In his own enigmatic way, Christopher Okigbo, in a well-known poem, claims that the “eye that looks down will surely see the nose; / The finger that fits should be used to pick the nose”. His concern had much to do with the Biafran war, the conflict between tribes, secessionist struggles, and the possibility of a unified Nigeria. In many ways, the situation in Sri Lanka is different, but we too are in the process of assessing the past and charting ways in which the future will ensure that the tragedies of the past will not be repeated.

Almost seventeen months have passed since the defeat of the LTTE, and the triumphalism that inevitably followed the victory has given way to sober reflection. It is hardly surprising that many of the essays and short stories in this issue are, in one form or another, about finding ways to understand the past, review the present, and plan for the future. In some essays, the connection is implicit, and in others it is more direct. The fact is that if conflict remained a dominant motif in the past two decades, reconciliation is a constant theme in the present. The model of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission offers itself as a possible paradigm, although the historical trajectory of South Africa is a far cry from the history of Sri Lanka.

The essays seem to imply that ultimately the central concern is not, or should not be, about peeling away layers of history until some kernel of truth is found. Such truths, even if they do exist, often lead to a politics of blame. They perpetuate a cycle of incompatible and mutually exclusive stances. Since we cannot understand the past with any degree of certainty, we construct them to complement our own perspectives. Instead, what is needed is the capacity to understand the narratives of the past in order to shape the present. Whether the essays are about those who stood firm in their convictions or about economic choices, the major concern is about transcending an ultimately futile identity politics and adopting a vision that accommodates all and alienates none.

Nethra Review believes in multiplicity, and encourages rigorous discussion. It is, however, reassuring that the submissions appear to endorse a fundamental vision of unity and progress.

Chelva Kanaganayakam

:                         Latest edition