Love is Worldmaking: Reading Rabindranath Tagore'sGoraas International Theory

Abstract

Love constitutes the global because it is normatively implicated in worldmaking work. I illustrate this empirically via a close and contextualized reading of the political novel Gora, which was set during a key moment of worldmaking during empire and penned by the first non-European Nobel Laureate in literature, Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941). Tagore is an underappreciated figure in global international relations (IR) who not only traversed multiple political circles during the British empire but also saw himself as a confluence of several cultures. I read Gora as lending insight into love as a site of normative contestation—ethically indeterminate, and intimately involved in worldmaking projects, including nationalism, cosmopolitanism, and inter-communalism in an India on the eve of its independence. Setting Tagore's thought in conversation with contemporary research in international history, and normative and anti-colonial international political theory, makes two important offerings to the study of IR: it reveals how a sociological examination of the micropolitics of love helps us to understand and explain the innumerable ways in which intimacies animate worldmaking and equips us with a normative typology for engaging it. El amor constituye lo global porque está normativamente incluido en el trabajo de creación del mundo. Ilustro esto empíricamente mediante una lectura cercana y contextualizada de la novela política Gora, ambientada en un momento clave de la construcción del mundo durante el imperio, y escrita por el primer ganador del premio Nobel de literatura no europeo, Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941). Tagore es una figura infravalorada en las Relaciones Internacionales (RR. II.) mundiales, que no solo atravesó múltiples círculos políticos durante el imperio británico, sino que también se vio a sí mismo como una confluencia de varias culturas. Considero que Gora refleja una visión del amor como lugar de contestación normativa, éticamente indeterminado e íntimamente implicado en proyectos de creación de mundo, incluidos el nacionalismo, el cosmopolitismo y el intercomunismo en una India en vísperas de su independencia. Al poner el pensamiento de Tagore en conversación con la investigación contemporánea de la historia internacional y la teoría política internacional normativa y anticolonial, se hacen dos importantes aportes al estudio de las relaciones internacionales: se revela cómo un examen sociológico de la micropolítica del amor nos ayuda a comprender y explicar las innumerables formas en que las intimidades animan la construcción del mundo, y nos equipa con una tipología normativa para abordarla. L'amour constitue le monde car il est normativement impliqué dans le travail de création du monde. J'illustre cela sur le plan empirique par une lecture attentive et contextualisée du roman politique Gora, qui se déroule à un moment clé de la création du monde à l’ère de l'empire britannique et qui a été écrit par le premier lauréat non européen du prix Nobel de littérature, Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941). Tagore est une figure sous-estimée des relations internationales (RI) mondiales qui a non seulement traversé plusieurs cercles politiques durant l'empire britannique mais qui s'est également vu comme étant à la confluence de plusieurs cultures. J'ai lu Gora comme source de renseignements sur l'amour en tant que site de contestation normative éthiquement indéterminé et intimement impliqué dans les projets de création du monde, notamment dans le nationalisme, le cosmopolitisme et l'intercommunautarisme dans une Inde à la veille de son indépendance. Confronter la pensée de Tagore aux recherches contemporaines en histoire internationale et en théorie politique internationale normative et anticoloniale apporte deux contributions importantes à l’étude des RI : cela révèle la façon dont un examen sociologique de la micropolitique de l'amour nous aide à comprendre et à expliquer les innombrables manières dont les intimités animent la création du monde et nous équipe d'une typologie normative pour l'aborder.

How love orders: an engagement with disciplinary International Relations

“…Taken together, their diverse accounts of love lend credence to three claims. First, along with the first wave of literature on love (Hartnett, 2022; Krystalli and Schulz, 2022; Pin-Fat, 2019) and political emotions (Bleiker and Hutchison, 2008; Crawford, 2000; Mercer, 2006), they unequivocally affirm that love and emotions matter to IR. 1 Second, they gesture towards intellectual history, in general, and disciplinary IR, in particular, as important and largely untapped resources for theorising love.…”

“…Love generates geographies because agents love in space, place and time. Similarly, because loving a subject or object entails the work of judgement – of valuing, ordering, assessing and adjudicating – it demarcates ethical circles of concern and the hierarchies which pervade them (Hartnett, 2022). Love, in sum, makes worlds by producing a sense of ‘we-ness’.…”

“…1 Second, they gesture towards intellectual history, in general, and disciplinary IR, in particular, as important and largely untapped resources for theorising love. Third, in their disparity, they assert that while love may well be a polymorphous, polysemous, political phenomenon that derives meaning-in-use (Hartnett, 2022), in its varied meanings and forms, it nonetheless performs the work of order. 2 That love performs the work of order -or to build on Hedley Bull's (2012) parsimonious formulation -supplies meaning or purpose to international political arrangements is evident in its normative work.…”

“…1 Second, they gesture towards intellectual history, in general, and disciplinary IR, in particular, as important and largely untapped resources for theorising love. Third, in their disparity, they assert that while love may well be a polymorphous, polysemous, political phenomenon that derives meaning-in-use (Hartnett, 2022), in its varied meanings and forms, it nonetheless performs the work of order. 2…”

Relational peace versus pacific primacy: Configuring US strategy for Asia's regional order

“…Every tie can be coded as positive or negative regardless of the network structure the ties produce, giving regional order a net negative or positive valence, which in turn would define the kinds of behaviors and trends that are possible or likely. While this insight is undertheorized in the literature, it appears inchoately in discussions ranging from ripeness and conflict resolution to emotion and love in world politics (Boulding, 1978; DeSteno et al, 2000; Hartnett, 2022; Lebow, 2017, pp. 161–186; Zartman, 2001, pp.…”