VI
PREFACE
Being a practicing psychiatrist, a votary of the Indian aesthetic theory as propounded by Sanskrit aestheticians of yore, and a Sanskrit poet, I have frequently contemplated on the relevance of poetry and poetics for understanding the mental states of real-world individuals and the possibility of such relevance illuminating therapy sessions, allowing the therapist to not only empathize with the client in the latter’s experience of myriad mental states but also guide him/her in the attainment of greater psychological well-being, one in which the experience of pleasure is maximized and displeasure minimized.(4)
Sanskrit poetics is primarily concerned with elucidating the process by which the mental states of literary characters are communicated to the audience and the aesthetic appeal underscoring this communicative process. For the communication of a character’s mental state to be effective in arousing the audience’s aesthetic appeal, the audience must empathize with that character, or, as understood from this thesis, with the prototype that the character represents. And if the audience must empathize with a character, it is important that the poet invokes such antecedent stimuli and consequent responses of the character’s mental states as are consonant with the antecedent stimuli and consequent responses of those very mental states in real-world individuals. Put simply, there is a correspondence between the mental states of literary characters and real-world individuals as far as their stimuli and responses are concerned and furthermore, it is because of this correspondence that we are able to empathize with literary characters as with real-world individuals. Thus, the study of aesthetic mental states must be seen as complimentary to, rather than divorced from, the study of mundane mental states. In fact, as I see it, using literary characters as “subjects” for understanding mental states can circumvent the problem of generalizability that is seen with empirical studies in psychology.(4) This is so, because, literary characters, that represent prototypes and engage a large section of people, are generalized even to begin with.
In this thesis, I had to first move beyond the narrow confines of specific mental states and evolve three models from Sanskrit poetics that would help me understand mental states in general. The subsequent study of asūyā, garva, and vrīḍā – the thesis’s target mental states – was carried out in the light of these overarching models. Here, it is important to mention that the three models discussed in my thesis are not readily isolable as such from Sanskrit poetics; nor do Sanskrit aestheticians make explicit their interrelatedness. Also, not all the elements of a given model are to be found in Sanskrit poetics itself.
Model 1, that understands mental states in terms of stimulus-response pairs, is the most conspicuous of the three models in that Sanskrit aestheticians often provide vignette verses for mental states based on this model.
Model 2 looks at dynamically interacting mental states. It owes to a solitary observation made by Abhinavagupta in his commentary on the Nāṭyaśāstra.
Model 3, based on Bhoja’s typology of literary characters, has its roots in the Samkhya system of Indian philosophy. Constructing model 3 demanded I look closely into the foundational texts of the Samkhya system so as to bring in elements that were implicitly assumed but left unmentioned by Bhoja.
Models such as the ones described above may help us understand mental states, both of literary characters and real-world individuals. However, what additional, therapeutic, purpose does this understanding serve? How can we better ourselves as humans through the study of literary characters and their mental states?
Firstly, the aesthetic ambience in which the mental states of literary characters are communicated to us can itself be regarded as therapeutic because, according to the tradition of Sanskrit poetics, such an aesthetic ambience is characterized by the time-bound experience of heightened pleasure (sukha) or, alternatively, spiritual bliss (ānanda) that characterizes our true Self. This experience can be considered as a spatiotemporally delimited state of psychological well-being that lasts as long as we engage ourselves with a literary text, performative or otherwise.(4)
Secondly, literary works also possess an instructional value. Through the very process by which a literary work confers on the audience an experience of heightened pleasure or bliss, it also instructs him/her about lifegoals, the proper means through which they can be attained, and the characters that he/she must emulate or avoid emulating in his/her pursuit of specific life-goals.
Model 3 orients us to the instructional worth of a literary work by linking the experience of pleasurable and displeasurable mental states (and therefore, well-being and ill-being respectively) with hierarchically placed life-goals and personality types pursuing specific life-goals. Specifically, it instructs us to emulate a character pursuing ethical conduct or spiritual liberation rather than the one pursuing material prosperity or material enjoyment because the former two enjoy longer-lasting psychological well-being than the latter two.
In analyzing the mental states of literary characters using model 3, I have understood as much about myself as about the characters. Extending even beyond the purview of this thesis, model 3 has been an aid to self-introspection by enhancing my awareness to my own experiences of various mental states, helping me connect those experiences with my preoccupation with specific life-goals, and motivating me towards goal-reorientation so I can enjoy more sustained forms of well-being.