There is so much rubbish that Grendel and Tintin are up to, that the moment tou discover one problem, another set of problems unravels. It goes on and on and on. So, Tintin, the things he teaches, there are two categories of texts, either the texts are very childish, or the texts have inappropriate sexual content. He teaches nothing outside of these two categories. If he offers a course where more strong scholarship is demanded, he simply teaches nothing. He has a strategy for teaching nothing. Tintin’s lectures all follow the same pattern, and that is him giving the lufe history of the author or poet in question, and then reading out the text in class. Yes, he doesn’t actually teach anything. Everything is just a session where you listen to him reading out the text. A reading of the text is something the students can do on their own, or they can listen to an audiobook online. No one needs the professor to read out the whole text. The lecture is meant for something relevant to be taught so that people csn understand the text better and at all the levels necessary. He was the only professor who woukd do this. Basically, the students come out of his courses knowing absolutely nothing other than gossip about the author’s or poet’s life. And that too, usually there is some kind of creepy sexual element in the author or poet’s life, which is why Tintin teaches the topic. Look at the people he covers, Lewis Carroll, Byron, Marquis De Sade, everything where the author or poet was some debased pervert in real life! Carroll was not a part of the Victorian core course, it’s not supposed to be. This is children’s literature that used to be taught to children who were 3 or 4 years old, nursery, K. G. standard. What happens when you teach an adult that text, that too only reading out the text and discussing Carroll’s perversion? The adult learns nothing. Students in a college course already know this from infancy. By the time they are in college, the standard has advanced to so many things. They need to know those things. What happens if you don’t teach them the things should be taught to adults, to people st college level? Their standards remains infantile. Students from other colleges know infinitely more, the students taught childish texts no nothing that they need to. Therefore, they cannot keep up post their edication once they enter jobs. They miss all the good opportunities, all the good jobs, because they learnt nothing in college. What is the degree for if you won’t be taught anything new? These are things that have been taught in nursery. Carroll cannot be in a core course for college students. Teaching Carroll at that level displaces the other seminal texts that need to be in the core course. Carroll, Byron, Sade are not even taught these days. They’ve been rejected in curricula on the grounds of perversion. It’s 2022! All those texts are outdated! Look at the courses Tintin offers! Popular fiction in the ninenteenth century, again children’s literature, again something students have already learnt in school. They do not need these things repeated. They need to be taught at the college and university level. They’re not in school. They’re in university. They cannot be taught these things. Before Tintin joined the faculty, children’s literature was taught by Nilanjana Gupta, who taught children’s literature from an adult perspective, with loads of interesting theoretical approaches, she looked at so many angles. That too, I remember her teaching us mostly college level texts in college, which is what we were supposed to be taught, discussing th texts in detail with all the background and everything. Everything was fine. There was no confusion amongst the students. Then, enter Tintin. Nothing is taught, only reading out the text in class. And of course, the other professors have no clue that he teaches nothing in class and only reads out the text. They have no way of finding out. That too, only children’s lit., or creepy lit. What else does Tintin teach? Graphic novel, again things that people in school read. Childish things that people already know. What else does Tintin teach? Yes, Literature and Censorship, yes that’s his course! Anazingly, the whole optional course was booked! Everyone flocked there! Again, useless rubbish, waste of time, things that will never cime in handy to the students and will take the students along the wrong path. A whole course devoted to perversion. I did not opt for the course, so I have no idea what happened there. Then, he takes over Modern literature, teaches nothing, Paromita di and Debojoy save us. Then, again he offers Modern European Fiction to M.A. students as an optional. Again, nothing of Modernism was taught, he just did the usual, author’s life story, then read out the text. How is someone like that even offering Midern European Fiction? That isn’t even his area. Look at what he’s done with his area! Nursery standard pervy text becomes core course. Shanta Dutta is conveniently removed from the scene. Who else taught Victorian literature? Sajni Mukherji! Yes, Sajni di taught us Browning, ‘Porphyria’s Lover’ in our first few days of college. There was no confusion about what was going on. It was a standard text for that course. The poem was about a maniac who killed a hapless woman by strangling her to death, typical fallen woman theme of the Victorian period. She encapsulated the whole of the Victorian period with that one poem. Everyone knew what the Victorian period was about after that. Sajni di did a perfectly fine job of the period. Then, Samantak Das came in and taught us about the scientific milieu of the period. Very interesting, tech-savvy lectures. He was amazing with Victorian literature. Now, Shanta Dutta, Sajni Mukheji, Samantak Das, all of these fabulous people being in Victorian literature meant that the damage done by Tintin could be mitigated. Then one day came Aishwarya Iyer (Chinese zodiac pig). And what did Aishwarya do? She was the one who complained about Shanta Dutta. There you have it, the dastardly deeds of Pisces yet again. Nobody in the whole department would ever go and complain about a professor. So, naturally when Aishwarya suddenly came up with something so staggering, naturally everyone thought there was a very serious problem. All the professors started ganging up against Shanta Dutta. Shanta Dutta was left in tears. It wasn’t long before she got a job offer from Presidency and left. As usual, Pisces, pig, is at the root of the whole debacle. There’s a reason why Orwell is hailed as great, there’s a reason why Orwell and Pink Floyd make such a big deal about pigs. Sala shuworer baccha kothakar, just throw them out! What is this Aishwarya. She attended one class, understood nothing of what is going on in the lecture, did not bother finding out what was going on, did not bother looking up what was going on, conveniently went and placed a complaint. What were the grounds? She understood nothing. That’s pretty natural in university because you’re learning things for the first time. Normally people take their time and pick up the topic at length. Everyone has trouble with new things, from what I’ve found. Just because you know nothing about something doesn’t mean you go and place a complaint! Who does this kind of rubbish! What a loser! I’ll tell you what was going on in the course. Shanta Dutta was breaking up the text and showing the constituent dynamics of the text, how one action led to another action, how one wrong move, led to another wrong move, led to a chain of disaster events, ultimately resulting in the downfall of a woman, that’s how she became the fallen woman. She traced the whole trajectory detail by detail, action by action, action to consequence, consequence to further action, how people make choices in the moment, how there sometimes are no choices other than bad choices and things get worse and worse and worse, there’s no end to how bad it gets, you just keep sinking. Shanta Dutta adopted the same approach that is adopted in the law, where actions are traced in detail, where one action needs to be explained argumentatively over and over and over, because the more you argue, the more information comes out. It’s purely a legal perspective. And something that is very important in literature. Showing in detail the inner dynamics of a text is something that I don’t remember any other professor doing while I was a student at J.U. I didn’t understand it either. But, most students in the department did. Usually these things are taught to children by their mothers, it’s like an oral tradition. Now with me, the mother obviously did not teach me this kind of reasoning, because then first thing I would go and turn her in. So, naturally I did not understand. But, just because you don’t understand, it doesn’t mean you go and raise a complaint! I did not raise a complaint. Neither did anyone else who did not understand, other than Aishwarya. I do understand now, and I am so grateful to Shanta Dutta for having taught us all this. It’s very important that students at the college and university level have an understanding of the inner dynsmics of a text. When Shanta Dutta would ask questions in her tests, she would ask questions where we would have to go in depth and analyse the sequence of causes and events to arrive at a meaningful argument. It wasn’t enough to read pholosophers and critics and talk about their theories in the answer script. Without being able to dissect the inner workings of the text, students would be lost, and would not be able to read a text at the university or college level. Sukanta Chaudhuri would ask questions like that too. For a Shakespeare test, he gave us reference to context. I had not read the text, read other things that seemed more intersting, got 2/20. But later on in life you understand why that question was so important. If you don’t know what’s going on in the text, it doesn’t count. Which is why the jetha keeps saying things like, “Read Shakespeare.” Because people who read Shakespeare tend to quote Shakespeare out of context and confuse everyone, which is what the jetha wanted to do, quote Shakespeare randomnly, sound lofty and misguide everyone since most would not understand Shakespeare in the original. But, if you give the context to people in layman’s terms, then that strategy fails. And when you go to court, the way I will be, you will have to answer questions and explain the same thing a million times with different reasoning each time to get your pint across and all the angles covered. No one will listen to you in court otherwise if you can’t explain the chain of actions, because you’ll be incomprehensible in a legal context. Look at how long I’ve been talking since 2015, and I’m still not done talking, that’s how much explanation it takes to get something like this down, to get something like this to court. See how sophisticated what Shanta Dutta teaches is? Did Aishwarya bother learning any of this? No. There’s a reason why law and medicine are the fields the top students in the U.S.A. opt for, look at how sophisticated it is, and how much impact this form of reasoning cam have on changing lives. And Shanta Dutta brought in all of the contemporary perspectives of victim testimony in, things that were not present in England’s Common Law before, but were present in the legal set-ups of indigenous communities, and were reintegrated in contemporary legal practice. That’s why Agamben subtitles ‘Remnants of Auschwitz’ ‘The Witness and the Archive’. This is Shanta Dutta’s stature. She is a very high-order professor, a renonwned scholar. As for Aishwarya, she went to UPenn, came back without a Ph.D. Obviously she will not be able to perform in Ivy League if she cannot unravel the various layers of a text. She was doomed. That’s what happens when you don’t pay attention in the professor’s lecture! That’s what happens when you don’t find out for yourself what was going on in class! What standard Aishwarya has only she knows, typical Pisces miscreant spreading misery in the world ruining everyone’s lives! That’s all these pigs do, ruin everything. And when Shanta Dutta and Paromita Chakravorty were working so hard to fend off Grendel and Tintin, what was Aishwarya doing screwing up everything? Which universe does she live in? What is that? Who behaves like that in a university? I’ve never heard of anything like this. Eeeeeewwww. See what happened because of Aishwarya! Shanta Dutta left. Grendel went over and won over Sajni di. Then, when Sajni di retired, Grendel took over where Sajni di left off introducing more childish texts in Victorian litearture. And now Samantak Das is no more. Tintin and Grendel won Victorian! It’s a kiddly lit. course now, no thanks to Aishwarya. Wow! As usual, Pisces comes in and ruins everything! And the conditions Shanta Dutta and Paromita Chakravorty were having to work in with Grendel and Tintin breathing down their necks!