that was what it was. To my considerable amazement, the doctor refused to give me an anti-tetanus shot. He said it was superfluous since, as he said, tetanus runs its course much faster in India than in Europe, and âif it were tetanus you would already be dead.â It was just âa simple infection,â he said, and all I needed was some streptomycin. He seemed quite surprised that I hadnât been infected by tetanus, but evidently, he concluded, one occasionally came across Europeans who had a natural resistance.
Iâm sure you will find my story ridiculous, but itâs the story I have to tell. As far as your gnostic interpretationof my Nocturne , or rather of its conclusion, is concerned, allow me to insist in all sincerity that I am not familiar with the Mandala and that my knowledge of Hindu philosophy is vague and very approximate, consisting as it does in the summary found in a tourist guide and in a pocket paperback I picked up at the airport called LâInduisme (part of the âQue sais-je?â series). As regards the question of the mirror, I started doing some hurried research only after getting your letter. For help I went to the books of a serious scholar, Professor Grazia Machianò, and am finding it hard work to grasp the basics of a philosophy of which I am woefully ignorant.
Finally I must say my own feeling is that on the most immediate level my Nocturne reflects a spiritual state which is far less profound than you so generously suppose. Private problems, of which I will spare you the tedious details, and then of course the business of finding myself in a continent so remote from my own world, had provoked an extremely strong sense of alienation towards everything: so much so that I no longer knew why I was there, what the point of my journey was, whatsense there was in what I was doing or in what I myself might be. It was out of this alienation, perhaps, that my book sprang. In short, a misunderstanding. Evidently misunderstandings suit me. In confirmation of which allow me to send you this most recent book of mine, published a few days ago. You know Italian very well and may wish to take a look at it.
I am, believe me, your
A NTONIO T ABUCCHI
Madras, 13 June 1985
Dear Mr Tabucchi,
My thanks for your letter and gift. I have just finished Little Misunderstandings of No Importance and your other book of short stories, Reverse Side , which you were generous enough to enclose. You did well, since the two complement each other and this made reading them more pleasant.
I am perfectly well aware that my letter caused you some embarrassment, just as I am also aware that you,for reasons of your own, wish to elude the gnostic interpretations that I have of your books and which you, as I said, deny. As I mentioned in my first letter, Europeans visiting India can usually be divided into two categories: those who believe they have discovered transcendence and those who profess the most radical secularism. I fear that despite your search for a third way, you do fall into these categories.
Forgive me my insistence. Even the philosophical position (may I so define it?) which you call âMisunderstandingâ corresponds, albeit dressed up in Western culture (the Baroque), to the ancient Hindu precept that the misunderstanding (the error of life) is equivalent to an initiatory journey around the illusion of the real, that is, around human life on earth. Everything is identical, as we say; and it seems to me that you affirm the same thing, even if you do so from a position of scepticism (are you by any chance considered a pessimist?). But I would like to abandon my culture for a moment and draw on yours instead. Perhaps you will remember Epimenidesâ paradoxwhich goes more or less like this: âThe phrase that follows this is false: the phrase that precedes this is true.â As you will have noticed, the two halves of the saying are mirrors of each other. Dusting off this