Elliptical Solipsism: The Circular and Spiral Paths of Mobility

Abstract 

This paper aims to examine the state of moral and axiological predicament instated in the backdrop of postmodernity and post-truth. It engages with the narrative and plot analysis of Arvind Adiga’s White Tiger (2008) for contemplating over the discourse concerning ‘social mobility’ undertaken therein, as a case study to substantiate arguments with incidents from its fictitious narrative. The point of contention this instrument paper tries to amplify is the drift between self-realisation and self-actualization in the face of moral absolutism and nihilism, wherein, the character’s life trajectory is categorised in cyclical and spiral movements. ‘Cyclical movements’ are composed of instances in the character’s life which are responded with passivity (whereby, the narrator/protagonist is able to garner an epiphanic realisation about himself and his surroundings but isn’t able to make any substantial changes to his life circumstances). On the other hand, the spiral movements are characterised as instances that are remarked by active application of the character’s agency which alter the way in which he is perceived and advances his social positioning. This advancement is largely premised on acts of “defiance or crime”, which poses a pressing question on the ability of existing institutional structures which regulate and are alleged to be governed by conventional ‘moral and axiological understanding of society’ to instate appropriate channels for social mobility. Hence, negating all forms of metanarratives which advocate value fundamentalism and acknowledgement of how those metanarratives are closely tied to perpetuating status quo, remark the need of reevaluating the core values on which all social interactions rest.

Illustrating Elliptical Solipsism 

The term “elliptical” holds two meanings, denoting (1) “of, relating to, or shaped like an ellipse”; and (2) (a) “of, relating to, or marked by ellipsis or an ellipsis (...)”; (b) (i) “of, relating to, or marked by extreme economy of speech or writing”; (ii) “of or relating to deliberate obscurity (as of literary or conversational style)”(Elliptical Definition & Meaning, 2023).” In the context of mobility, this paper asserts that the term’s first meaning pertaining to ‘ellipse’ referring to the shape, could be understood as one’s supposed path for social mobility which accounts for socio-spatial movement across time. This movement remarks the arc of their life trajectory over an imagined matrix conceived of geometric calculations accounting for one’s psycho-social location recording the rise and fall with regard to ‘cognition, motivation and beliefs’ and ‘wealth, esteem and power’ (as parameters amongst others). Whereas, the term’s other meaning corresponds to ‘ellipsis’ which literally implies an edit or omission for the sake of grammatical coherence or enabling ease in readability while reiterating an incident, event or quotation. The deviation from a verbatim replication enables the possibility for a speaker/writer to depict the narrative from a vantage point of their peculiar understanding which facilitates: (1) sous rature wherein certain parts of the text/speech are left out or crossed out during reiteration, such that they are both present and absent in the narrative (i.e., omission), as well as, (2) addition of ‘reflexive, mnemonic or anecdotal’ supplements to elucidate the narrative such that it makes the narrators’ inferences explicit.

Solipsism as a philosophical tenet holds that ‘the self is all that can be known to exist’, this view embarks on the argument that everything that one can know about the world at large (or ‘thing in itself’) is essentially something that one knows about one’s own self. For instance, the distinction between the noumenal world (i.e., ‘thing in itself’) and the phenomenal world (i.e., ‘thing as we know it’) is only mediated by the sensory and phenomenological inferences. Hence, the attempt to ascertain ‘thing as it is’ reflects the nuances of sensations and phenomenon at play within one’s own self or apparatus that is employed in the task of observation. A probable understanding of the term may advocate it to be ‘an acknowledgement of the observation of one’s observation’, wherein, it can be seen as a seldom occasion where the ‘observer is able to observe themself observing (i.e., the parallax)’. From an epistemological, methodological and ontological vantage point, it is strongly inclined towards idealism, such that its assertions can be equated to that of cartesian scepticism advocating “I think, therefore I am” or the world of thought can be only one that can truly be known to exist. Although, it is not to be supposed as the same because while cartesian scepticism accepts the existence of the world outside one’s thoughts but solipsism is indifferent to it, it is concerned with how is one able to perceive, engage or give meaning to the outside world by the faculties of their own volition. This paper operationalizes the concept of solipsism, as ‘reflective self-understanding’. The rationale of using the term for the aforementioned concept stems from the tendency to internalise the psycho-social underpinnings in one’s own narrative, wherein, the most profound and honest insight that the subject is able to gather about the supposed objective view of their world is the realisation that one’s understanding of the world as it is (comprising of social phenomena, facts and one’s own worldview), is shaped by their volition. This volition is not to be equated with manipulation or misappropriation of the ‘thing in itself’ as one may deem fit for the sake of informed comprehension, but rather the term ‘volition’ here denotes the acknowledgement that regardless of all attempts to ascertain credibility of the axioms and assertions that we deem to be true are mediated and funnelled through one’s self.

The synchronic inferences of the aforementioned terms contextualised under the purview of social mobility hold a peculiar meaning, while interpolating them one can derive various meanings of ‘elliptical solipsism’. The foremost interpretation instigates a three-dimensional imagination of the ellipse shape (that is, movement comprises of horizontal and vertical displacement) which denotes the self’s journey through milieu of socio-spatial epoch that facilitate solipsism, such that the trajectory of one’s life instruments reflexive understanding of the self, where one is able to observe themselves, facilitating deliberations regarding their associations and engagement with the external world. This continuity between the self and the external world holds psycho-social underpinnings regarding how one is able to conceive one’s self, which often happen to take place with their relation to the other, the acknowledgement of ‘the other’ doesn’t discredit the solipsistic endeavour but rather enables the anthropophagic enterprise, wherein the self consumes the other such that it is able to see it as a part of itself, hereby the other acts as the mirror to one’s self. Another interpretation ‘elliptical solipsism’ could be explained through the ‘chiasm’ and the ‘fold’, the former represents the intersection of past, present and future (X), wherein the project of self formation is guided by memories of the past (>), perception of the present (.), and the expectations of the future (<). This interpretation supposes ‘chiasm’ to be two ends of the line and the ‘fold’ denotes the curvature and shaping of the line in order to give it a graphic and phonetic meaning (i.e., word), herein, act of identification of the ‘self’ with a name and the supposed obligations that the name holds towards either upholding the preordained meaning that one’s name is derived from or make a peculiar meaning of one’s name which drives the quest for recognition. The third inference of ‘elliptical solipsism’ examines the role of “deliberative obscurity” in the process of creating a narrative which enables identity formation concerning how one is able to understand themselves and their interaction with the world, wherein the omission that one makes in their reflexive self-understanding, i.e., the observations that are underlooked or dismissed in the process of reiterating or recalling incidents, especially concerning how one is able to make sense of them and how they shape their understanding about themselves. These omissions and supplements to one’s self-anecdotal references are closely tied to how one understands themselves, as well as, how in this process one is able to ascend the subject-object distinction because one is able to iterate the objective facts from their subjective vantage point. Hence, the dialectics of ‘being written and the written being’ have an underlying impact of the ‘ellipsis (...)’, whereby the speaker/writer consciously (or unconsciously) skips out certain nuances of the incidents that are being written/spoken about either for the sake of ease in comprehension (i.e., obvious inferences from the context), or the intention behind reiterating incidents hold a supposed projection which the speaker/writer aims to instil in the listener/reader or in one’s own self. Herein, “the being written” is closely tied to ascertaining one’s ontological stance where the peculiarity of self is made explicit, whereas, “being written” is associated with the ‘ontic’ pertaining to ‘what one can or cannot do’.

“Elliptical Solipsism” conceptually engages with how the displacement in one’s socio-spatial location alters and enhances the understanding of one’s self. As well as, how deliberative obscurity plays into the formation of one’s self through conscious/unconscious omissions and supplements in the process of internalisation, appropriation and explication of one’s being. The holographic constriction of self holds a spatial and psychic inference, where the former traces the process of ascertaining spatial occupancy and spatial displacement, while the latter investigates how changes in the social space one occupies alters their psycho-social outlook (and vice-versa). The subsequent sections advocate the application of the concept in the narrative and plot of Arvind Adiga’s “White Tiger'', attempting to examine the scope of elliptical solipsism in studying the social mobility of the narrator/protagonist from an out of school child working as a in a tea stall of his village to becoming an entrepreneur in Bangalore building, his fortune through providing logistical services to the employees of technological firms (naming his enterprise, White Tiger Drivers).

Summating the “Sous Rature”: transition from ‘Balram Halwai’ (alias Munna) to ‘White Tiger’ (alias Ashok Sharma)

“I protected his good name when I was his servant, and now that I am (in a sense) his master, I won’t stop protecting his good name.”

          -Arvind Adiga, The White Tiger (2008)

This section operationalizes the concept of ‘Sous Rature (under erasure)’ as an integral process in the attempt of self-formation, wherein the quest of ‘becoming’ undertakes abnegation of one’s antecedent self. Hence, how Derrida employs ‘sous rature’ as a philosophical tool for a “word” to be “inadequate, yet necessary” (Verges, 1992) holds true for “being” as well, whereby the project of ‘becoming’ intends to ascend and improve one’s being (i.e., existing self). The process of becoming entails an erasure of the antecedents of one’s being, as well as, the notion of inadequacy motivates one to undertake self-improvement (which is essential in the process of becoming). Although, the existence of one’s contemporary self which might be a source of resentment or inadequacy is ‘necessary’ and persistent in the process of self-transformation. The conventional application of ‘sous rature’ is limited in the context of language’s inability to provide a comprehensive understanding that language allows. Especially concerning ‘being’ which is susceptible to seem dismissive of ‘becoming’. However, the concept also holds intriguing insights for the understanding of ‘self’, wherein, the self’s quest for transformation and alteration of the terms with which it negotiates its position in society stems from the acknowledgement of ‘inadequate, yet necessary’ aspects of one’s existence. The narrative and plot analysis of Adiga’s White Tiger highlights the protagonist's struggle of “being for oneself”; herein, the quest of self ownership is premised on the gruesome crime of murder of his employer who he reveres and cares for, and is a source of care and compassion for the protagonist, unlike fellow members of his employer’s family who constantly reinstate his position of servitude. The protagonist often expresses guilt and remorse about his actions towards his employer while reminiscing about him with high regard and co-opts his employer’s name after murdering him. This supposed transition that leads to the literal demise of Ashok Sharma and metaphorical death of Balram Halwai is the point of contention that this paper adopts towards operating the concept of ‘sous rature’ from the vantage point of character development and the story’s progression, wherein the social mobility of the protagonist is premised on absolute erasure of his life as Balram Halwai, which then becomes a well-guarded secret. Process of becoming is premised on negating the supposed antecedent of one’s self, the story of White Tiger can very well be perceived as a romance between the narrator/protagonist and his employer, Ashok Sharma (the son of an industrialist in Dhanbad, Jharkhand which has based his business on illegitimate trade of coal). The story revolves around the master/slave dialectic between the protagonist's conflict with his own self and his employer (who he feels affection and reverence for). The narrative consists of a series of letters addressed to the Chinese Premier, Wen Jiabao who has scheduled a visit to India with the intention of gauging the rise in technological start-ups in India (especially India’s silicon valley, Bangalore). The narrator is attempting to highlight the subtle realities of being an Indian citizen which would not come to light in the delegate visit of the Chinese Premier, whereby he portrays his own story to be the authentic ‘rags to riches tale’. The plot is akin to the narrator/protagonist’s life history concerning the trajectory he has adopted to become an entrepreneur from an unorganized worker in a tea stall.

This narrative delves into the struggle between “to eat or to be eaten” which follows the life course of the protagonist who initiates his tale as a person bereft of a name, who was called ‘Munna’ by his family (which literally translates to ‘boy’), alleging that his parents never found the time to name him. He was officially named by his school teacher, who decided to call him “Balram'' because the teacher deemed him to be his accomplice as his own name was “Krishna” (a reference to a popular mythology in the Indian subcontinent). In the process of naming the protagonist, the teacher also subliminally assigns a role for him which was that of his friend and a protector in the teacher’s time of need. The teacher who hasn’t been remunerated for his work retaliates by engaging in illegitimate means of eliciting funds through selling school uniforms to neighbouring villages (that were provided by the State for students) and syphoning rations assigned for midday meals. During one of the inspections where the teacher’s performance is being questioned concerning his lack of competency and service to his students (who are not able to read the text written by the inspector incharge of the school audit), Balram is the only student who is able to pass the given test. This is the first reference to the protagonist being compared to the “White Tiger”, where the Inspector remarks “You, young man, are an intelligent, honest, vivacious fellow in this crowd of thugs and idiots. In any jungle, what is the rarest of animals- the creature that comes only once in a generation” and promises a scholarship which would enable him to study in a better school in the city. Although, the protagonist is not able to avail the scholarship on account of a loan that his family had to take for his cousin sister’s wedding because the money lender demands that all the members of the family work for him at the tea shop for the sake of this debt’s repayment. The narrator’s life history recalls the limitations that he faces on account of his sociological location in the process of his self formation, as well as, the opportunities that he carves out for himself. The limitations are closely akin to his acknowledgment of where and why his application of agency is restricted, hence this paper tends to situate them in the realm of “self-realisation”. While the opportunities that the protagonist seeks and acts upon are shaped by challenging the trajectory of life that others decide for him, hence hereby categorised as “self-actualization”. The protagonist narrates the trajectory of becoming the master of himself as being marked by various vocations and trainings that he undertakes as a keen flaneur, who doesn't shy away from admitting that although most of the ideas he had concerning how to make best of his life were not his own but rather gathered from his astute observations, eavesdropping and self-awareness. After dropping out of school, while working at a tea-shop, he learns about the lucrative nature of work as a driver and convinces his family to allow him to learn driving and invest into learning that skill. Despite his family being averse to such an undertaking, they comply with the promise of him sending a lionshare of his salary back home. When he finally attains gainful employment as a driver in the house of one of his village’s landlords, he threatens the security guard at the household by indicating that he would his role in hiding the fellow driver’s religious identity, who is pretending to be an upper caste hindu for the sake of gaining employment in the landlord’s household (which would otherwise be averse to hiring outside the confines of their religion). Thereby, ensuring a promotion which would allow him to become Ashok Sharma’s driver in New Delhi, an opportunity which came with a lucrative rise in his salary and a chance to witness life in a metropolitan city. During his employment, one of the remarkable incidents elaborates how he is made to sign a confession alleging that he ran over a person on the street while in actuality that accident was committed while Ashok’s wife was driving. Although he didn’t get indicted due to the lack of an investigation over that accident, the realisation of his dispensability and supposition of being incriminated for a crime that he did not commit by his employers creates a rift within him. He implicitly employs this incident as a justification and a supposed cause behind why he ends up murdering his employer.

The narrative revolves around the externalisation of the master-slave dialectic within the protagonist/narrator, consisting of a fictitious vilification of his employer which the narrator is cognizant of. This vilification is unconventional because the protagonist doesn’t object to Ashok’s behaviour or demeanour but rather to the relationship that he has with him, which is that of servitude despite not having any explicit difference between both except for varying life chances on account of their sociological location. This vilification is premised on envy instead of hatred because the narrator observes how Ashok’s family is dismissive of his suggestions and assertions regarding the course of action they should resort to in the face of adversity. Ashok is also tied to the circumstances of his wife leaving him, him having to bribe officials of the central government because his family has run out of favours amongst the current ruling party of the state from where they operate their business of illegitimate coal trade. Ashok often complains about how this is not the life that he chose for himself but is rather pushed into it on account of his family and finds a confidant in the narrator/protagonist while speaking about his anxieties in a drunken stupor. The narrator witnesses how often Ashok is put in a position where he has to act against his own will on account of the role that his family has assigned to him, how high government officials often dictate him to succumb to their own illicit appetites and how his wife abandons him and blames him for not putting his foot down to further her aspirations of going back to the US (where they had first met) amongst the fellow male members of his family. Hence, this peculiar case of master-slave dialectic is vocal about certain aspects that render the protagonist’s employer to be enslaved by his circumstances, along with the role of ‘wealth, status and esteem’ that sets the narrator and his employer apart. This rift between ‘class, status and power’ amongst the protagonist and his employer is an evident and overtly acknowledged source of anxiety for the narrator. This rift perpetually reinforces how the dynamics between both characters would never change, because his employer is shielded by an invisible armour that his sociological location attests to him. This constant reiteration of ‘class inequalities, status subordination and power imbalances’ between both characters is an underlying social commentary which is reflective of explicit psycho-social overtones. This is the point of infliction that culminates the concepts of ‘sous rature’ and ‘solipsism’ that this paper embarks upon, herein the notion of ‘inadequacy’ that the protagonist is subjected to is addressed with the question of ‘solipsism’- the schism between acknowledging the ‘other’ as a thinking, feeling rational being or rendering them to be mere means to a certain end. This inadequacy becomes a necessity in gauging and comprehending the protagonist's further actions. Now this begs us to question the necessity of his master’s erasure and how that corresponds with overcoming his servitude, that was instilled within himself beyond the dynamics of the relationship he shared with Ashok Sharma. The following sections of this paper attempt to deal with that question.

Cyclical and Spiral Paths: The dialectics of Self-Realisation and Self-Actualization

“The movement of knowing is in the inner realm itself, not in the objective realm. In their first interrelation, the two poles of the tension already fall asunder. To be sure, they approach one another with uncertainty and timidity, yet with trust, for each knows itself immediately in the other, and the movement is merely the inversion whereby each realises that the other knows itself likewise in its other. This reversal also rests in the fact that each gives up its independence. The stimulus is itself an excitation, i.e., it is the condition of not being satisfied in oneself, but rather having one's essence in another—because one knows oneself in the other, negating oneself as being-for-oneself, as different. This self-negation is one's being for another, into which one's immediate being is transformed. Each one's self-negation becomes, for each, the other's being for the other. Thus the other is for me, i.e., it knows itself in me. There is only being for another, i.e., the other is outside itself.”

-Hegel and the Human Spirit (Rauch & Hegel, 1983 emphasis added)

Attesting attributes of cyclicality and spirality to self-realisation and self-actualization respectively, hold justification in their ability to transform ‘unilateral will’ to ‘omnilateral will’. The central argument that this assertion is premised on is the limitations of self-realisation to externalise its revelations and its dependence on the “Other” for acknowledgement. Hence, the exercise of ‘freedom’ revolves within the confines of one’s self although the act of actualizing ‘freedom’ plays out in the social arena, wherein the exercise and assertion of one’s freedom has to be accepted and respected as valid by the fellow other(s). The Hegelian notion of freedom is articulated as  “Bei-sich-selbst-sein-imAnderen—being by oneself within the other or being at home with oneself in the other” (Hofmann, 2019). Herein, the project of self-actualization is deemed to fruition when every facet of one’s self is reflected in how the ‘other’ perceives and recognizes the self in question. The cyclicality of self-realisation is based on the underlying binary codification that flows in the undercurrents of existential philosophy pertaining to ‘being’ (1) and ‘not being’ (0). For instance, ‘being moral’ is explicitly synonymous to ‘not being immoral’ or ‘being courageous’ is conterminous to ‘not being cowardly’. Due to the confines of this dialogue concerning ‘being’ and ‘not being’ happening within a self-sustaining sub-system, which does not need an externality for its credibility or validity. Hence, self-realisation tends to function in a cyclical pathway of a feedback loop, wherein any assertion made about the self is either affirmed or discredited within the self itself. Although, self-actualization is explicitly premised on external validation of one’s assertions about the self in the other, hence hereby attributed to ‘spirality’ because it functions through affirming or discrediting the supposed typecast/archetype that fellow others hold regarding one’s self. The task of actualization spirals around establishing the realisations regarding oneself in the other, for instance, ‘being smart’ and ‘being acknowledged for one’s smartness’ are two domains of self-application. The former circles around the idea of internalising the virtue of ‘smartness’, while the latter entails to establish the association of smartness to one’s self in the other.

The supposition of a typecast which one ascribes to themselves and is attributed to them never happens in isolation, but rather is based on the relationships and associations as points of immanence in the larger whole. This integration is hierarchical and differential, wherein every member integrates in the whole through different terms. The terms influence the process of ‘becoming’ in ontological and ontic sense, pertaining to ‘how one ascertains their peculiarity’ and ‘what is one capable of’ respectively. Often there is a drift between how one perceives one’s ownself and how fellow members of the whole perceive them, this is the drift which the task of self-actualization attempts to bridge by “self-restoring sameness” and establishing “a reflection of oneself in the other” through the labour of negation. This labour of self-abnegation is a twinfold exercise wherein one acknowledges the necessity to overcome their own inadequacies (through the process of erasure of one’s ancedental self, i.e., sous rature) and recalibrating their association with others, through challenging the preconceived notions that may persist about them. 

Arvind Adiga’s White Tiger is a particularly interesting social commentary with regards to the drift between self-realisation and self-actualization. It poses the most puzzling questions regarding what means one might resort to for the sake of self-actualization in Indian society, where the application of Kantian morality and Hegelian notions of an ideal are overtly inoperable considering how social stratification is appropriated and undisputed. The story closely follows the role of class, caste, status and power over the life chances of its characters while tracing the narrator's account of crime and corruption as an entrenched part of everyday life. The opportunities available for self-application and the inclusion in influential circles happen to largely be in the favour of elites. Despite the democratic process being successful in ‘circulation of elites’ (Pareto, 1916) and how the hopes of this circulation influences the trajectory of different characters; herein the protagonist’s employers try to bribe the central government officials to assert pressure on the state government party workers who are compelling them to donate a higher amount than was earlier decided as this political party claims to be representing the needs of the backward classes and castes. However, despite their efforts the same political party gets reelected in the state and happens to garner a stronger stake at the central government, so Ashok Sharma has to pay an even higher sum than was previously demanded. The protagonist who happens to belong to the caste and class identity which the political party claims to be inclined towards doesn’t reap any benefit from this circulation, instead he is a victim of corruption at public institutions such as schools and hospitals rendering him helpless to apply his true potential as a human being. This realisation cornered him into resorting to crimes like murder and theft as the only route to alter the trajectory of his life and attain self-ownership. Though, considering that the protagonist chose to co-opt the name, ambitions and even behavioural inclinations of his employer, Ashok Sharma poses the question of him attaining self-mastery in the true sense (though this paper refrains from taking such a metaphysical/ magical realism position and restricts itself to the socio-political purview).

The drift between self-realisation and self-actualization is evident in narration of the protagonist's life-history. Such that there are incidents where he realises his position in society, for instance the angst that he feels when his employer calls him a ‘half baked man’ during a conversation with his wife or how the inspector in charge of auditing the the school calls him a ‘White Tiger’ and he feels ashamed to face his schoolmates despite being bestowed with such praise on account of not being able to avail the scholarship. Such instances apart from many others highlight that his treatment as a person being subject to shame and ridicule is not on account of his own personal limitations but because of his life’s circumstances. These circumstances are consequences of social customs, corruption and crime. Although, all instances of self-realisation in his narrative do not alter his life circumstances but rather reinforce a sense of helplessness pertaining to the acknowledgement of his place in the social hierarchy and the inability to change the circumstances that he finds himself in, hence attested to ‘cyclicality’ herein. Although, all measures of self-actualization that the protagonist undertakes be it threatening to disclose the religious identity of the fellow driver employed in the household he worked at syphoning fuel and car repair expenses to indulge in availing services of a sex worker, opting out of sending remittances to his family, murdering his employer and stealing the money that would have otherwise been used to bribe a minister (which potentially led to the massacre where all members of his family were killed as an act of revenge), and basing his logistical enterprise of providing commute services to tech workers by bribing police officials to raid his competitors out of business. These instances are premised on actions that go against the alleged moral and axiological standards set by the society, as well as averse to the protagonist’s own ethical understanding. The narrator expresses guilt and remorse for those actions which are underlying in the emotions with which he reiterates them. Although, the narrator doesn’t paint himself as a victim but rather a success story, the likes of which he alleges that the Chinese Premiere would never hear about in his delegate visit because his story holds the unspoken and invisibilized reality of Indian society. He mentions how the large section of the Indian population lives in the rooster coop which instils servitude in them, because there is no way out. Though, the protagonist expresses that turning towards crime and deviance became his route to break through this aforementioned rooster coop. While contemplating over the fear of getting caught and penalised for his actions, he mentions that even if it was to happen then, in retrospect “it was all worthwhile to know, just for a day, just for an hour, just for a minute, what it means not to be a servant” (Adiga, 2008).

“Homo politicus” defines ‘ends, means and facts’, which means that the appropriation of means and ends, i.e., aspirations of one’s self and the measures they take up for its fulfilment are a reflection of socio-political realities of an epoch. ‘People do what society rewards them to do’ and one’s actions are also informed by replicating and reinforcing the idea of their observation regarding the reward structure. This reward structure is an important bone of contention upon the drift between self-realisation and self-actualization because the former is not dependent on the whims of ‘reward structure’ but the latter is largely premised on its dictates. Hence, this question of psycho-social assertion of one’s self comes at the cost of either negating the premonition one has about one’s own self or breaking the moulds of the typecast that others have put one’s self in. Both these trajectories can be understood from a solipsistic vantage point, wherein the ‘self’ and the ‘other’ are collated in a seamless continuity. This solipsistic endeavour is susceptible to be in denial of fellow minds, wherein anyone who holds solipsism in an infallible regard could potentially consider the ‘fellow other’ as an object and be dismissive of their humanity (Fodor, 1979). The story of White Tiger is an example of the same where the question of ‘being’ and ‘becoming’, where the conversion process is marred by perversion, corruption and crime which revolves around the narrator’s description of his route to self-ownership being premised on theft and murder as the point of primitive accumulation for his enterprise.

The process of self-actualization is a spiral because it furthers its project beyond the confines of one’s self and embarks through a trinary (also called ternary) following the movement between ‘being’ (1), ‘not being’ (0) and ‘becoming’ (2). Hereby, the movement between either altering or reinforcing how one is perceived is crucial because the sanctity of the self-actualization project lies in establishing the revelations of one’s self-realisation in the supposed objective realm. Self-ownership is a vital philosophical tenet across ideological lines especially under the ambit of moral philosophy, wherein, the task and possibility of actualizing self-ownership through making it substantial instead of a mere expression is the prerogative. The story of White Tiger reflects on the staunch challenges of self-ownership in the face of systemic barriers, irrespective of acknowledging that he is better off than many on account of attaining petty employment, despite being respected by his immediate employer, he resorts to crime as the means of self-emancipation. In spite of there not being any explicit reason or angst towards his employer, the greed and unlikeliness of ever being able to earn the amount of money that he can steal even if he works his entire life becomes the motive that lures him to such a trajectory. Although, despite all the feelings of guilt and remorse, he is not ashamed of what he did and does not portray himself as a victim but rather presents himself as an example. His narrative depicts him as the prey (supposed victim of his circumstances) who became the predator (who availed a chance even if it meant resort to crime and commit a moral harm).

‘Obstinate Orchestrators’ and ‘Ostracized Orchestrators’: Surpassing Servitude

All social actions are collective orchestrations of a variety of individual acts undertaken within the ambit of certain common or particular objectives (which are the motivations that one holds towards the application of their self). The course of social actions is actualized through the dialectical interactions of ‘orchestrators’ and ‘orchestrated’, whereby one’s sociological location and their conscious presence regarding the ‘action’ being performed determines the ‘role’ they play in its course. This dialectical interaction is premised upon exercising agency over their time, wherein the tussle between orchestrators and orchestrated is centred around circularity regarding their active and passive associations with social time. This revolves around the need for individuals to establish themselves as self-reliant masters of their own lives, and for the acknowledgement of the same by fellow others. ‘Class inequalities, status subordination and power imbalances’ are often pivotal explanations in understanding what possibly limits one’s potential for exercising agency over their time. A dramaturgical reading of society enables the perception towards circularity of active and passive application of time, considering that the ‘orchestrator’ becomes ‘orchestrated’ after having given the commands that they want fulfilled, wherein, those who have been rendered to be adherers of the command hold agency over how well would they would oblige to the instructions bestowed and what duration of time would they need for the same.

The dialectics of ‘orchestrating’ and ‘being orchestrated’ are decided through the role that one plays in society, as well as the dynamics of associations which enable the purview of allowing agency over one’s own time.  The distinct tasks of ‘directing’ and ‘being directed’ within the social drama follows the ascription of roles and the attributes attested to those alleged roles. For instance, if we further this argument under the purview of master-slave dialectics then we would find that: ‘the master can order the slave or advise them, the master can grant or deny the slave permission to act in certain ways, whereas, the slave cannot grant or deny their master permission, neither can they order their master, even if they’re entreated by them. This asymmetry of the power balance is reflected in the asymmetry of their abilities to perform certain illocutionary acts (Langton, 2009). These inabilities act as impediments to self-mastery and self-ownership, even though one may argue that there is agency over succumbing to commands and roles or choosing against them, but these social relations are heavily tied to monetary, performative and customary chiasms. Hence, exercising self-mastery and availing self-ownership are often not inherently facilitated in social theatres but rather require struggle to be attained.

Time is the ideal model of auto-affection and hetero-affection (Spivak, 2015), herein auto-affection refers to self-experience (Lawlor, 2015). The ability to experience one’s self and for one to establish one’s own experiences with others happens within the rubric of time. To be able to surpass the servitude that one is subjected to is only possible when one is able to exercise agency over how one is able to employ their time. The question of employing one’s time and being employed under the tutelage of a fellow’s time, is the great leap of movement which happens to steep over ‘class inequalities, status subordination and power imbalances’. To be able to overcome the asymmetry of power that denies one agency over their time is the ability to orchestrate and direct one’s ownself.

Objectification is a stance, a way of looking at the world, and a social practice which restricts the acknowledgement of fellow’s humanity, the story of White Tiger is vocal of this supposed objectification, wherein, the protagonists servitude is not restricted to the role that he is employed for but rather conscripted to the whims and fancies of the time of his employer while being made to perform all chores across the expanse of the time that his employer deems fit. The story expresses the affection and reverence that both the characters (protagonist and his employer) share for each other but terms of association between them are not that of equals but that of superior and subordinate. This dynamic renders the protagonist to be treated as an ‘automaton’, an accessory that saves his employer the daunting task of driving on Indian roads. There is an implicit application of solipsism within both the characters. Solipsism is not a brave epistemological rite of passage, but a moral desert at our doorstep (Langton, 2009).

The moral desert that White Tiger stirs is premised on supposing the fellow to be less of than one’s self, though the story takes this question up a few notches when it reveals that the protagonist murders his employer, steals his money and bases his enterprise on the foundation of this bounty. The story reflects a moral dilemma concerning how one resorts to violence and crime for the sake of self-mastery and epouses a sense of sympathy for the killer and the killed, while posing the question of time, money and value. Herein, the extremes of absolute erasure of the orchestrator for the liberation of the orchestrated espouses the questions of validity of socio-economic armour and its permeability, as well as the validity of such an action. This story reflects the larger axiological problem that although contextualised in Indian society, is not peculiar to it because it opens up a Pandora's box concerning the moral foundations on which all societies rest, the paradox between ‘to eat or to be eaten’.

Conclusion: Traversing the Moral Desert

The story of White Tiger holds a mirror to the society which advocates and adjudicates certain values, but the reward structures it follows function against what it preaches. Especially when the ethical conundrum that the story poses is viewed from the lens of moral desert theory, which alleges that adhering to conventions of morality is rewarded and immoral behaviour is penalised. This premise is shattered in shambles over the course of the incidents in the narrative that unfolds herein. The most disconcerting revelation is the underlying truth of reality that it reflects, which poses the most pressing question of ‘what do we value as individuals and as a society at large?’ which is answered as ‘freedom’ and ‘self-mastery’ but the strangleholds of the roles, their attributes and ascription impose very different costs at which one is able to avail ‘freedom’ and ‘self-mastery’. The plot reinforces the biblical question of Mark.8- 36:34-38 “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” This question opens up a Pandora's box of inquiries pertaining to the story, regarding how all social institutions function with an intent to instate moral values and ethical mores but they fail against greed and temptation. Although, the subsequent question concerning the appropriate channels of social mobility which are institutionally denied or restricted in favour of pertaining and perpetuating the status quo, as well as, axiological issues of the stigma between mental and manual labour which normalises ‘objectification’ of human beings. This stigma that persists across various lines of social cleavages which enforce a hierarchical and differentiated dynamic through the constructs that these schisms and divisions are premised upon. This paper proposes the idea of ‘elliptical solipsism’ as a potential methodological tool for literary criticism, appreciation and engagement with the subtleties of life-histories that lurk in literary works pertaining to the time and space that characters are exposed to and how such an exposure plays into their psycho-social development. This methodology intends to devise a microscopic lens which would enable the reader gauge vertical and horizontal displacement of the characters, their association with time and the trajectory of availing agency over their own time as a means to self ownership, as well as, how does one employ their time when they have complete autonomy over it. In the process of engaging with ‘elliptical solipsism’, the role of ‘ellipsis’ relating to what is left out in the reiteration pertaining to ‘sous rature’ which this paper aims to operationalize beyond its conventional ‘langue’ and ‘parole’ application but rather on ‘self-formation’, presentation and representation which can offer an insightful theoretical tool for character, discourse and plot analysis.

End Notes

• Ellipsis refers to an omission of words or phrases which are presumed to be inferred from the context,  and is symbolically indicated by (...) (Ellipsis Definition & Meaning, 2023).

• Literally translated as “under-erasure” and applied as a strategic philosophical tool that strikes off a word from the text but allows it to remain legible, it is used as symbolic denotation of knowledge and oblivion (Derrida, 1998).

• Supplement denotes “replacement and addition” which correspond to the functions of supplementing and supplanting, referring to altering text/speech that are already complete in themselves; or adding elaborations or suggestive remarks for the sake of making a statement more complete (Derrida, 1998).

• The conventional definition of parallax is: the apparent displacement of an object (the shift of its position against a background), caused by a change in observational position that provides a new line of sight. The philosophical inference of this concept asserts the ‘object’ and ‘subject’ are inherently mediated, such that an epistemological shift in subject’s point of view also reflects an ontological shift in the object itself (Zizek, 2009).

•  Zygmunt Bauman endorses two ways through with ‘otherness’ are dealt with, (i) anthropoemic (through which ‘otherness’ is pertained because it stands for eradicating or vomiting out the other); and (ii) anthropophagic (through which the otherness is consumed, such that the fellow is integrated in the self such that it overcomes the distinction between ‘self and the ‘other’ (Bauman, 2013).

•  These concepts of “chiasm” and “fold” are borrowed from Leonard Lawlor who uses them to elucidate his interpretation of Foucault’s ‘The Archeology of Knowledge’ and the discourse that it embarks on (Lawlor, 2003).

•  Referring to the concept of reflective consciousness, pertaining to the mind’s inner mirror contemplating over its own thoughts elucidated in “Being and Nothingness”, originally published in 1943 (Sartre, 1969).

• Kant’s general concern about the life of one who ‘must shut himself up in himself’, who must remain ‘completely alone with his thoughts as in a prison’—a prison from which he says it is our duty, epistemic and moral, to escape (Langton, 2009).

• Referring to the members of the protagonist's family and his observation of the people who migrate to cities in buses against whom he feels a sense of superiority because he gets the opportunity to drive to the city in an air-conditioned car.

•  The odds that the protagonist faces in the situation where he commits theft and murder are an analogical equivalent of the trolley problem.

References