Skip to main content
Steve Chisnell

ChizBlog

Go Search
Home
ROHS Main Site
AP English Lit
ELA 10
Submitting Papers
Presentations
Art & Music
Books
Travels
Green
ChizBlog
Contact Me
  

Chiz Web > ChizBlog > Categories
Kathmandu

Kathmandu is sari’ed women riding side-saddle on Yamasaki motorcycles as they pass by Magar girls in low-hipped jeans. It is a young police officer cornered roughly and shoved against a bus panel as he tries to issue a traffic ticket.

A Rahani-era roundabout imitates Piccadilly Circus but has a crumbling concrete center, a tangle of rebar and empty Fanta bottles. A construction site is confused with the abandoned home beside it but for the bamboo scaffolding. “Green water” stands across the sidewalk in defiance of a determined sun.

Kathmandu is a random street sign, an absence of address, a young man selling Skype connections at two rupees per minute. It is a professor’s son attending Albion College in the fall on soccer scholarship, a midnight road block in Dhalilkehl extorting tourists.

Kathmandu has no tax base, no method to measure its random and scheduled power outages. It is the bearded man with pliers on a street pole, adding his own electrical wire to his home. It is three million people making karmic choices, but ignorant of or resigned to consequence.

Kathmandu is tour buses nudging motorbikes, a holy man copping coins for photos, it is a refuse pile left to rot if it was not burned last night. Kathmandu is freshly waxed UNDP vehicles passing beggar children and tie-clad students. Kathmandu is barbed wire clay walls and broken sandbags behind which bored military hide. Kathmandu is youth cadres itchy for change. It is 90 rupees a day is a good day. A can of cold Coke Light is 210 rupees at Hotel Himalaya.

Kathmandu is a teen couple groping secretly in a sweaty parking garage, black leather-clad men sitting and smoking warily in Durbar Square, it is a Buddhist monk playing checkers.

Kathmandu is a security light stapled to ancient palace timbers, the sound of thousands of pigeons, it is a hawker of silk bags and singing bowls. It is a thin cow picking from that unburned street trash, a fusion of caste and non-caste, it is a man carrying ten foot bags of linens secured by head straps.

Kathmandu is “Naturally Nepal” in 2011, a dusty straw-swept alley crawled by homeless men, it is a hidden sanctuary garden through that low gate over there.

Kathmandu is no air conditioning, no ice cubes, and no clear sidewalks. It is truck horns and bicycle bells and “Excuse me, sir, cheap price just for you.” Kathmandu is English-speaking and America-buying, it is Baskin Robbins next to its abandoned palace center and Bollywood videos selling pale-skinned sex appeal.

Kathmandu is miles of ancient and claustrophobic market streets selling pashmini silk and Mylar balloons, Buddha statues and boogie boards, open-capped water and warm Everest beer. Kathmandu is the quiet woman who wishes for 40 rupees to which the American replies, “I have no money.” Kathmandu is the butterscotch ice cream sold behind a neon sign.

Kathmandu is a monkey temple of prayer wheels overlooking a valley of stacked home-made apartments. It is a faded prayer flag, a newspaper of party politics posturings, and a whiff of barbecued corn from the woman grilling at the bus stop. It is a 1970s diesel bus packed with morose expressions.

Kathmandu is the family living beneath the plastic tarps against a stale river, it is the toothless woman plodding against the heat, the gum-chewing girl with ear buds and iPod.

It is a mass of questions seeking resolution, but without a foundation, a UC Berkeley education matched against a routine of bandh and nepotism. It is a Hindu school abandoned by a newly secular government, an argument of literacies and untouchables, it is influenza and dysentery. Kathmandu is the small boy in the stained Mickey Mouse t-shirt.

Kathmandu is a forever-deposed king reclusive in a worn palace, freshly-cleaned from his family’s slaughter. It is a wedding celebration of 20 hours, a loud brass band parading against traffic, it is a daily greeting of warmth and blessing.

Kathmandu is the dog with mange which imagines something better, it knows not what.

Oak Leaves

In ancient Greek legend, the cave-dwelling Cumaean Sibyl, a famous prophetess, wrote the future on a series of oak leaves.  However, every time supplicants came to ask of their fortunes, they would open the door to the cave and the West Wind would blow in, scattering the leaves.  Thus was the future known yet not known.

 

Caves of Cumae 

Much could be read of this frustration, of how we never know where we will end, of whether our efforts are worthwhile or will be doomed to failure—that we can hope for little more than failed communication.

 

The poet Shelley, too, lamented the problem of communication, suggesting in his “Ode to the West Wind” that tumultuous forces prevent our communication:

 

O WILD West Wind, thou breath of Autumn's being—  

Thou from whose unseen presence the leaves dead  

Are driven, like ghosts from an enchanter fleeing, (1-3)

Shelley’s ability to write, to reveal his experience, flees beyond his control.  However, I prefer the story of the Aeneid where, in seeking the Sibyl’s advice, the hero Aeneas has a simple solution:

 

Chant the sacred verses

With your own lips; do not trust them to the leaves,

The mockery of the rushing wind’s disorder (6:83-85).

Our lives are rushed, the pile of “To Do” items scattered, and it seems just when we get a handle on where we wish to go, the wind catches us.  But Aeneas reminds us that solutions abound; all we have to do is ask. 

 

Too simple, perhaps.  But this much is certain:  the more we remain silent, the more failure we must inevitably encounter.  Our futures are produced by words, by language, broken or no.  Every moment we choose to avoid the discussion is another futured moment lost and a scattered present lived, often in anxiety. 

 

In discussion, in dialogue, we produce meaning, create new opportunities, learn the world. 

 

The Romans understood.  The Cumaean Sibyl offered King Tarquin nine books of prophecies, but her price was too high and he refused.  So the Sibyl destroyed three of the books and offered him six.  Again he refused so she burned three more.  Finally, he understood and bought what was left.  Seize language.

 

 

To do so is frightening.  With language comes responsibility for its use: it’s easier for us sometimes to abdicate control or power over our present.  To talk is to confront it, to make active our place in the world.  Who else can we blame when our own words are cast before us? 

 

But this much seems certain: in language lies consequence, our wills, our selves.

 

The same can be said of our writing, of course.  But not just any writing.  The school assignment is merely that, a designed exercise trapped in a closed cave.  It pretends to be assertion, but until the door is opened to the world, private writing protects itself from examination, from dialogue.  This is why the most powerful and important writing is that which readers encounter and to which they respond. 

 

Down with readers of television who passively absorb!  And down with mere consumers of text who do not engage it with their own words.

 

Worst of all fall those writers and speakers who language recklessly, without critical responsibility for their words.  “What does it matter?  It’s just words.”  “It’s just my opinion.” “It doesn’t mean anything.” The ethos of any writer stems from her consciousness of the responsibility for the words.  Ethos is character, is ethics.  Ethos is writing and speaking for truth.

 

King Tarquin is a fool.  Shelley begs for power against the chaos.  Aeneas heroically demands the dialogue. And another writer will be forever unknown because he chooses not to write.

 

I Nearly Always Write As I Nearly Always Breathe

Kafka-esque

In his book, An Assault on Reason, Al Gore draws a parallel between the fate of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and Joseph K. in Kafka’s The Trial.  The detainees, he writes, have not been told the crimes with which they have been charged, they are “served” by secret courts, and their friends and families are caught in a morass of bureaucracy without a clear idea even if they are making progress.  The “trial” for some has already gone on some years; nevertheless, they are not free.

 

 

Joseph K goes through the same.  As important, however, is his own mindset in the process.  As a priest tells him, “The court wants nothing from you.  It receives you when you come; it dismisses you when you go.”  Kafka tells us that, in a sense larger or more philosophical than physical confinement, we choose ourselves whether we will live our lives as prisoners.  We may sink ourselves into the tangles of bureaucracies or disengage from them. 

 

We may burn our energies out in combating the ROHS scheduling process or choose to learn where we are placed.  We may lose hours to clicking on Causes in FaceBook or choose to walk our talk more directly.  We may trap ourselves in webs of gossip and lies or we may choose our own principles and stand apart.

 

Ah, I wax philosophic!  Kafka’s question is like Thoreau’s.  Where Joseph K dies “Like a dog!” because he is never able to live without his fear and guilt created by his own slavery to society, Thoreau challenges us to live like humans, to think independently from those social pressures.

 

In many ways, people who live under totalitarian regimes are compelled to act (if not think) as the state tells them to.  To resist may mean imprisonment or death.  (Just think Hussein’s Iraq, the Taliban’s Afghanistan, or even today’s Myanmar.) But at the same time, these states have at least a few individuals of conscience we’ve met, people who choose to act and speak their principles.  (Think Chia Thye Poh in Singapore, Gabriel Rufyiri in Burundi, Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar.) 

 

Don’t know these folks?  Is that because they’re unimportant or that we have also been inundated—trapped, sunk, imprisoned, detained, lost—in a society not totalitarian (despite what Gore implies) but Kafka-esque nonetheless?  Thoreau and Kafka both challenge us to be human—not machines, not animals, not narcissists or manipulators, not liars. 

 

 

What else distinguishes us from the machine or beast but our conscience?  This does not mean to resist everything, but to choose something, and be honest about it.  It means we must be prepared to own our actions and words and accept the consequences.