I have experienced the twenty-first century so far mainly in three domains. First is the experience of its celebration at the zero hour of 2000 in Nepal. The second is related to pedagogy especially the teaching of theory at the English departments, which includes the major critical and ideological theories mentioned later. The third is the chaos that is raging so early on. The storms that have been created by interventions, suppressions, expansions of territories, wars, business interests that include the selling of arms regardless of its impact, and at home the establishment of a republication state, promulgation of the constitution albeit stuck in parties’ intransigent positions. This third impact is also seen in refugees, chaos, resurgence of the old orders, erosion of democratic values and the justification of lies, post-truth era, surrealist politics and alternative truth.

A new beginning

For me, the twenty-first century came like light, ideas and challenges of a unique order. The first sun of the century spilled out, as it were, from the Himalayan peak as seen from Nagarkot. Sunrises on particular occasions are seen in groups; and seeing the heaven in temporal order reflects the communal spirit of mankind. In Nagarkot, though I am approaching 50, I was part of a ‘Youth’ Festival, but was later pacified when I saw Japanese ‘youths’ all above fifty who came to participate. This great moment was organised by an enterprising young man named Hari Lama. This century began with light and hope, melodies and poetry, and most importantly with new realms of theories that we introduced in the MA English curricula at the Central Department of English, and accepted the challenge to tackle them.

I was head of the Department then but all scholar colleagues worked with a wonderful team spirit. We were guided by a principle that in the twenty-first century we should look at our English department pedagogic practice from a new angle. It was no longer an ‘English’ department per se, it was a department of literature written in English wherever that was written, which included importantly, the South Asian and African writings in English. We offered several related options under each rubric of the course for students to choose from. But the most important part of the curricula was the incorporation of what is called ‘theory’ in the teaching programme, and was supported by our interdisciplinary programmes. A new sphere was opening up in the realms of theory in other departments and interestingly in discussions among the communist parties who invited us to talk on theories related to Marxism and curiously, on postmodernism.

The wheel of theory

For us introducing ‘theory’ was an in-house programme. We never thought when we were introducing structuralist, poststructuralist, modernist, postmodernist, Marxist, postcolonial theories, gender theories and stylistics, that these theories would shape the educational thinking of the humanities at the University. Importantly, we would have never imagined then that the above theories would be espoused by Nepali literary academics, critics and writers. In some cases the theories became mere noises and fashionable nomenclatures. One poet came with a collection for me to write a preface to that. But his condition surprised me to the core. He requested me to call him a postmodern not a modern poet. When I read his poems, I realised, they didn’t merit either of those features.

As to the use of theories, there was no problem in the English department, and I guess, there still is not. Now the English departments, quite a few now in Nepal, also teach ecological criticism and other newly developed theories with success. Students examine written and oral texts and write theses. But what drew me was when the theories were interpreted in Nepali language. Quite a few articles and a few books have been appearing in these areas. Some are written very well, but others especially some creative Nepali writers and academics bandy about the theories. I tell wherever I go to speak as a Nepali literary critic that creative writers do not write poems or fiction, plays or short stories by following a theory. That is wrong. Theories have ideological, epistemological, and stylistic contents with their origins in linguistics, anthropology, literary criticism, Marxism and other emerging issues. They provide yardsticks to judge literary writings. But badly interpreted texts in Nepali will obfuscate the readers. Scholars agree that when many people accept a certain practice as usable that becomes a culture. I think that explains the use of the theories in Nepali language literary writings. Both the nonchalant and enthusiastic misinterpretation of theories will create a strange culture in Nepali creative practices. I am familiar with somewhat similar experiences of Hindi writers, which I know from some writings and my contacts with the writers.

But another interesting lure of theory is seen among the communist ideologues of Nepal. I have been invited to talk about postmodernism in seminars attended by senior party comrades. I was surprised to see that the major theorists that we use for the literary pedagogy were used there. They were most interested in ‘Sokal hoax’, the incident of Sokal parodying texts and deceiving the postmodern scholars with that for fun and criticism. That hoax delighted the Marxists because to them postmodernism is but a hoax. But the question, what does the giant Marxist American literary theorist Fredric Jameson who has written extensively and seriously about postmodernism, say about this theory, had no plausible answer? I neither want to defend nor reject any of the theories introduced at the English department literary curricula, but to share my experience with regard to the use of theories in the place where I taught, and how I saw it as a critic in Nepali literature.

The twenty-first century that touched the rare Nepali mountains and valleys has seen seventeen turbulent years in Nepal and the world. The term ‘politically correct’ warranted by theories is now challenged vehemently even in the US. In Nepal one theory that is long and widely used is Marxism, and the other is postmodernism that is new and wildly bandied about. This century has given a teacher and writer like me, both metaphors and ideas to live with.