but rather as part of his ongoing exploration of the processes of revolutionary social change, is suggested by numerous allusions in the Notebooks to contemporary social/political affairs. In the Notebooks, as Raya Dunayevskaya has argued, "Marx's hostility to capitalism's colonialism was intensifying...[He] returns to probe the origin of humanity, not for purposes of discovering new origins, but for perceiving new revolutionary forces, their reason, or as Marx called it, in emphasizing a sentence of Morgan, "powers of the mind?"

It was only after reading Morgan that anthropology, previously peripheral to Marx's thought, became its vital center. His entire conception of historical development, and particularly of pre-capitalist societies, now gained immeasurably in depth and precision. Above all, his introduction to the Iroquois and other tribal societies sharpened his sense of the living presence of indigenous peoples in the world, and of their possible role in future revolutions.Reading Morgan, therefore, added far mote than a few stray bits and pieces to Marx's thought-it added a whole new dimension, one that has been suppressed for more than a century and is only beginning to be developed today.

Pivotal to all the excitement, playfulness, humor, discovery and diversity of Late Marx-so reminiscent of the mood of the 1844 texts-his anthropological investigations have a special relevance for today. If a century later, Marx's "return to the projects of his Paris youth" still glows brightly with the colors of the future, it is because the possibilities of the revolutionary strategy suggested in these notebooks and related writings are far from being exhausted.

Fragmentary though they are, the Notebooks, together with the drafts Of the letter to Vera Zasulich and a few other texts, reveal that Marx's culminating revolutionary vision is not only coherent and unified, but a ringing challenge to all the manifold Marxism's that still try to dominate the discussion"" of social change today, and to all truly revolutionary thought, all thought focused on the reconciliation of humankind and the planet 'we live on. In this challenge lies the greatest importance of these texts' A close, critical look back to the rise and fall of ancient pre-capitalist communities, Marx's Ethnological Notebooks and his other last writings also look ahead to today's most promising revolutionary movements in the Third World, and the Fourth, and our own.

Raya Dunayevskaya, to whom 'we owe the best that has been written on the Notebooks, rightly pointed out that "there is no way for us to know what Marx intended to do with this intensive study?" One need not be a card-carrying prophet to know in advance that this undeveloped work on underdeveloped societies will be developed in many different ways in the coming years.

But here is something to think about, tonight and tomorrow: With his radical new focus on the primal peoples of the world; his heightened critique of civilization and its values and institutions; his new emphasis it on the subjective factor in revolution; his ever-deeper hostility to religion and State; his unequivocal affirmation of revolutionary pluralism; his growing sense of the unprecedented depth and scope of the communist revolution as a total revolution, vastly exceeding the categories of economics and politics; his bold new posing of such fundamental questions as the relation of Man and woman, humankind and nature, imagination and culture, myth and ritual and all the "passions and Powers of the mind." Late Marx is sharply opposed to, and incomparably more radical than, almost all that we know today as Marxism. At the same time, and everyone who understands Blake and Lautreamont and Thelonious Monk will know that this is no mere coincidence, Marx's culminating synthesis is very close to the point of departure of surrealism, the "communism of genius."] by - Franklin ROSEMONT

Marx's ethnological notebook raises hope in serious degree for a place like Northeast, mostly dominated by ethnic communities, diverse in language, culture etc. May be I have to back off here due to my disadvantage in academic methodological study and research for this land and possibility , potential in can bring to revolutionary thought and practice. But need to be warned that this exploration in the light of ethnological note cant be a mere phd thesis, it should be marked with or a deep understanding of how to integrate northeast India in to working movement of world.

Recent general strike in India: 

"Between 1991 and 2015 there is a vast gap. The mainstream left parties and the Central Trade Unions and other mass organisations affiliated to them had at that time a much tighter grip on the working people. But they were becoming utterly clueless in a world where the Tien-an Men Square massacre had occurred, where the East European bureaucratized workers states had taken the path of capitalist restoration and even the Soviet Union was about to collapse. The Stalinist ideology and politics most of these parties followed was in its death throes. On the other side was the decades long class collaborationist practice in independent India. This was the time when the BJP had begun its ascent, over the campaign to destroy the Babri Masjid. As a result, in the belief that resisting fascism demanded an alliance with the so-called democratic sections or the anti-fascist sections of the bourgeoisie, they were not willing to take up the fight against the first round of neo-liberal offensive seriously. Indeed, frozen in their doctrinaire position that India needed a two-stage revolution and that globalization was the imposition of imperialism, they did not even realise how much the new policies were brought about in the interests of the Indian ruling class itself. The capitalists globally made no such mistake. A World Bank report at that time said that unlike in many other countries, in India they did not meet with hostility from government bureaucrats and banks when they put forward their Structural Adjustment proposals, but were instead met with similar proposals from the opposite side. This simply means that the Indian capitalist class had decided that further capital accumulation needed a great deal of economic liberalisation. Those leftists who were busy hunting for the “progressive national bourgeoisie: were the ones who did not understand this." - Statement BY radical socialist on "The Political Significance of the All India Strike and the Revolutionary Movement in India".

Question is - who among us being as a Marxist, believe bourgeoisie of India, have ability to produce some solution to suffering of poor and stand against neo liberal policies? 

Question is - why and when we submitted our self to national bourgeoisie?

I have tried to believe that it may strategical Technic of GMSS, KMSS to thrives on national bourgeoisie and give its shoulder to "Assamese nationalism." Although its has it own conflicts of identity, as already right wing brahmonical super structure is exposed. Natural to its division in many dimensions such as religion, ethnicity etc. If we emphatic to “progressive national bourgeoisie" for their kind resolution to Assamese Identity, it should be more economic in structure by characteristic, so "Assamese" nationality will be provided a patronage of its own kind. But It was hammered under British hegemony of capital , ( ie - sad case of MANIRAM DEWAN.) eventually cultural hegemony of imperialist order is placed and consumerism devoured everything.No hope insight for independent industrial capital that will grows from Assam and will provide proper patronage for Assamese nationalism". So by default it will under oppression from big capitalist from India and state will serve interest of big capitalist from in and out of India, of course in also colonial manner.

KMSS is playing a vital role in political scenario of Assam, much ahead of Stalinist left parties in terms of socio political role and engagement. Dynamic in approach and application. KMSS able to provide as Lenin stated ""the amalgamation of the workers of all nationalities in a given state in united proletarian organisations" ie amalgamation of the peasants from all ethnic communities from Assam, this is very significant role to a proletariat struggle or mass movement. But once the leadership deviated the movement to a nationalist in characteristic it will loose credential in decisive proletariat struggle. National bourgeoisie is very good at back stabbing, logger-heading. It is historic call for working class people around the world to overcome all barrier of nationalities and join struggles in solidarity for common a cause. So in this scenario KMSS, dynamic and militant in approach should think of necessity to join the "Maruti sukuki workers struggle", "women workers struggle from Kerala", "unorganized workers struggle movement from Kolkatta" etc and many working class movement from India, without a solidarity unity movement from common platform a local movement cant reach to its goal irrespective of its popularity , it will sink to its own doom, middle class opportunity will take over. Above all its important for KMSS who has formed a political organization as GMSS, to understand hidden dynamics of working class scenario of India, more then middle class, national bourgeoisie, it should build a party on basis of advance working class that back by peasantry and continuous preaching and advocating class consciousness among poor classes from all communities, stand with their all economic demands, because a dynamic movement cant go along with frustrated middle class, they are no hope anymore, it will be wasting of time and efforts to engage with national bourgeoisie or degraded middle class who already falls to trap of consumerism and under complete domination of cultural hegemony.

Fascism and liberal democrats: 

In an informal discussion with Vivek Chiber, he stated that there will be never full fledged fascism in India as per masters of globalization are there. But all kind assault on its own people by state to serve its master will be immanent. But on going assault on democratic values in India, does not give enough comfort to progressive National bourgeoisie, its duty for liberal democrats to fight against it for bourgeoisie democratic values, for freedom expression , for secularism etc at least. Otherwise it will be too late, within crisis of capitalist dominion, confrontation will be brutal in all angle.

মইনা চৰাইটি, মাত মাত মাত মিঠা মাতটি…

‘মেডমেক্স-ফিউৰি ৰ’ড’ৰ মাতৃতান্ত্ৰিকতা


ভাৰতবৰ্ষৰ চৰকাৰে দুদিনমানৰ আগত জাপান চৰকাৰৰ লগত পৰমাণুৰ শক্তিৰ এখন চুক্তি কৰিছে। সেই জাপান, যি জাপানে পৰমাণু শক্তিৰ ধ্বংসাত্মক ৰূপৰ অভিজ্ঞতা নাগাছাকি আৰু হিৰোছিমাৰ জৰিয়তে বাৰুকৈয়ে লাভ কৰিছিল। তাৰ পিছতো বোধহয় ফুকুশ্বিমাৰ বিভীষিকা জাপানৰ লগতে পৃথিৱীৰ সকলোৰে অৱগত। তাৰ পাছতো কিয় এই চুক্তি? বোধহয় আন্তঃৰাষ্ট্ৰীয় ব্যৱসায়-বাণিজ্যৰ কথা আহে। বা টকা-পইচাৰ আদান-প্ৰদানৰ কথা আহে। এই পৰমাণু শক্তিৰ নাৰকীয় বিভীষিকাৰ কথা তল পৰি যায়‌। ‘মেডমেক্স-ফিউৰি ৰ’ড’ নামৰ চলচ্চিত্ৰখনৰ পটভূমি পৰমাণু শক্তিৰ নাৰকীয় বিভীষিকা। অৰ্থাৎ ইয়াৰ পটভূমি তৈয়াৰ হৈছে পৰমাণু শক্তিৰ ভুল ব্যৱহাৰৰ পাছত পৃথিৱীত হোৱা অপায়-অমংগলসমূহৰদ্বাৰা। ইতিমধ্যে সমগ্ৰ পৃথিৱী মৰুভূমিলৈ ৰূপান্তৰিত হৈছে। গছ-লতা আদি নোহোৱা হৈ গৈছে। যিবোৰ স্থানত প্ৰাকৃতিক সম্পদসমূহ আছে সেয়া কিছুমান যুদ্ধবাজ গোটৰ কবলত আছে। তেনে এটা যুদ্ধবাজ গোটৰ দলপতি হ’ল ইমৰটান জ’। তেওঁ এজন নিষ্ঠুৰ দলপতি।


তেওঁৰ প্ৰজাগণ অভাৱী, অনাখৰী আৰু ভোকাতুৰ ৷ অলপ পানীৰ বাবে তেওঁলোকৰ হাহাকাৰ ৷ এনে সময়ত পানী, মাতৃদুগ্ধ, মানুহৰ তেজ আৰু পেট্ৰল হ’ল আটাইতকৈ মূল্যৱান পণ্য ৷ ইমৰটান জ’ৱে পানীৰ সমস্ত ভাণ্ডাৰ তেওঁৰ কবলত ৰাখিছে ৷


চিনেমাখন আৰম্ভ হৈছে আৰু চলচ্চিত্ৰখনৰ এজন মূল চৰিত্ৰ মেক্স ৰকাটানন্ধিৰ এটা মনলগৰদ্বাৰা৷ তেওঁৰ বৰ্তমান সময়ৰ দুৰ্দশাৰ কথা বৰ্ণনা কৰিছে ৷ তেওঁক ইতিমধ্যে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ যুদ্ধবাজ সেনানীসকলে কৰায়ত্ত কৰিছে আৰু যুদ্ধবাজ এজন সেনা “নাক্স”ৰ বাবে জীৱন্ত তেজৰ যোগান হিচাপে ব্যৱহাৰ হৈছে ৷


আৰু আন এটা প্ৰধান চৰিত্ৰ ইমৰটান জ’ৰ এজন সেনাপতি “ইপ্ৰেৰেটৰ ফিউৰিচা”ই এখন পানীৰ টেংকাৰ লৈ পানীৰ বিনিময়ত গেছলিন আনিবলৈ যাত্ৰা কৰিছে ৷ ইয়াৰ পিছৰপৰাই সমগ্ৰ চলচ্চিত্ৰখন এখন এক্সনধৰ্মী চলচ্চিত্ৰ হিচাপে দেখিবলৈ পাওঁ ৷ কাৰণ ফিউৰিচাই ইমৰটানে জ’ৰ পাঁচগৰাকী পত্নীক পলুৱাই লৈ গৈছে নতুন জীৱনৰ সন্ধানত ৷ আৰু এই বিষয়টোক লৈয়ে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ ক্ৰমাগত অনুসৰণ আৰু যুদ্ধ ঘোষণা ৷


ইতিমধ্যে Sight and sound নামৰ এখন চিনেমা সম্পৰ্কীয় সন্মানীয় পত্ৰিকাই লোৱা পৃথিৱীৰ বিভিন্ন দেশৰ ১৬৮ জন শীৰ্ষ চিনেমা সমালোচকৰ ভোট অনুসৰি ২০১৫ চনৰ ২০ খন শ্ৰেষ্ঠ চিনেমাৰ ভিতৰত “Madmax-Fury road” ৰ স্থান হৈছে তৃতীয়৷

বহু দিনৰ আগতে ‘Terminator – Judgement day’ নামৰ এক্সনধৰ্মী চলচ্চিত্ৰ এখন চাই ভাল লাগিছিল তাত থকা সাংগীতিক লয়ৰ গাঁথনিৰ বাবে৷ এই গাঁথনি অপূৰ্ব আছিল আৰু গাণিতিকভাৱে মাপ-জোখ কৰি লোৱাৰ দৰে নিখুঁটভাৱে বহুৱাই দিয়া হৈছিল বিভিন্ন শ্বটসমূহ , বিভিন্ন শ্বটসমূহৰ পৰ্দাত স্থায়িত্ব আছিল সঠিক অনুপাতত৷ কোনো এটা শ্বটেই অবাবত দীঘল নহয় তথা চুটিও নহয়, যেন প্ৰয়োজনীয়ভাৱে খাপ খাই পৰা আৰু ফলত লয়টো অনুভৱ কৰিব পাৰি বা বাৰে বাৰে চালেও নতুনত্ব এটা থাকে। যিকোনো চলচ্চিত্ৰ পৰিচালকৰ বাবে ইয়াক আয়ত্ব কৰিব পৰাটো ইমান সহজ নহয়৷ কেমেৰাৰ অৱস্থান, এংগল আদিৰ সৈতে বিষয়বস্তু তথা পৰিচালকৰ মনোজগতৰ এক আত্মিক সম্পৰ্ক স্থাপন কৰিব নোৱাৰিলে চলচ্চিত্ৰ এখনৰ সেই ভাল লগাটো হৈ নুঠে৷ (সচৰাচৰ বলিউদী মচলা-ধৰ্মী চলচ্চিত্ৰ সমূহে সাধাৰণ দশৰ্কৰ wish fulfillmentঅৰ দ্বাৰা তেওঁলোকৰ জীৱনৰ পোৱা-নোপোৱাবোৰৰ আৰু সহজাত আবেগৰ শোষণ চলাই যোৱা পৰিলক্ষিত হয় আৰু কেমেৰাই তেনে অৱস্থানেই লয়৷ আমি এখন অসমীয়া চিনেমা কিয় নচলে বুলি কাৰণবোৰৰ কথাও ভাৱোঁ, তেনেহ’লে উপৰোক্ত চলচ্চিত্ৰৰ গাঠনিৰ কথাটোও এটা অন্যতম কাৰণ, আৰু ইয়াক যে সকলো অসমৰ চলচ্চিত্ৰ পৰিচালকে তেওঁলোকৰ প্ৰচন্দ “ভাল এখন চিৰিয়াচ ছবি বা মচালা-ধৰ্মী চিনেমা” বনোৱাৰ অভিপ্ৰায় সত্বেও আয়ত্ব কৰিব পাৰিচেনে নাই সেইটো লক্ষ ৰাখিব লাগিব, ফলশ্ৰুতিত উপযুক্ত গাঠনিবিহীন তেনে চিনেমা এখন দশৰ্কে নাকচ কৰি দিয়ে৷ দশৰ্কেও বোধহয় কাৰণটো ফহিয়াই নাচায়, তেওঁলোকৰ ভাল নালাগিল “কিবা কাৰণত” আৰু চিনেমাখন নচলিল৷ কিন্তু সেই অন্তৰ্গত কাৰণটোৰ বাবে পৰিচালকৰ দক্ষতাৰ কথাটোও আমি এক অন্তৰ্গত অন্যতম কাৰণ বুলি ভাবি চোৱাৰ অৱকাশ আছে, পোনচাতেই দশৰ্কক “অসমীয়া চিনেমা নাচায়” বুলি অভিমান কৰি দোষ দিয়াতকৈ৷)


‘Madmax – Fury road’তো তেনে এটা অনুভৱ হয় ৷ বিভিন্ন শ্বটসমূহ আমি প্ৰতিনিয়ত গতিশীল ৰূপত অৱলোকন কৰোঁ আৰু সমগ্ৰ এক্সন দৃশ্য গাণিতিকভাৱে খাপ খুৱাই দিয়া হৈছে ৷ এয়া মূলতঃ পৰিচালকৰ কৃতিত্ব ৷ আমি এটা ছিম্ফনি বা সাংগীতিক লয়ৰ আৰোহণ, অৱৰোহণ, আৱাহন, সুৰ, ক’ৰাছ আদিৰ গাঁথনি এটা মনেৰে গঠন কৰি লওঁ অজানিতে ৷ এনে সাংগীতিক কাঠামোৰ যদি আমি উদাহৰণ লওঁ, তেন্তে আমি দেখোঁ – প্ৰথম শ্বটটোত মেক্সে মনলগত কথা কৈ আছে, স্থিৰ দৃশ্য, কেমেৰাৰ অৱস্থান স্থিৰ ৷ শান্ত সময় ৷ হঠাত উত্থান আৰু কলৰৱ, আকৌ শান্ত সময় পৰ্দাত৷ তাৰ পিছত আকৌ গাড়ী কিছুমান জঁপিয়াই আহে কেমেৰাৰ ওপৰেৰে ৷ পুনৰ এক আৰোহণ৷ তীব্ৰ গতিৰ গাড়ীসমূহ , long shot, কিন্তু এটি সাংগীতিক moveঅৰ দৰে ৷ ইয়াৰ পিছত তীব্ৰ গতিৰ গতিশীল চলন কেমেৰাৰ, ইমৰটান জ’ৰ থলিত পূৰ্ণ ব্যস্ততা ৷ এক সাংগীতিক লহৰ ৷ সেয়া শান্ত হয়, আকৌ ফিউৰিচাৰ ফ্ৰেমত প্ৰৱেশত ৷ পিছত আমি দেখো মৰুভূমিৰ ধুমুহাত ফিউৰিচাৰ পিছে পিছে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ সেনাসমূহ, এই দৃশ্যটো যেন উচ্চহাৰত সমস্বৰত ক্ৰমাত শিৰ্ষগামী সুৰৰ ঐকতান৷


কিন্তু মূলতঃ ইয়াকো ক’ব লাগিব যে ‘Madmax – Fury Road’ এখন এক্সনধৰ্মী চলচ্চিত্ৰ ৷ পৰিচালক জৰ্জ মিলাৰে এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনৰ জৰিয়তে কিছুমান সামাজিক বিষয়ো গুৰুত্বপূৰ্ণভাৱে উপস্থাপন কৰিছে আৰু দশৰ্কৰ মাজলৈ প্ৰেৰণ কৰিছে ৷ সেয়া হ’ল পৃথিৱীৰ মানৱজীৱনৰ প্ৰাচীন মাতৃতান্ত্ৰিকতা আৰু ইয়াৰ ঐতিহাসিক ভূমিকা ৷ গতিকে এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখন নায়ক বা পুৰুষপ্ৰধান হোৱা সত্ত্বেও ই মূলতঃ এখন মাতৃতান্ত্ৰিক চলচ্চিত্ৰ, কিন্তু নাৰীবাদী নহয় ৷


‘Madmax – Fury road’অৰ যিটো বিষয় চকুত লগা বা মনত চাপ পৰিব পৰা বিষয় সেইটো হ’ল – ইয়াৰ নিৰ্মাণশৈলী, ইয়াৰ চিনেমাট’গ্ৰাফি, চৰিত্ৰসমূহৰ বেশ-ভূষা, গাড়ীসমূহৰ বিভিন্নধৰণৰ ডিজাইন, যুদ্ধৰ দৃশ্যসমূহ আৰু stuntmenসকলৰ বিভিন্ন কলাকৌশল আৰু অভিনয় ৷ বিশেষকৈ ফিউৰিচাৰ ৰূপত অভিনয় কৰা হলিউডৰ এগৰাকী প্ৰতিভাশালী অভিনেত্ৰী চাৰ্লি থেৰনৰ অভিনয় ৷ লাস্যময়ী এই অভিনেত্ৰীগৰাকীয়ে কঠোৰ, প্ৰবল নেতৃত্ব দিয়া এগৰাকী সেনাৰ ভূমিকাত বাস্তৱসন্মত ৰূপত অৱতীৰ্ণ হৈছে ৷


উপৰিউক্ত সকলোবোৰ উপাদানক অতি সুচাৰুৰূপে পৰিচালকে মূল বিষয়বস্তুৰ সৈতে বাংময় ৰূপত প্ৰকাশ কৰিছে, ইয়াতেই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনৰ কৃতিত্ব ৷ ই যিটো বিষয় উপস্থাপন কৰিব বিচাৰিছে ইয়াক আন কাৰুকৌশলে ঢাক খাই পেলোৱা নাই, যিটো হলিউডৰ চলচ্চিত্ৰত সচৰাচৰ ঘটে ৷ মূল চৰিত্ৰত আমি মেক্সক দেখোঁ যদিও লাহে লাহে ই প্ৰতিফলিত হয় যে তেওঁ চলচ্চিত্ৰখনত আহি পৰা এক সংযোজিত চৰিত্ৰহে ৷ বৰং সময়ৰ লগে লগে বেছি দীপ্ত হৈ উঠে ফিউৰিচা চৰিত্ৰটোহে ৷


এই ফিউৰিচাই ইমৰটান জ’ৰ পাঁচ পত্নী এংহাৰেড, কেপেবল, টষ্ট, দাগ আৰু চিব’ক পলুৱাই লৈ আহে জ’ৰ কবলৰপৰা আৰু বিদ্ৰোহৰ সূচনা কৰি দিয়ে ৷ এংহাৰেড হ’ল গৰ্ভৱতী, তেওঁ ইমৰটান জ’ৰ সন্তান ধাৰণ কৰি আছে ৷ ইমৰটান জ’ৱে তেওঁলোকক ভল্টৰ দৰে কোঠা এটাত আবদ্ধ কৰি ৰাখে ৷ এই পাঁচগৰাকী পত্নীৰ তাৎপৰ্য কেৱল সন্তান ধাৰণ কৰা, জ’ৰ ঔৰসত ৷
ইমৰটান জ‘ৰ প্ৰতিনিধিত্ব :



ইমৰটান জ’ এজন পুৰুষতান্ত্ৰিক যুদ্ধবাজ cult leader ৷ তেও নিজাববীয়া সেনা আছে, পানীকে আদি কৰি পেট্ৰ’ল আদি প্ৰাকৃতিক সম্পদৰ ওপৰত সম্পূৰ্ণ দখল ৰাখি তেওঁৰ প্ৰজাগণক নিয়ন্ত্ৰণত ৰাখে ৷ নাৰী তেওঁৰ বাবে ভোগ আৰু সন্তান জন্ম দিয়াৰ আহিলা ৷ তেওঁ নাৰীসকলক দুগ্ধ উৎপাদনৰ বাবেও ব্যৱহাৰ কৰে ৷ এটি দৃশ্যত দেখা যায় যে বৰ্তমান সময়ৰ কোনো এক মটৰ কাৰখানাৰ Assembly lineঅৰ দৰে মাতৃদুগ্ধ উৎপাদনৰ বাবে মহিলাসকলক বহাই দুগ্ধ উৎপাদন কৰি থকা হৈছে ৷ ইমৰটান জ’ বৃদ্ধ, দেহত যৌন ৰোগৰ চাপ আৰু তেও উশাহ ল’বৰ বাবে লাওখোলা আকৃতিৰ এটা মুখা ব্যৱহাৰ কৰে ৷ পৰিচালকে এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনৰদ্বাৰা বৰ্তমান সময়ৰ পৃথিৱীৰ বহু ঠাইত সংঘটিত হৈ থকা যুদ্ধ-বিগ্ৰহ আৰু যুদ্ধবাজ নেতাসমূহৰ কথাও অৱচেতনভাৱে ৰূপায়িত কৰিছে ৷ ধৰ্মীয় মৌলবাদীসকলৰ মানসিক গঠন তথা নাৰীবিদ্বেষী মনোভাব, দৃষ্টিভংগী এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনত প্ৰতিফলিত হৈছে ৷ ইমৰটান জ’ৰ আচল মুখখন দেখুওৱা নহয় ৷ তেওঁ লাওখোলাসদৃশ এখন মুখা পিন্ধি থাকে, যাৰদ্বাৰা তেওঁ উশাহো লয় ৷ গতিকে এনেকৈ মুখহীন চানেকিৰদ্বাৰা ই বিভিন্ন ধৰ্মীয় যুদ্ধবাজসকলৰ নাৰীবিদ্বষী মনোভাব একত্ৰিতভাৱে প্ৰকাশ কৰে ৷ দৰ্শক হিচাপেও আমাৰ এনে অনুভৱেই আহে যে তেওঁ বৰ্তমানৰ সকলো প্ৰতিক্ৰিয়াশীল, কট্টৰ পুৰুষতান্ত্ৰিক, নাৰীবিদ্বেষী চেতনা তথা কাৰ্যাৱলীকেই প্ৰতিনিধিত্ব কৰিছে ৷
ফিউৰিচাৰ পৃথিৱীখন :



ফিউৰিচাই যেতিয়া ইমৰটান জ’ৰ পাঁচগৰাকী পত্নীক পলুৱাই লৈ আহিছিল তেওঁ সেই চন্দুকসদৃশ আবদ্ধ কোঠালিত ইমৰটান জ’ৰ প্ৰতি বাৰ্তা দি আহিছিল – “Our babbies will not be war lords”, “We are not things” আদি ৷


এই ফিউৰিচাকেই ইমৰটান জ’ই অপহৰণ কৰি আনিছিল য়ুৱালিনী মাতৃসকলৰ এটা ফৈদৰপৰা শিশু অৱস্থাত ৷ আৰু শিশু অৱস্থাৰপৰা বিভিন্ন অত্যাচাৰত ডাঙৰ-দীঘল হোৱা ফিউৰিচাৰ মনত এটা প্ৰচণ্ড ঘৃণা হৈছিল ইমৰটান জ’ৰ পুৰুষতান্ত্ৰিকতাৰ প্ৰতি। ইতিমধ্যে তেওঁ এখন হাতো হেৰুৱাইছিল যুদ্ধক্ষেত্ৰত। ফিউৰিচাই এই পাঁচগৰাকী পত্নীক লৈ যাব বিচাৰিছিল এখন ‘সেউজীয়া ঠাই’লৈ। যি ঠাইত তেওঁ ডাঙৰ হৈছিল আৰু সেই যুৱালিনী মাতৃসকলক বিচাৰি উলিয়াইছিল যাতে তেওঁ পুৰণা ফৈদৰ সৈতে মিলিত হ’ব পাৰে। ইতিমধ্যে দক্ষ শ্বুটাৰ বুলি জনাজাত ফিউৰিচাই বহু বীৰত্বৰ প্ৰমাণ দিছিল। মেক্সৰ কান্ধত বন্দুক ৰাখি বুলেট ফাৰ্মাৰ বুলি নেতাজনক ফিউৰিচাই অন্ধ কৰি দিছিল। কিন্তু যেতিয়া ফিউৰিচাই সেই যুৱালিনী মাতৃসকলক লগ পালে, তেওঁলোকৰপৰা গম পালে যে ‘সেউজীয়া ঠাই’খন নাই। ইতিমধ্যেই সেই ঠাই পাৰমাণৱিক যুদ্ধত নষ্ট হৈ গৈছে। সেই ঠাইৰ মাটি বিষাক্ত। আৰু ফিউৰিচা ভাগি পৰিছে। এই যুৱালিনী মাতৃসকলে যাতায়াতৰ বাবে মটৰ বাইক ব্যৱহাৰ কৰে আৰু সকলো প্ৰায় ষাঠি বছৰৰ ঊৰ্ধ্বৰ। তেওঁলোকেই সেই বিভিন্ন প্ৰজাতিৰ গছ-গছনিৰ বীজবোৰ লগত লৈ ফুৰে। ক’ৰবাত কোনো ঠাইত ৰুই সেই আগৰ পৃথিৱী ঘূৰাই পাবৰ বাবে।
যুদ্ধযুৱক নাক্স :



এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনত এটা গুৰুত্বপূৰ্ণ চৰিত্ৰ আছে, সেয়া হ’ল “নাক্স” ৷ নাক্স হ’ল এজন যুদ্ধৰ সেনানী যাক সৰুৰেপৰা যুদ্ধবাজ হিচাপেই পালন কৰা হৈছে, সেই অনুসৰি অনুশীলন কৰোৱা হৈছে ৷ নাক্সৰ শৰীৰ ঠিক নহয়, গতিকে বন্দী মেক্সক নাক্সে blood bank হিচাপে ব্যৱহাৰ কৰে ৷ ইমৰটান জ’ৱে যেতিয়া ফিউৰিচাৰ বিপক্ষে যুদ্ধ ঘোষণা কৰে নাক্স উদ্বাউল হয় আৰু যুদ্ধত অংশ ল’ব বিচাৰে ৷ কিন্তু তেওঁৰ আবেদনক নাকচ কৰি দিয়া হয়, কিয়নো নাক্স হ’ল এজন বেমাৰী যোদ্ধা ৷ কিন্তু শেষত মেক্সৰ গাড়ীত বান্ধি লৈ নিৰন্তৰ তেজৰ যোগান লৈ যুদ্ধত নমাৰ প্ৰতিশ্ৰুতি দিয়াত নাক্সক অনুমতি প্ৰদান কৰা হয় ৷


নাক্সকে ধৰি যিসকল যুদ্ধযুৱক সকলোৰে এটাই সপোন – ইমৰটান জ’ৰ বাবে জীৱন আত্মোৎসৰ্গ কৰা, যুদ্ধক্ষেত্ৰত যাতে তেওঁলোকে ছহিদ হয় আৰু মৃত্যুৰ পিছত “Valhalla”লৈ যাব পাৰে, যি পশ্চিমীয়া সংস্কৃতিৰ এটা মিথ ৷ যেনেকৈ ইছলামিক ধৰ্মযোদ্ধাসকলৰ বাবে “জন্নৎ” আৰু হিন্দুসকলৰ বাবে “স্বৰ্গ” ৷ এই “ছুইছাইড” আক্ৰমণ তথা ছহিদি বৰণৰদ্বাৰা স্বৰ্গপ্ৰাপ্তি, এই ধাৰণাটোৱেই আজিৰ সময়ৰ বিভিন্ন ধৰ্মীয় যুদ্ধবাজ মৌলবাদীসকলৰ প্ৰপাগাণ্ডা তথা মগজ ধুলাই কৰা প্ৰক্ৰিয়াটোৰ বিষয়ে সম্যক ধাৰণা দাঙি ধৰে, যে ই কি ধৰণেৰে এজন সেনাৰ মনত ক্ৰিয়া কৰে , কেনেকৈ তেওঁ ইয়াৰদ্বাৰা উদ্বুদ্ধ হয়। তেনে এটা দৃশ্যত যেতিয়া দেখোঁ ইমৰটান জ’ৱে নাক্সক কয়, “ফিউৰিচা আৰু সংগীবোৰক হত্যা কৰ্ আৰু মই তোক নিজ হাতেৰে দাঙি লৈ Valhallaলৈ লৈ যাম”৷


আমি দেখোঁ, নাক্সৰ মুখৰ ক্ৰমাৎ ভাবালেশ সলনি হৈছে আৰু এক মানসিক সন্তুষ্টি, দীপ্তি লৈ “ছুইছাড” আক্ৰমণৰ বাবে সাজু হৈছে ৷ তিনিবাৰ সুযোগ পায়ো মৃত্যুবৰণ কৰিব নোৱাৰি কেপেবলৰ ওচৰত দুখত ভাগি পৰিছে ৷


শেষৰ ফালে আমি দেখো, নাক্সৰ মনোভাব ক্ৰমান্বয়ে সলনি হৈছে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ এগৰাকী ষোড়শী পত্নী তথা breeding wife কেপেবলৰ সান্নিধ্যত ৷ কেপেবলে নাক্সৰ প্ৰতি সহমৰ্মিতা দেখুৱাইছে আৰু দুয়োৰে মাজত এটা আত্মিক সংযোগ প্ৰকৃতিৰ নিয়মৰ ফলতেই স্থাপিত হৈছে ৷ শেষত নাক্সে ফিউৰিচা আৰু ফিউৰিচাৰ সংগীসকলৰ প্ৰাণ বচাবৰ বাবে নিজৰ প্ৰাণ উৎসৰ্গা কৰিছে ৷
মেক্স ৰকটানক্সিৰ সহযোগিতা :



এই মেক্সক নিজৰ জীৱনৰ পুৰণি দুঃস্বপ্নই খেদি ফুৰে ৷ কাৰণ তেওঁৰ পত্নী, জীয়াৰী আৰু সমন্ধীয় লোকসকলক মেক্সে ৰক্ষা কৰিব নোৱাৰিলে ৷ এই দুঃস্বপ্নৰ বাবে মেক্স প্ৰতিনিয়ত এঠাইৰপৰা সিঠাইলৈ পলাই ফুৰে ৷ এনে এটি যাত্ৰাতেই মেক্সৰ ফিউৰিচাৰ লগত আকষ্মিক যোগাযোগ হয় আৰু দুয়ো নিজা নিজা কাৰণত ইমৰটান জ’ৰ বিৰুদ্ধে থিয় হয়, দুয়ো তেওঁৰ সহযোদ্ধালৈ পিছত ৰূপান্তৰিত হয়‌। ইমৰটান জ’ৰ বন্দিত্বৰপৰা মুক্ত হ’বলৈ আপ্ৰাণ চেষ্টা চলোৱা মেক্সৰ নিজৰ স্বাৰ্থৰ বাবেই ফিউৰিচাৰ সৈতে একেলগে আগ বাঢ়িবলগা হয় এক নিৰ্দিষ্ট পৰিকল্পনা মতে‌ ক্ৰমান্বয়ে এটি দীঘলীয়া পৰিভ্ৰমণৰ অন্তত। একেলগে কৰা সংগ্ৰামৰ অন্তত দুয়োৰে মাজত আন্তৰিকতা আৰু স্বাভাৱিক সহমৰ্মিতা প্ৰতিষ্ঠা হয় ৷ মূলতঃ কমকৈ হোৱা কথা-বতৰা কিন্তু বিভিন্ন মুহূৰ্তত সহযোগিতা তথা যুদ্ধক্ষেত্ৰত হোৱা camaraderieৰ ফলত এক নিৰৱ বিশ্বাসৰ বান্ধোন গঠন হয় ৷ য়ুৱালিনী মাতৃসকলক লগ পোৱাৰ পিছত “সেউজীয়া ঠাই”খন ধ্বংস হৈ যোৱাৰ কথা জানিব পাৰি ফিউৰিচা ভাগি পৰিছিল, সেই মুহূৰ্তত কেমেৰাই মেক্সৰ মুখৰ ভাবালেশৰ ক্ল’জ শ্বট লয়৷ আমি দেখো মেক্সৰ মুখৰ ভাবান্তৰ তথা চেপি ৰখা আৱেগ৷


ফিউৰিচা আৰু য়ুৱালিনী মাতৃসকল যেতিয়া নতুন ঠাইলৈ যাবলৈ সাজু হয়, মেক্সেই প্ৰস্তাৱ দিয়ে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ সৈতে পোনপটীয়া যুদ্ধত লিপ্ত হ’বৰ বাবে৷ য়ুৱালিনী মাতৃসকল আৰু ফিউৰিচা মান্তি হয় ৷ তেওলোকে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ প্ৰাকৃতিক ভাণ্ডাৰসমূহ দখল কৰি প্ৰজাসকলক মুক্তি দিবৰ বাবে নিজকে যুদ্ধৰ বাবে প্ৰস্তুতি চলাবলৈ সাজু হয়৷ বোধহয় চলচ্চিত্ৰখনত শেষলৈ আমি নাৰীবাদী দৃষ্টিভংগীতকৈ এটা মানৱীয় সংগ্ৰামৰ আভাস পাওঁ৷ কিন্তু এই ক্ষেত্ৰত য়ুৱালিনী মাতৃসকলৰ ভূমিকা নিৰ্ণায়ক, কাৰণ পৃথিৱীৰ ধ্বংসাত্মক পৰিস্থিতিত তেওলোকেই বিভিন্ন গছ-লতাৰ বীজসমূহ লগত কঢ়িয়াই লৈ ফুৰিছে৷


সেই মইনা চৰাইৰ মাত বিচাৰি ফুৰিছে উদং ধূসৰ বিষাক্ত পৃথিৱীত৷







ফিউৰিচা আৰু মেক্সৰ মাজত প্ৰথমবাৰৰ বাবে লগপোৱাৰ সময়ত যুদ্ধ, তেওঁলোকৰ পাৰস্পৰিক অনাস্থা, ভয় আৰু জীৱন সংগ্ৰামৰ অভিলাস৷ এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখন মূলতঃ ছেপিয়া ৰঙৰ প্ৰধান্যৰে নিৰ্মাণ কৰা হৈছে৷ যাৰ বাবে গোটেই চিনেমাখনত এটা ৰুক্ষ ভাৱ ফুটি উঠে। ‘টাৰমানেটৰ – জাজমেন্ট দে’ৰ মূল ৰঙৰ আধাৰ আছিল নীলা, “মেট্ৰিক্স” যি সকলে চাইছে তেওঁলোকে জানিব সেই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনত সেউজীয়া মূল ৰঙেৰে বুলোৱা হৈছিল৷ ‘মেদ মেক্স – ফিউৰি ৰ’দ’ এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনক মূলতঃ কমলা ৰঙেৰে ধৌৱাই পেলোৱা হৈছে৷





মেক্স আৰু ফিউৰিচাৰ মাজত ভৰসা, সহমৰ্মিতা, সহযোগ আৰু আন্তৰিকতা প্ৰতিষ্ঠাপিত হৈছে৷ সেইয়া হৈছে সময়ৰ পৰিমাপত দুয়োৰে এখন উমৈহতীয়া যুদ্ধৰ মাজেদি৷ মেক্সে সহায়ৰ হাত আগবঢ়াইছে৷ আমি দেখোঁ মেক্সৰ কান্ধত বন্দুক থৈ ফিউৰিচাই যুদ্ধবাজ ‘বুলেট খেতিয়ক’ক দূৰৈৰ পৰা নিখুটভাৱে নিচানা লগাই অন্ধ কৰি পেলাইছে৷ এই আন্তৰিকতা সহযুদ্ধ নাৰী আৰু পুৰুষ এখন উমৈহতীয়া সংগ্ৰামলৈ পৰিণত হৈছে৷





ইমৰটান জ’ৱে নিজৰ লাওখোলাসদৃশ মুখা পৰিধান কৰিছে৷ এওঁ এনে এজন নেতা যাৰ আচল মুখখন দেখা নাযায়৷ অতি নিষ্ঠুৰ, নিৰ্দয় এজন যুদ্ধবাজ দলপতি, ইমৰটান জ’ৰ যোগেদি বৰ্তমান সময়ৰ যুদ্ধবাজসকলৰ প্ৰতিছবি এখন পাব পাৰি৷





বৰ্তমানৰ বাস্তৱ সময়ৰ এজন যুদ্ধবাজ নেতা, যিয়ে একে লাওখোলাসদৃশ মুখা পৰিধান কৰি আছে৷





ইমৰটান জ আৰু তেওঁৰ যুদ্ধবাজ সেনানী৷ আজিৰ পৃথিৱীৰ এক পৰিচিত দৃশ্য, সেইয়া আফ্ৰিকা, দক্ষিণ আমেৰিকা, মধ্যপ্ৰাচ্য আদি সকলোতে বিৰাজমান৷





ইমৰটান জ’ৰ পানীৰ ভাণ্ডাৰ৷ সকলো প্ৰাপ্ত প্ৰাকৃতিক সম্পদ ইমৰটান জ’ৱে নিজৰ দখলত ৰাখে এটা যুদ্ধবাজ সেনাৰ যোগেদি৷ বোধহয় বৰ্তমান সময়ৰ তেল, পানী আদি খনিজ-পণ্যসমূহৰ ওপৰত হোৱা অধিকাৰৰ এটা ৰিজনী পোৱা যায়৷ তেল, পানী, ৰক্ত আৰু মাতৃ দুগ্ধৰ দ্বাৰা শাসন৷





ইমৰটান জ’ৰ ভোকাতুৰ, অতৃপ্ত, এটোপা পানীৰ বাবে আতুৰ প্ৰজাগণ৷





ইমৰটান জ’ৰ আত্মহত্যাৰ যোগেদি শ্বহীদবৰণ কৰিব বিচৰা এজন সেনা, যি সেই ধৰণৰ এক আক্ৰমণ শত্ৰুৰ ওপৰত চলাবলৈ লৈছে৷ তেওঁক এনেদৰে মগজ-ধোলাই কৰা হৈছে যে এনেদৰে যুদ্ধত আত্মৎৰ্সগৰ দ্বাৰা মৃত্যু হ’লে তেওঁৰ ‘ভালহাল্লা’ প্ৰাপ্তি হ’ব৷ এই বাইবেলিকেল মিথ – যাৰ সমাৰ্থক হিচাপে আমি পাওঁ আন দুটা ধৰ্মত ‘জন্নত’ আৰু ‘স্বৰ্গ’৷ সেই একেই প্ৰৰোচনা-ত্যাগৰ বিনিময়ত স্বৰ্গত বৈষয়িক সুখ লাভ৷





শিশু যুদ্ধবাজ সকল৷ শিশু অৱস্থাত তেওঁলোকক মগজু-প্ৰক্ষালণ কৰি যুদ্ধবাজ বনোৱা হয়৷ গাত একে ৰং একে পোচাক৷





বৰ্তমান সময়ৰ বাস্তৱিক শিশু যুদ্ধবাজসকল৷ যাৰ শৈশৱ এক দুঃস্বপ্ন৷





যুদ্ধৰ দৃশ্য৷ এটা সুন্দৰ কৰিঅ’গ্ৰাফী আৰু মিউটেণ্ট যুদ্ধ-গাড়ীসমূহ৷ এইখন চলচ্চিত্ৰত প্ৰায় ২০০০ Visual Effects Shot ব্যৱহাৰ কৰা হৈছে৷ Conceptual design আদিৰ বাবে পাঁচজন শিল্পীক লৈ প্ৰায় ৩৫০০ পেনেলৰ ছবি আঁকি পেলাই storyboard প্ৰস্তুত কৰা হৈছিল৷





এটা যুদ্ধদৃশ্যৰ সুন্দৰ composition ৷ শ্বটটোৰ এটা আৱয়িক সামগ্ৰিকতা৷ আগ্ৰাসী শত্ৰুপক্ষৰ সেনা, সংগ্ৰামী মেক্স, গাড়ীচালক তথা নিয়ন্ত্ৰণত ফিউৰিচা আৰু ফিউৰিচাৰ তত্বাৱধানত ইমৰটান জ’ৰ পাচ পত্নী৷





ইমৰটান জ’ৰ পাঁচ পত্নী৷ পত্নী মানে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ বাবে তেওঁৰ সন্তান জন্ম দিয়াবৰ বাবে মাধ্যম৷ পানী, তেল আদিৰ দৰেও নাৰী তেওঁৰ বাবে পণ্য সামগ্ৰী তথা উৎপাদনৰ বাবে ব্যৱহৃত মেচিন৷

তলত পৰি থকা লোহাৰ ত্ৰিকোণ বন্ধনি কেইডাল হ’ল এই পাঁচ পত্নীৰ যৌনাংগসমূহ তলাবন্ধ কৰি থ’ব পৰা ব্যৱস্থা, যাতে ইমৰটান জ’ নিশ্চিন্ত হ’ব পাৰে যে তেওঁলোকৰ দ্বাৰা উৎপাদিত সন্তান কেৱল তেওঁৰেই৷ যি সচৰাচৰ পুৰুষতান্ত্ৰিকতাৰ এক মূল উপাদান৷





‘য়ুৱালিনি’ ফৈদৰ মাতৃসকল৷ পৰিস্থিতিয়ে এওঁলোকক যুজাৰু হিচাপে পৰিগণিত কৰিছে৷ এই মাতৃসকলে বিভিন্ন গছলতাৰ বীজ কঢ়িয়াই লৈ যাযাবৰী জীৱন যাপন কৰে৷





বাস্তৱ পৃথিৱীৰ কুৰদিশ নাৰী যোদ্ধাসকল ৷ এখেত সকলে ISIS মৌলবাদী সকলৰ বিৰুদ্ধ অস্ত্ৰ তুলি লৈছে আৰু এক মৰণপণ যুদ্ধত লিপ্ত হৈছে৷





ফিউৰিচাই তেওঁৰ ফৈদৰ সৈতে মিলিত হৈছে৷ সেই সহমৰ্মিতা, সেই একেই যান্ত্ৰণা— মানসিক শাৰীৰিক৷ দুয়ো সেই প্ৰাচীন দুখত ভাগি পৰিছে৷ এক সংঘাত আৰু মিলনৰ দৃশ্য৷





ফিউৰিচা, ‘সেউজীয়া ঠাই’খন পাৰমানৱিক যুদ্ধত তথা পাৰমানৱিক শক্তিৰ অপপ্ৰয়োগত হেৰাই যোৱাৰ দুখত ভাগি পৰিছে৷





এটা ব্যৱহাৰ নোহোৱা শ্বট৷ ইয়াৰ দ্বাৰা যুদ্ধকালীন বিভীষিকা ধৰিব পৰা যায়৷





এটা বাস্তৱিক দৃশ্য৷ দ্ৰোণৰ দ্বাৰা আক্ৰমণত নিহত এটি শিশু৷





ফিউৰিচা আৰু পাঁচ পত্নীয়ে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ বাবে দি যোৱা বাৰ্তা – “Our babies will not be warlords.”





বিদ্ৰোহী পত্নী আংহাৰেদে নিজৰ গৰ্ভৱতী অৱস্থাটোক ইমৰটান জ’ৰ বিপক্ষে ঢাল হিচাপে ব্যৱহাৰ কৰিছে তেওঁৰ সহযোগীসকলৰ নিৰাপত্তাৰ বাবে৷ নিজৰ সন্তান আংহাৰেদৰ গৰ্ভত স্থিত বাবেই ইমৰটান জ’য়ে আক্ৰমণ চলাব পৰা নাই৷ ই এটা অতি শক্তিশালী আৰু তাৎপয্যপূৰ্ন শ্বট৷





নাক্স আৰু কেপেবল৷ দুয়োৰে মাজৰ এটা আন্তৰিক সহমৰ্মিতাৰ দৃশ্য৷ নাক্সৰ জীৱনবোধ সলনি কৰাত কেপেবলৰ ভূমিকা উল্লেখযোগ্য৷ এই চলচ্চিত্ৰখনিত সচৰাচৰ চিনেমাত ব্যৱহাৰ হোৱা voyeuristic নাৰী দেহৰ তেনে প্ৰদৰ্শনকামিতা নাই৷ এটা আন্তৰিক সন্মান সহ নাৰীসম্বলিত দৃশ্যসমূহ ফ্ৰেমত আৱদ্ধ কৰা হৈছে৷ এইয়া পৰিচালকৰ এক অনন্য অৱলোকন আৰু প্ৰজ্ঞাৰ পৰিচয়৷





নাক্স আৰু কেপেবল, নাক্স নিজৰ দুদল্যমান অৱস্থাৰ পৰা মুক্ত হৈছে৷ ইতিমধ্যে ফিউৰিচাৰ পক্ষ লৈছে৷ কেপেবলৰ মৰমী সান্নিধ্যই নাক্সৰ জীৱনবোধ উজ্বিৱীত কৰিছে৷





ফিউৰিচা জয়ী হৈ ঘূৰি আহিছে৷ প্ৰজাসকলে অভিবাদন জনাইছে৷





ৰাইজৰ জয়ধ্বনীৰ মাজেৰে যুদ্ধত বাৰুকৈয়ে আঘাত প্ৰাপ্ত ফিউৰিচা মঞ্চত উপৱিষ্ট হৈছে৷ কাষত ‘টোষ্টে’ তেওঁক এগৰাকী য়ুৱালিনি মাতৃয়ে দিয়া ‘বীজ’ৰ বাকচটো লৈ আছে৷ জীৱনৰ বীজ এগৰাকী নাৰীৰ পৰা আন এগৰাকী নাৰীয়ে উত্তৰাধিকাৰসূত্ৰে গ্ৰহণ কৰিছে৷





ফিউৰিচাৰ শৈশৱকালীন অভিজ্ঞতাৰ ‘সেউজীয়া ঠাই’৷ যি ইতিমধ্যে পাৰমানৱিক শক্তিৰ ধ্বংসকামী ব্যৱহাৰত নষ্ট হৈ গৈছে৷ এক বিষাক্ত পৰিবেশ৷





ইমৰটান জ’ৰ কৱলত থকা মাতৃসকল যাক মাতৃদুগ্ধ উৎপাদনৰ আহিলা হিচাপে ব্যৱহাৰ কৰা হৈছিল৷ জীৱনদায়িনী দুগ্ধ দিয়া এই নাৰী সকলেই প্ৰজাৰ বাবে ইমৰটান জ’ৰ পানীৰ ভাণ্ডাৰ ৰাইজৰ বাবে খুলি দিছে৷





য়ুৱালিনি বাইক৷ বিভিন্ন গছলতাৰ বীজৰ উপৰিও জীৱন ধাৰণৰ প্ৰায় সামগ্ৰীয়ে এই মটৰ বাইকখনত উপলব্ধ৷ শেষত য়ুৱালিনি মাতৃসকলে মেক্সক এনে এখন বাইক উপহাৰ দিয়ে৷





ইলেক্ট্ৰিক গীটাৰ বজাই থকা এজন যুদ্ধবাজসকলক প্ৰমোদ দিয়া সেনা৷ এটি চৰিত্ৰটিৰ অন্তভুক্তিয়ে চলচ্চিত্ৰখনত এক কমিক অনুষংগৰ সৃষ্টি কৰে ইয়াৰ মোহময় উপস্থাপনৰ দ্বাৰা৷ ইমৰটান জ’ৰ সেনা বাহিনীত এনে এটা hard rock, heavy metal band ও থাকে৷ তেওঁলোকে অনবৰত সংগীত বজাই থাকে, যুদ্ধ চলি থকা সময়তো৷





পৰিচালক জৰ্জ মিলাৰ (সোঁফালে), এখেতৰ সজীৱ, প্ৰাণৱন্ত আৰু প্ৰজ্ঞাৰ ফলশ্ৰুতিতেই ‘Mad max- Fury road’ এখন বাংময় তথা বিশিষ্ট চলচ্চিত্ৰ হিচাপে পৰিগণিত হৈছে৷ লগত প্ৰখ্যাত চিনেমাট’গ্ৰাফাৰ জন চিল (বাওঁফালে), যিয়ে কমলা ৰঙৰ প্ৰাধান্য দি চলচ্চিত্ৰখনৰ দৃশ্যসমূহ জীৱন্ত আৰু বহল কেনভাচত মৰুভূমিৰ ৰুক্ষতা প্ৰকট কৰি তুলিছে৷

Richness of urban minds and mystical smell "MOHMOHIYA "

In memory of Comrade Amalendu Guho

Nagendra narayan Chaudhuri, prolific writer from Assam, what I know (or said in lighter note by NNC) that he was indulging in writing because of putting Goalpara in main stream Assam against ignorance and to connect it culturally with main stream Assam. The Second science fiction story in Assamese language was written by him and I still hold that "Rokhayan" is still best of 3 science stories in Assamese language till now. The urge to write in "main stream sanskritized Assamese" is justified as it was time of renascence period of modern Assamese nationalism.

And later many prominent writers from lower Assam put their contribution to Assamese literature. ie - in language of main stream "ASSAMESE".

But with sociopolitical changes, ethnic uprising, conflicts, influences of neo economic liberal economy etc,, we are witnessing an era of uprising and identity crisis around the world. So Northeast India also part of those many changes and unrest. Obviously in this whole process of global phenomenon, regional literature and cultural activities are under attack and under influences of neo-globalization.

In counter action in various fields in various countries, awareness, consciousness of new bourgeoisie, a progressive flow is evolved through in this process.

If Nagendra Narayan Chaudhuri had written for a cause, we have seen Shilobhadra, Mamoni roysom Goswami were came out with another conscious innovative efforts in their writings. They incorporated local, colloquial languages in their writings and experimented with it. Saurav Kumar Chaliha had written a story with full colloquial language , probably 1rst one to understand richness of these many colloquial languages of Assam, gave due respect to all these colloquial languages with his story" Hahichompa" and open a way to others or for future generation. 

We see here two important factors in action.

Cultural hegemony and counter action of Subalterns. 

"The initial, theoretic application of cultural domination was as a Marxist analysis of economic class (base and superstructure), which Antonio Gramsci developed to comprehend social class; hence, cultural hegemony proposes that the prevailing cultural norms of a society, which are imposed by the ruling class (bourgeois cultural hegemony), must not be perceived as natural and inevitable, but must be recognized as artificial social constructs (institutions, practices, beliefs, et cetera) that must be investigated to discover their philosophic roots as instruments of social-class domination. Hegemony is the geopolitical method of indirect imperial dominance, with which the hegemony (leader state) rules subordinate states, by the threat of intervention, an implied means of power, rather than by direct military force — that is, invasion, occupation, and annexation. Which is practice by imperialist order and neo liberal elite ruling class of every countries in this world."

So anything we see in day to day life that resembles above words, yes.. we are witnessing it in every hour of our life. Lumpen cultural practices are dominating and ruling the society and states are in stand by. Intellectuals have became pimps and opportunist. 

The crisis of bourgeoisie is gone far deep, its suffocating for mass. The crisis in bourgeoisie lead to other dysfunctional syndromes of existing society, from moral and cultural degradation etc to all kind of mess. 

There is nothing left for the whole majority of poor working class and peasants, only to do "halla boll", revolt against humiliations, to protest against in injustice.

"In Marxist theory, the civil sense of the term subaltern was first used by the Italian Communist intellectual Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937). In discussions of the meaning of the "subaltern" in Gramsci's writings, Spivak and others have argued that he used the word as a synonym for the proletariat (a code-word to deceive the prison censor to allow his manuscripts out the prison), but this interpretation has been contested, with evidence indicating that it was a novel concept in Gramsci's political theory. In several essays, the postcolonial critic Homi K. Bhabha, emphasized the importance of social power relations in defining subaltern social groups as oppressed, racial minorities whose social presence was crucial to the self-definition of the majority group; as such, subaltern social groups, nonetheless, also are in a position to subvert the authority of the social groups who hold hegemonic power."

"The Eurocentric discourse on Africa is in error, because those foundational paradigms, which inspired the study, in the first place, were rooted in the denial of African agency; political intellectualism bent on its own self-affirmation, rather than objective study. " — The Removal of Agency from Africa , this is true same way to Asia, and to Assam also.

In a simple way if Eurocentric, USAcentric "khana, pina, gana, nasna" etc embedded to bourgeoisie all the way, its created a relay race among bourgeois of all societies that divided under nationalism.

Trotsky illustrating the concept of "Uneven and combined development"

"...the entire history of mankind is governed by the law of uneven development. Capitalism finds various sections of mankind at different stages of development, each with its profound internal contradictions. The extreme diversity in the levels attained, and the extraordinary unevenness in the rate of development of the different sections of mankind during the various epochs, serve as the starting point of capitalism. Capitalism gains mastery only gradually over the inherited unevenness, breaking and altering it, employing therein its own means and methods. In contrast to the economic systems which preceded it, capitalism inherently and constantly aims at economic expansion, at the penetration of new territories, the surmounting of economic differences, the conversion of self-sufficient provincial and national economies into a system of financial interrelationships. Thereby it brings about their rapprochement and equalizes the economic and cultural levels of the most progressive and the most backward countries. Without this main process, it would be impossible to conceive of the relative leveling out, first, of Europe with Great Britain, and then, of America with Europe; the industrialization of the colonies, the diminishing gap between India and Great Britain, and all the consequences arising from the enumerated processes upon which is based not only the program of the Communist International but also its very existence. By drawing the countries economically closer to one another and leveling out their stages of development, capitalism, however, operates by methods of its own, that is to say, by anarchistic methods which constantly undermine its own work, set one country against another, and one branch of industry against another, developing some parts of world economy while hampering and throwing back the development of others. Only the correlation of these two fundamental tendencies – both of which arise from the nature of capitalism – explains to us the living texture of the historical process. Imperialism, thanks to the universality, penetrability, and mobility and the break-neck speed of the formation of finance capital as the driving force of imperialism, lends vigor to both these tendencies. Imperialism links up incomparably more rapidly and more deeply the individual national and continental units into a single entity, bringing them into the closest and most vital dependence upon each other and rendering their economic methods, social forms, and levels of development more identical. At the same time, it attains this “goal” by such antagonistic methods, such tiger-leaps, and such raids upon backward countries and areas that the unification and leveling of world economy which it has effected, is upset by it even more violently and convulsively than in the preceding epochs." - Leon Trotsky, The Third International After Lenin, part 1, section 4

To summarize above concept we witness:

[1) A more backward, primitive country would adopt parts of the culture of a more advanced, or more modern society, and a more advanced culture could also adopt or merge with parts of a more primitive culture – with good or bad effects. 

2) Cultural practices, institutions, traditions and ways of life belonging to both very old and very new epochs and phases of human history were all combined, juxtaposed and linked together in a rather unique way, within one country. 

3) In turn, this meant that one could not really say that different societies all developed simply through the same sort of linear sequence of necessary developmental stages, but rather that they could adopt/utilize the results of developments reached elsewhere, without going through all the previous evolutionary stages which led up to those results. Some countries could thus "skip", "telescope" or "compress" developmental stages which other countries took hundreds of years to go through, or, very rapidly carry through a modernization process that took other countries centuries to achieve. 

4) Different countries could both aid or advance the socio-economic progress of other countries through trade, subsidies and contributing resources, or block and brake other countries as competitors from making progress by preventing the use of capital, technology, trading routes, labour, land or other kinds of resources. 

5) In Trotsky's theory of imperialism, the domination of one country by another does not mean that the dominated country is prevented from development altogether, but rather that it develops mainly according to the requirements of the dominating country. For example, an export industry will develop around mining and farm products in the dominated country, but the rest of the economy is not developed, so that the country's economy becomes more unevenly developed than it was before, rather than achieving balanced development. Or, a school system is set up with foreign assistance, but the schools teach only the messages that the dominating country wants to hear. 

6) The main tendencies and trends occurring at the level of world society as a whole, could be also found in each separate country, where they combined with unique local trends – but this was a locally specific “mix”, so that some world trends asserted themselves more strongly or faster, others weaker and slower in each specific country. Thus, a country could be very advanced in some areas of activity, but at the same time comparatively retarded in other areas. One effect was that the response to the same events of world significance could be quite different in different countries, because the local people attached different "weightings" to experiences and therefore drew different conclusions.] 

Now in this above situation, 

"Lokhaitara" by Priynka Das and "The chair" by Pradyumno kumar gogoi are fresh wind and cool lime juice for hot days in summer.

Both stands completely at opposite side, but at the same time two significant innovative intuitions are unfold, two bonded by dialectics. Both determined and constructive in their approach. Both careless to limping literature, able to create flawless tales for readers.

"Lokhaitara" is unleashed the journey again that once Saurav Kumar Chaliha initiated. Its like a traditional takeover. Priyanka das is locating and start building a bridge to its reader layers on layers in her verses. Colloquial expressions tend to sneak in as writers, being part of a society, are influenced by the way people speak in that society. Naturally, they are bound to add colloquial expressions in their vocabulary. However, writers use such expressions intentionally too as it gives their works a sense of realism, this is something Shilobhadra and MRG had practiced. But Priyanka Das has chosen the path of "Hahichompa" to establish "Kamrupia, Goalporia, Koch rajbongsi" etc as all can be mode of totalitarian expression. A geographical diverse Diaspora /phenomenon like Northeast India will be flourish only by healthy development of all spoken language/dialect of many communities and use of Colloquial languages in literature, film etc or in any art forms from this Diaspora. Interestingly this process is complete opposite to that NNC had once want to establish. Just to remember also "Ningni Bhaoria" also, an wonderful our own Charlie Chaplin, a vagabond character in "Goalporia" literature which never got its due from main stream, probably never attempted in film, theatre etc.

"Lokhaitara" a river came as a metaphor, it has provocation, storylines in many dimensions. Socio Political annotation, rudeness in narrative, yet very sensitive outlook, hurried but short objective words play is demonstrated with confidence of writer . This "verse" has gone to many parts... like "Lokhaitara" 1, 2, 3 etc.....disclosed seriousness in approach of writer, love for mother tongue and own land, loyalty to a language with a deep sense of responsibility. First, with its first layer, that language, reader will be hit back by its language. Because we are usually not prepared to accept what can be described as counter subalterns view. We are entitled to accept only ..only main stream or whispered daily by bigger cooperates power to live through under cultural hegemony of cultural imperialism. Yes, if a reader able cross the barrier of the language of this verse or unlock the usual mind set, he/she may be allowed to step in next phase of "Lokhaitara", that is content. When one hooked in the content he/she probably able swim in lyrical ocean of its narrative, so words now slowly, gradually unveiled to reader, it will awaken and teleport reader to another realm. Now hang on there, and listen, sound of the river, sense the rawness of soil and possibly in this phase the reader will be connected to the realm of "Lokhaitara". 

"Lokheitara pugly", "lokheitarai dhowa dag" and "aar ekbar lokheitara" are metaphorical, beautiful emblem of a river, providing an abstract or representational pictorial image that represents a concept, like a moral truth, or an allegory, or a love tale of an young couple, a society.

বগা ঢকঢকে চাদৰখান মেলি

ব্লেক এন্ড হোৱাইট সপোনটু উৰে যায়৷

পিছে পিছে লখেইতৰাই দাউৰে৷

থাপমাৰি ধৰা সপোনটু পিছলি যায়৷ 

ভাগেৰি-জুগেৰি 

কেকো-জেকোকৈ 

লখেইতৰাই চায় থাকে সপোনটু৷ 

"Lokheitara pugly" is a wonderful representation of a river in human form, a restless, wild and independent soul. Someone wild at heart, free by soul.

Lokheitara is running after a "black and white" dream, in this colorful world "black and white" dream is a choice. She has refused "colors". For her those imposed colors are just river mud, she never has care for them.

A sensual expression for a clear, transparent dream and freedom. Lokheitara, the river wish to fly, because she believe" the dream" has a sky. More then live of a shadowy river with mud, she has willingness to escape for sunshine and rain.

flow of lokheitara is halted by another reality. The dream became an irony.

সপোনটুৰ আকাশ এখান আছে৷ 

বৈৰহান পৰে,ৰ'দ দেই৷ 

সেই বৈৰহানোত লখেই ভিজে৷

টুপটুপা হৈ

আতাঘাটিকে 

আৰু দাউৰে

ব্লেক এন্ড হোৱাইটটুৰ পিছে পিছে ৷ 

বৈৰহানোৰ পিছোৰ ৰ'দটুৰ কথা 

লখেইৰ খেয়ালোত নাহে৷

ৰ'দটুৰ জিভেই চেলকি নিয়া

শুখে কৰাল বান্ধা 

লখেইৰ ৰূপ দেখি

লখেই নিজে কান্দে৷

She is trying to manage her own perish and start a complete negation with herself.

ইপাৰে-সিপাৰে

হাবিয়ে-জংঘালে

কান্দানটু বাজি থাকে৷

ৰৈ ৰৈ৷

ফাটা ঢোল এটা কুবেই 

লখেই কান্দানটু নুশনা হবা খোজে৷

Lokheitara, who live through a black and white dream, in a contradictory reality sunshine mocked her, rain forgot her, she is called now as "witch" ,"insane lokheitara".

Her freedom is buried.

From - :lokheitarai dhowa dag"

ধান শুখেবাৰ দিপ্ৰে 

চোকা ৰ'দ জাকতকৰিও চোকা নখটুইদি

সি আচৰি দিছিল তাইৰ ফাটা চোলাটুইদি অলে থাকা বগা মঙাহখেন্তি ৷

Sensual words play is curated here with wild erotic undertone. The aggression and submission both in display. In a casual harsh day , hot sun up there, those forces of nature strikes physically two organism, two living beings with opposite sex in wilderness. The act of original sins.

ৰঙা পৰা চিনটো পিহি পিহি ফিৰদিনা তাই পানীত নামছিল,

লখেইতৰাত ৷

ধুই নিবা দিছিল লখেইতৰাক ৰঙাৰ পে কজলে পৰা দাগটু ৷ 

লখেইতৰাই বুজলাক !

মানুহগিলাই নুবুজলাক ৷

তাইৰ দাগটু চাবাকলেগি সেহঁতোৰ টানা-আজৰাত আৰু এটা দাগ হ'ল,

তাইৰ কইলজেত ৷

বুকুৰ ভিতেৰোত ৷

In a calmness after thunderstorm, she submitted herself to "Lokheitara". Water, the original source of life, she has merged in there in a lonely act. Conflict is evolved between the fear for constituted, manipulative social strata in a specific time of history and temptation, longingness, she is bestowed upon by nature. . She is condemned for life.

Probably since time of "Draupodi", she is carrying a scar, the time when dwindling matriarchy is taken over by patriarchy till now.

Remembering that famous feminist jab "Fat diya basumoti patale lukau", from story of Sita's returning to earth here as resembles to this verse. We see, Sita, A female deity of agricultural fertility, according to the Ramayana, Sita was discovered in a furrow when Janaka was ploughing. Sita is considered to be the child of the Mother Earth, produced by the union between the king and the land. Sita is a personification of the Earth's fertility, abundance, and well-being.

After humiliation caused by Lord Rama, Sita sought final refuge in the arms of her mother earth. Hearing her plea for release from an unjust world and from a life that had rarely been happy, the Earth dramatically split open, appeared in form of a woman and took Sita away.

গইধলাবেলা মায়েকে বহি থাকলাক

লখেইতৰাৰ পাৰোত ৷

লখেইতৰাক শাও দি ৷ 

ফিৰদিনা লখেইতৰাই তাইক

তুলি ধৰলাক উপেৰোত ৷

ধুৱেই-পখলেই…

দাগটু নহা কৰি -- 

কইলজেৰটু ৷ 

মায়েকে তিত্তেও শাও দি থাকলাক ৷

আজিও দেই! 

লখেইতৰাক ৷

Empathetic view of mother here in this verse at the same time we see anguish, its helplessness of women in a patriarchal society. 

ইত্তেও কেতেবা লখেইতৰা গন্ধে ৷ 

তাই তাই !!!

Her body is drowned and later is floated above Lokheitara. Ultimately she became Lokheitara, the river.

From : "aru ekbar lokheitara."

সৰু বাঁহীটুত ওঁঠ দুটে লগেই

সি সুৰ তুলছিল ভালপাৱাৰ৷

নদীৰ সিপাৰে কাপোৰ ধুই থাকা তাই

শুনে

মনে মনে৷ 

মিচিক-মাচাক কে তাইৰ ওঁঠোত

ভালপাৱাৰ হাঁহি৷ 

A tale of murder, mystery and politics is carried by Lokheitara.

We can witness richness of word power in this "Kamrupia Langauge". In deliberation we can argue that which way main stream Assamese language wish to evolve? Retaining Its current sanskritized version or is it ready to embrace all other colloquial languages of Assam? Answer is almost negative. An initiative taken by Dr Devabrat Sarma, as "Oxomiya jatiya abhidhan" with inclusion of many colloquial languages of Assam. It is late approach toward build a progressive nationality, but an important approach to give respect to colloquial languages of Assam.

তাৰ সুৰটুই ঠন ধৰে…

মহমহকে গোন্ধ এটা উঠে

দুয়োৰ' মাজোত৷

What will be the smell of a couple when they are deeply in a relationship? This "Kamrupia Langauge" is provide us a word "MOH-MOHAI". Its prolific, phonically beautiful. 

সি জানা নাছিল 

কোনো মাও বা গুৱেভাৰাক…

জংঘালোৰ মাজোত অধিকাৰ বিচৰাৰ 

হেপাঁহো নাছিল তাৰ

সি চিনি প নাছিল কোনো 

জলফেই ৰঙোৰ পোছাক পিন্ধা 

তেজেইদি হাত ধোৱা মানুহ৷ 

কলপইতে ৰঙোৰ সোপান এটাহে 

দেখছিল সি 

লখেইতৰাৰ পাৰোত 

তাইৰ লগোত৷ 

Lokheitara makes ripple through socio political scenario of Assam also. Static rhythm of life torn apart by collateral damages. The man play flute ultimately decide to become revolutionary, who wish to wear olive green trouser and shirts (or freedom fighter) with out knowing name of Mao and Che Guevara. But He is killed for his desire to become revolutionary by those gun men. He is hunted down finally.

সেটু পাৰে তাইৰ মুখোত সোপা দি

ৰঙগিলা তাইৰ পে আজৰি লৈ গুচি গেছিল সেহাঁত…

দমৰাটুই কিন্তু হেম্বেই আছিল৷

লখেইতৰাও বৈ আছিল

বোবা হৈ৷ 

জোতাৰ গচাকোত ভাঙা বাঁহীটু

বুকুত সামেৰি সুতেৰি লৈ 

তাই মোলান পৰা আত্মাটু চোঁচৰেই গুচি গেল তাৰ পে৷ 

Story continues something similar way as stories of states that controlled by AFPSA law , she is taken to jungle, raped, colors of her life is snatched brutally. Another story of "Manoroma" is mirrored probably. Dumped, crushed and silenced.A man who played flute is silenced.

গোন্ধখিনি কিন্তু থাকি গেল

মহমহেই…

একেই গোন্ধ

একেই পানী

একেই বতাহোত কঁপা

চাদৰোৰ মেথেনি 

কিন্তু নাছিল 

গণ্ডাই-গণ্ডাই সৰি পৰা 

তাই আৰু তাৰ 

মিচিক-মাচাক হাঁহি !! 

But that smell "Mohmohai" is retained. The smell "Mohmohai", the splendor of antiquity is keep possessing others, light up hearts eternally. 

In this case, in this era when a society is failed to see laughter of young people that accumulated in high size, its then collective failures of a zombie society, which is thoroughly became impotent and opportunistic.

"Lokheitara" saga is goes on, author of Lokheitara have written other more verses of Lokheitara.

Now lets look in another literary piece "The chair" by Pradyumno kumar Gogoi. 

Its an wonderful observation and intelligent creation. Probably I have not read in Assamese language such emblematic representation of media frenzy world and accurate appropriation of current propaganda model so intelligibly and as a profound literary piece which has ability to claim its authority on time. 

মানুহজনৰ ঘৰত এখনো চকী নাই। এদিন তেওঁৰ চকীত বহিবলৈ মন গ'ল। সেয়ে তেওঁ চকী এখন বনাবলৈ অৰ্ডাৰ দিয়ালে। চকীত বহাৰো বিভিন্ন ধৰণ আছে- গাটো হলাই অথবা আঁউজি মূৰটো ওপৰলৈ কৰি, ভৰি দুটা তুলি লৈ মুখখন আঁঠু দুটাত গুজি, অথবা ভৰি দুটা মাটিত থৈ ,... , ... ...- মানুহজনে ভাবিবলৈ ধৰিলে চকীখন সাজি হোৱাৰ পাছত কেনেদৰে বহিব!

"self-reflexiveness, metafiction, eclecticism, redundancy, multiplicity, discontinuity, intertextuality, parody, the dissolution of character and narrative instance, the erasure of boundaries, and the destabilization of the reader" , these are characteristics of postmodernism and one might attribute to literary magic realism also.

"The chair ", a story deploys the ambiguity and dubious narrator characteristic of modernism, along with some suspense and humor elements. the story, in reading whose meaning could change dramatically depending on his/her belief on social system on each reading, one may argued further for socio-economic aspect of the story. 

[A postmodern literary work tends not to conclude with the neatly tied-up ending as is often found in modernist literature . Postmodern authors tend to celebrate chance over craft, and further employ a style self-consciously and systematically draw attention to a work's status as an artifact. It poses questions about the relationship between fiction and reality, usually using irony and self-reflection to undermine the writer's authority. Another characteristic of postmodern literature is the questioning of distinctions between high and low culture through the use of pastiche, the combination of subjects and genres not previously deemed fit for literature.]

So they intend to became "pogha singa moh, ji sab tohilong korar moti goti rakhe".

পাছদিনাখনৰ ঘৰৰ গাৰ্ডেনত, বাৰান্দাত মানুহজনক চকীখনত বহি থকা দেখা গ'ল। ৰাস্তাৰে পাৰ হৈ যোৱা সকলোৱে তেওঁক গাড়ীৰ গ্লাচ নমাই অভিবাদন-অভিনন্দন জনাই থৈ যায়, পুলিচবিলাকে চেল্যুট আৰু ঠেলাৱালাবিলাকে ভৰি মালিচ কৰি দিয়েহি। বেণ্ডপাৰ্টিবিলাক তেওঁৰ ঘৰ পায় হৈ যাওঁতে প্ৰশস্তি গাই যায়। চিত্ৰশিল্পীবিলাকে পদূলীত ৰৈ ঘণ্টা ধৰি তেওঁৰ ছবি আঁকি পাৰ কৰে আৰু ফটোগ্ৰাফাৰবিলাকে বিভিন্ন এংগোলত ফটো উঠায়। মানুহজনে নিৰ্বিকাৰ চাৱনীৰে সকলোকে সন্তুষ্ট কৰে।

We found Kafkaesque element in "the chair", "the chair" apply real-life occurrences and situations that are incomprehensibly complex and illogical. The hopelessness and absurdity as emblematic of existentialism are seen in the story. Themes of alienation and persecution although present in "the chair", reading "the chair" while focusing on the futility of characters' struggles reveals writer's play of humour, writer of the story is not necessarily commenting on problems, but rather pointing out how people tend to invent problems. It is noticed writer has created malevolent, absurd worlds in his other creations also and it can be proposed that writer's inspirations for characteristic situations came both from growing up in a megalomaniac media frenzy and living in a bourgeois democratic state.

ৰেকৰ্ডিং ষ্টুডিঅ', এফ.এম.বিলাক তেওঁৰ প্ৰশস্তিগীতবোৰেৰে উত্তাল হৈ থাকিল, তেওঁৰ নামত অজস্ৰ চিৰিয়েল উলাল, 'বহিখোৱা' নামেৰে চিনেমা নিৰ্মাণ হৈ উলাল- ব্লেকত টিকট বিক্ৰী হ'ল আৰু ব্লেকাৰবিলাকে কেইবাদিনলৈ ভগৱানৰ সলনি তেওঁৰ নাম লৈ থাকিল, আলোচনীবিলাকৰ কবিতা শিতানত তেওঁৰ প্ৰশস্তিসমূহে আলোড়ন সৃষ্টি কৰিলে, একঝিবিশ্যন ৱালবিলাক তেওঁ চকীত বহি থকাৰ ফটোগ্ৰাফী-পেইণ্টিঙেৰে ভৰি পৰিল, গুণমুগ্ধসকলে ডাইনিং ৰুমবিলাক তেওঁৰ ছবিৰে সজাবলৈ লাগিল।

'বহিখোৱা' নামেৰে এটা ট্ৰেণ্ড-ফেশ্যনৰ সৃষ্টি হ'ল।

জুইশলা বাকচৰ পৰা চিমেণ্ট কোম্পানীৰ এডভাৰটাইজলৈকে চকীৰ ছবি দেখা গ'ল- মজবুত চেয়াৰ কে লিয়ে মজবুত ফাউণ্ডেশ্যন। বাতৰী কাকতৰ চাৰ্কুলেশ্যন-নিউজ চেনেলৰ টিআৰপি তেওঁৰ ওপৰত নিৰ্ভৰ কৰা হ'ল। অফিচ-বজাৰ-বাছষ্টেণ্ড-বাৰ-বেশ্যালয়-মদৰ আড্ডা জমি উঠিল। মদাহীবিলাকে মাজৰাতি তেওঁৰ নামত দম্ভালি মাৰি ফুৰিলে। তেওঁৰ নাম লটাৰী খেলা হ'ল।

The story include instances in which media overpower people, often in a surreal, nightmarish milieu which evokes feelings of senselessness, disorientation, and helplessness. Characters in the story setting often lack a clear course of action to escape a rabbit hole situation. Now fascism continues to seep into today’s political events and consciousness in a way that means that it is absolutely necessary to strike back. And that is the point, the story evaluates that people are trapped as being obsessives and yet coporates media/bureaucracy/ruling class are performing a vital public service in preventing all of us from thinking that we, as a nation and people, are somehow better than others and that we therefore have some inalienable right to rule.

এদিন ৰাতিপুৱা তেওঁৰ ঘৰৰ আগত গোটখোৱা গুণমুগ্ধ-ফটোগ্ৰাফাৰ-সাংবাদিক-চিত্ৰকৰসকলে আৱিষ্কাৰ কৰিলে- বহিখোৱাই হাস্যকৰভাৱে ভৰি আঁউজা চকীখনত ভৰি দুটা 'দ'ৰ দৰে ভাঁজ কৰি বহাখনত মূৰটো থৈ শুই আছে। গুণমুগ্ধসকলে হাঁহি হাঁহি বাগৰি পৰিল, ৰাস্তাৰে পাৰ হৈ যোৱা গাড়ীবিলাকৰ গ্লাচ গুচাই মানুহবিলাকে মানুহজনক লৈ কৌতুক কৰিলে, পুলিচ-ঠেলাৱালাবিলাকে হাঁহি মুখেৰে চাদা মোহাৰি মোহাৰি পায়চাৰি কৰি ফুৰিলে, বেণ্ডপাৰ্টিবিলাকে হাস্যকৰ গান এটা ঠাওকতে সাজি পৰিৱেশন কৰিলে, ৰেকৰ্ডিং ষ্টুডিঅ'-এফ.এম.বিলাকত হাস্যকৰ গানেৰে উত্তাল হৈ পৰিল, তেওঁৰ নামত অজস্ৰ ব্যংগ চিৰিয়েল উলাল, 'বহিখোৱা ৰিটাৰ্ণছ' নামৰ ব্যংগ চিনেমা নিৰ্মাণ হ'ল আৰু ব্লেকত টিকট বিক্ৰী হ'ল, একজিবিশ্যন ৱালবিলাক বিভিন্ন হাস্যকৰ পেইণ্টিং-ফটোগ্ৰাফীৰে ভৰি পৰিল, গুণমুগ্ধবিলাকে তেওঁৰ শুই থকা হাস্যকৰ ফটোসমুহ শোৱাৰুমত আঁৰি ৰাখিলে, আলোচনীসমূহত ব্যংগ কবিতাই আলোড়ন তুলিলে, নিউজ চেনেলসমূহত হাস্য-ব্যংগানুষ্ঠান পৰিৱেশন হ'ল, বাতৰি কাকতত কাৰ্টুন ছাপা হ'ল, অফিচ-বজাৰ-বাছ ষ্টেণ্ড-বাৰ-মদৰ আদ্দাবিলাক কৌতুক-গজৱেৰে ভৰি পৰিল... ... ...

Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman have established a "propaganda model" which purports to explain this bias.

"The hypothesis is that the process is decentralized and operates as a confluence of factors, that includes the overt pressure from owners and advertisers,but also by the gradual internalization of the biases and values of the corporate owners, leading to self-censorship. Other factors include the tendency of journalists to avoid doing original research, instead obtaining news from the same few wire services."

Bagdikian notes that in the 1980s, "less than 1 percent of all corporations, have 87 percent of all sales. [The corporates] are the aristocrats of the American Industrial economy; the remaining 359,500, in terms of their national power, are the peasantry." This conflict continues to arise as "dominant media companies are further [integrating] into the ruling forces of the economy." The directorates of major companies interlock with others and control the content of multiple dominating media and information distribution (i.e., newspapers, magazines, radio and television companies, book publishers, film industries, and even multinational banking investors). They become directly influenced by still other powerful industry, creating the "Endless Chain" of mass media and economic aristocracy (Wardrip-Fruin, 479).

First presented in their 1988 book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, 

[the propaganda model views the private media as businesses interested in the sale of a product—readers and audiences—to other businesses (advertisers) rather than that of quality news to the public. Describing the media's "societal purpose", Chomsky writes, "... the study of institutions and how they function must be scrupulously ignored, apart from fringe elements or a relatively obscure scholarly literature".

The theory postulates five general classes of "filters" that determine the type of news that is presented in news media. These five classes are: Ownership of the medium, Medium's funding sources, Sourcing Flak and Anti-communism and fear ideology."]

"The chair" proclaim here that it seems enjoy to stepped in as opposite side and ready to face them unquestionably and unconditionally. 

It is witnessed many writers/artist/filmmaker/socio political critic etc from new generation in various field already are taking the grip firm-way. Literature, film, poetry etc from NE States in safe hands and they refused to do "sorbit sorvan" ....damn ..some real bad ass boys n girls....... :P

no way out from conformism, opportunism and careerist engagement in creative filed , but to establish a forward looking dynamic culture should be in agenda.

Kardom :)

[quoted text are taken from Internet source]

Statement by Women’s and Progressive Groups and Individuals Condemning Sexual Violence and Opposing Death Penalty

DECEMBER 24, 2012

On 16 December, 2012, a 23-year old woman and her friend hailed a bus at a crossing in South Delhi. In the bus, they were both brutally attacked by a group of men who claimed to be out on a ‘joy-ride’. The woman was gang raped and the man beaten up; after several hours, they were both stripped and dumped on the road. While the young woman is still in hospital, bravely battling for her life, her friend has been discharged and is helping identify the men responsible for the heinous crime.

We, the undersigned, women’s, students’ and progressive groups and concerned citizens from around the country, are outraged at this incident and, in very strong terms, condemn her gang rape and the physical and sexual assault.

As our protests spill over to the streets all across the country, our demands for justice are strengthened by knowing that there are countless others who share this anger. We assert that rape and other forms of sexual violence are not just a women’s issue, but a political one that should concern every citizen. We strongly demand that justice is done in this and all other cases and the perpetrators are punished. 

This incident is not an isolated one; sexual assault occurs with frightening regularity in this country. Adivasi and dalit women and those working in the unorganised sector, women with disabilities, hijras, kothis, trans people and sex workers are especially targeted with impunity – it is well known that the complaints of sexual assault they file are simply disregarded. We urge that the wheels of justice turn not only to incidents such as the Delhi bus case, but to the epidemic of sexual violence that threatens all of us. We need to evolve punishments that act as true deterrents to the very large number of men who commit these crimes. Our stance is not anti-punishment but against the State executing the death penalty. The fact that cases of rape have a conviction rate of as low as 26% shows that perpetrators of sexual violence enjoy a high degree of impunity, including being freed of charges.

Silent witnesses to everyday forms of sexual assault such as leering, groping, passing comments, stalking and whistling are equally responsible for rape being embedded in our culture and hence being so prevalent today. We, therefore, also condemn the culture of silence and tolerance for sexual assault and the culture of valorising this kind of violence.

We also reject voices that are ready to imprison and control women and girls under the garb of ‘safety’, instead of ensuring their freedom as equal participants in society and their right to a life free of perpetual threats of sexual assault, both inside and outside their homes. 

In cases (like this) which have lead to a huge public outcry all across the country, and where the perpetrators have been caught, we hope that justice will be speedily served and they will be convicted for the ghastly acts that they have committed. However, our vision of this justice does not include death penalty, which is neither a deterrent nor an effective or ethical response to these acts of sexual violence. We are opposed to it for the following reasons: