Balram says about Ashok’s murder:
“I’m losing him, I thought, and this forced me to do something I knew I would hate myself for, even years later. I really didn’t want to do this—I really didn’t want to think, even in the two or three minutes he had left to live, that I was that kind of driver—the one that resorts to blackmailing his master—but he left me no options.” (pg. 243)
In this passage, Balram explains his ‘rationale’ for killing Ashok. Looking at this climactic excerpt, we clearly see that Adiga weaves some fundamental philosophic issues into his novel— free will, responsibility, morality, etc. For brevity’s sake, I will, of course, ignore the issue of Balram’s second person narration. Credibility and narrative indirection are not my current concerns.
Consider this passage from a linguistic/grammatical perspective. “I’m losing him, I thought, and this forced me to do something…” Balram’s thought about Ashok’s escape (from death) ‘forces him to do something…’ Let’s play with agency and rewrite that sentence. Balram is forced (by the thought of Ashok’s escape) to do something. With Balram as the subject, the sentence is passive. Passivity becomes a pattern in relation to his character. For a lack of a better phrase, things ‘are done’ to Balram. He says, “I really didn’t want to do this... but he left me no option.” The notion of passivity translates to philosophy. Balram’s explains his motivation by NOT having any motivational explanation. Apparently his only option is to blackmail and kill his master. Balram makes no ‘choice.’ He is a passive observer of the universe—just a thing among other things—being acted upon, but himself not acting. Before he stabs his master with the glass bottle, Balram says, "There is a problem, sir. You should have got a replacement a long time ago."--not the best 'hasta la vista, baby.'
Inherent to the general notion of free will is one’s ability ‘to choose.’ Presently, I am writing this blog. Concerning my future, I can either choose to (A) keep writing, or (B) stop writing. My ability to choose either A or B makes me free with regard to writing this blog. (I’ll choose “A,” of course, because I want to pass, but it is still my option to do “B.”) Analogously, Balram can either kill his master, or, not kill his master. But he protests about ‘wanting to do otherwise’ and having no other option. Balram says, in so many words, that he does not have free will. And without free will—without the ability to choose—a man has no control over his life. He has no options. He is a ‘thing,’ not a person.
Adiga knows this. These concepts are basic. The way he uses them is, however, technical and more complex. By denying his free will, Balram avoids responsibility. For how can he be responsible for doing something without volition? With no other options, he was forced (passive construction) to blackmail and murder his master. Doing otherwise, he claims, is beyond his power. And therefore we, as readers, as people with some sense of ethics or morality, have no way of holding Balram responsible for this offense. Without his free will, he was forced like a slave. And here is the great irony. Right after Ashok dies, Balram says, “I was a free man.” He denies his individual free will, thereby becoming a slave, in order to feel an inauthentic, even illusory perhaps, social sense of freedom. Balram defends himself against the adverse moral judgment for the murder of his master while, at the same time, makes sure to take credit for any moral commendation. Not to mention the red bag of cash. The situation is ironically absurd. He becomes a slave to free himself. He leaves the Darkness as a good person and comes to the Light as a murderer. You, you American bloggers, you want the moral of Balram’s story? Here it is: Money over Morality.
Please excuse my sloppiness. It’s getting late now—12:37 a.m.—and I am no poet or philosopher. I do, however, have four favorite philosophers. They’re all German, and are known as the greatest in history. They are Heidegger, Nietzsche, Liebnitz, and I forget the last. Hitler? Does that sound right? You can laugh now—it’s a fucking joke.
No comments:
Post a Comment