Schizoanalysis, as developed by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, offers a framework to dismantle rigid structures of meaning, identity, and power, emphasizing the fluidity of desire and the multiplicity of flows. Applying schizoanalysis to the scripto-centricity of Konkani—a language spoken predominantly in Goa, coastal Maharashtra, and Karnataka—reveals the complex interplay of historical, cultural, and political forces that have shaped its fragmented orthographic identity. Konkani’s use of multiple scripts (Devanagari, Roman, Kannada, Malayalam, and Perso-Arabic) reflects not just linguistic diversity but a battleground of desire, territorialization, and deterritorialization. This article explores how Konkani’s scripto-centricity—its fixation on script as a marker of identity—can be understood through a schizoanalytic lens, uncovering the molar and molecular forces that sustain and disrupt its linguistic landscape.
The Konkani Linguistic Assemblage
In schizoanalysis, an assemblage is a dynamic constellation of elements—human, non-human, material, and symbolic—that interact to produce meaning and subjectivity. Konkani’s linguistic assemblage is marked by its multiplicity of scripts, each tied to distinct socio-cultural and religious territories. Devanagari, promoted as the “official” script by the Indian state and Hindu-majority communities, carries molar weight, seeking to standardize and unify Konkani under a nationalist framework. In contrast, the Roman script, historically associated with Goan Catholics and Portuguese colonial influence, operates as a molecular flow, resisting the homogenizing force of Devanagari. Similarly, Kannada, Malayalam, and Perso-Arabic scripts reflect localized, minority expressions of Konkani identity, tied to specific geographic and cultural milieus.
This multiplicity is not merely a linguistic phenomenon but a site of desire-production. Deleuze and Guattari argue that desire is not a lack but a productive force, generating connections and ruptures. In Konkani, desire manifests in the attachment to scripts as symbols of identity—Devanagari as a claim to “Indianness,” Roman as a marker of Goan Catholic heritage, and other scripts as assertions of regional autonomy. Yet, this scripto-centricity also produces schisms, as communities territorialize their identities around specific orthographies, creating rigid boundaries that fragment the Konkani-speaking body.
Territorialization and Deterritorialization
Schizoanalysis distinguishes between molar structures (rigid, hierarchical systems) and molecular flows (fluid, subversive movements). The imposition of Devanagari as Konkani’s official script in Goa’s Official Language Act of 1987 exemplifies molar territorialization. Backed by state power and Hindu nationalist ideologies, Devanagari seeks to consolidate Konkani into a unified, “authentic” linguistic identity aligned with Indian nationhood. This process codes Konkani as a “Hindu” language, marginalizing non-Hindu speakers and their scripts, particularly the Roman script used by Goan Catholics.
However, this territorialization is incomplete. The Roman script persists as a deterritorializing force, sustained by Goan Catholic communities and the diaspora. Its use in literature, music (e.g., Konkani pop and tiatr), and digital spaces (e.g., social media posts on X) resists the molar dominance of Devanagari. Schizoanalysis reveals this as a molecular flow, where desire escapes the state’s attempt to fix meaning, creating lines of flight that disrupt scripto-centric hierarchies. For instance, the continued publication of Konkani works in Roman script, such as novels and newspapers like Vauraddeancho Ixtt, demonstrates a refusal to be fully absorbed into the Devanagari-centric framework.
Similarly, the use of Kannada and Malayalam scripts in Karnataka and Kerala reflects localized deterritorializations, where Konkani speakers assert regional identities against the homogenizing pull of both Devanagari and Roman scripts. These scripts operate as minoritarian expressions, challenging the binary Hindu-Catholic narrative that dominates Konkani’s scripto-centric discourse.
The Body Without Organs of Konkani
Deleuze and Guattari’s concept of the Body Without Organs (BwO) is a state of pure potentiality, free from rigid organization. Konkani’s scripto-centricity can be seen as a struggle between the organized, molar body of the language (tied to state-backed Devanagari) and its potential BwO—a fluid, script-agnostic Konkani that exists in the multiplicity of its expressions. The insistence on a single script risks reducing Konkani to a stratified, organ-ized body, where desire is channeled into fixed identities (Hindu/Devanagari, Catholic/Roman). A schizoanalytic approach, however, seeks to liberate Konkani’s BwO, embracing its multiplicity as a source of creative potential.
For example, Konkani’s oral traditions—folk songs, proverbs, and storytelling—transcend script entirely, existing as a molecular flow that predates and outlives orthographic debates. These oral forms, often performed in diverse dialects, embody the BwO, resisting the territorializing force of scripto-centricity. Similarly, digital platforms like X, where Konkani speakers mix scripts (e.g., Roman for casual posts, Devanagari for formal ones), create a rhizomatic space where Konkani’s multiplicity thrives, defying molar unification.
The Politics of Desire in Scripto-centricity
Schizoanalysis emphasizes how desire is co-opted by power structures. In Konkani, the state’s promotion of Devanagari aligns with a capitalist-nationalist project, where linguistic standardization facilitates bureaucratic control and cultural hegemony. This molar desire suppresses the molecular desires of minority script users, framing them as “less authentic” Konkani speakers. Yet, these minority scripts persist as lines of flight, fueled by community pride and historical memory. For instance, the Roman script’s resilience is tied to the Catholic community’s desire to preserve a distinct cultural identity, shaped by Portuguese colonialism and global migration.
However, schizoanalysis warns against romanticizing these resistances. The attachment to Roman or other scripts can itself become molar, territorializing Konkani into competing, exclusionary identities. A truly schizoanalytic approach would seek to dissolve these rigid attachments, encouraging a Konkani that flows freely across scripts, dialects, and communities—a language that becomes a process rather than a fixed entity.
Conclusion
A schizoanalytic reading of Konkani’s scripto-centricity reveals it as a dynamic assemblage, caught between molar forces of standardization and molecular flows of resistance. The multiplicity of scripts—Devanagari, Roman, Kannada, Malayalam, and Perso-Arabic—reflects not just linguistic diversity but a complex interplay of desire, power, and identity. By embracing Konkani’s Body Without Organs, we can move beyond scripto-centric territorializations, fostering a linguistic practice that celebrates fluidity and multiplicity. This requires dismantling the hierarchies that privilege one script over others, allowing Konkani to exist as a rhizomatic, ever-evolving language that thrives in its differences. In doing so, Konkani can become a site of revolutionary desire, resisting the molar constraints of nationalism, religion, and bureaucracy to affirm its vibrant, pluralistic potential.
