CONFABULATIONS

The Writer as the Reader: Meditations of Two-Face

2011-09-11T01:40:00.000-07:00

The Writer as the Reader: Meditations of Two-Face

Sachin Ketkar

One of the deadliest enemies of Batman is Two-Face. Harvey Dent, aDistrict Attorney and a close friend of Batman, became Two Face after half ofhis face was disfigured and he became criminally insane plotting crimes around the number two, such asrobbing Gotham Second National Bank at 2:00 on February 2and so on. But then Batman is himself double faced, living a double life asBruce Wayne, billionaire, playboy and philanthropist in the daylight and Batman in the night. The Readertoo is the Writer's double, his alter-ego,an accomplice and acollaborator in his crimes, his other, his lover and his enemy. As everyserious writer knows that the activities of reading and writing are notmutually exclusive and separate activities and that the division between thewriter as a producer of discourses and the reader as a the consumer is notmerely superficial but commercial as well. When I write I also read and when Iread I also produce the text. Neighter can I write without learning how toread, nor can I learn to read if nothing is writen and the question of which is primary becomes the hen and the egg question. Whenthe writer recognizes and identifize his image in his Mirror Stage, it is seen ‘inthe place of the Other', outside of the self. The writer imagines himself asthe Writer, separate, autonomous and self sufficient , precisely at the momentwhen he realizes that his identity is dependent on the other, that is, when he reads the marks he is inscribing on thepage or on the monitor. The reader is the writer's unconscious- the Otherwithin. The writing, itself becomes thediscourse of the Other.

The disapperance of the Writer, his death, is amyth, and most probably a Christian myth. The writer who disappears at the timewhen writing writes itself is merely reborn as the Reader. When the Readerreads she allows the writer's consciousness to pervade her soul, she allows theOther to intrude her self- that is she translates. Translation, like reading, is acknowledgingthe presence of the Other as the Other: the other language, other culture,other text, other writer, and so it is more ethical than many otherpractices.

Translation is both reading and writing and acritique of the division of the distinction between reading and writing. Effacing this illusionary distinction, itreveals that there can be no writing which is not based on reading and there isno reading that is not dependent on writing. Translation reveals that text evenif it carries the signature of the writer- the father, also bears the signature of the reader-themother. It reveals that both reading and writing are founded on there respectiveother. It shows that the either category of a binarism is dependent on itsopposite. The Derridian philosophy reveals that the position a text overtlyclaims to take is a translation of the position it opposes and the morepolemical a text is , the more literally it translates its counter position.These are the things that responsible for the othering and the marginalizationof translation.

Translation is both reading and writing ,reading as writing and writing as reading. It practices the diffrence whichveers towards sameness; it practices the opposites , yoked together, ina mythical schizoid economy. Etymologically, the term Yoga is derived from theSanskrit ‘yug- joining, a mythopoetic yoking together of the dualities,the Self and Other, the human consciousness and the cosmic consciousness, themale and the female principles, the yin and yang, the Purush and Prakriti, theday and the night, the good and the evil, the krushna (black) and the shukla(white), and knowledge (vidya) andignorance (avidya). But then translation is also bhoga, the apparent opposite of the Yoga. But the term bhogais etymologically derived from bhuja which means to relish, enjoy, eatand the word bhakti too is derived from the same root. Bhakti means toenjoy, relish, eat and be one with the Other and like the Yoga is an attempt toefface the dualities. But you cannot efface the dualities without recognizing their difference and thedistinction. But why is there disticntion and difference in the first place?Narsinh Mehta has his own ideas:

Only to taste the nectar of being manifold,

You created the jiva and the siva andcountless other forms!

In this entire universe, you alone exist, Shri Hari,

Yet, in infinite forms you seem to be!

The presence of the Other is dependent on thepresence of the self and Narsinh Mehta knows this full well:

Only because I truly exist, youexist! Without me, you cannot be!

You will exist only as long as I exist!

If I no longer exist, you too will cease to be, andbecome ineffable,

For who will name you if I cease to be?

Call it whatever you like advaita, schizophrenia,madness, poetry , samadhi, orgasm, bhakti or translation, it really makes nodifference. Therefore, when I ask myselfwho am I ? The writer or the reader? I can only reply: I am a translator, I amTwo-Face, yogi, bhogi, bhakta, schizophrenic, and Batman. Translate me as youwill.

Notes

Jacques Lacan, From Wikipedia, the free online encylopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lacan#The_mirror_stage_.28le_stade_du_miroir.29

Narsinh Mehta, translated by Sachin Ketkar, ‘Akhil Brahmandma Ek Tu Shri Hari' and ‘ Hun khare tu kharo, hu wina tu nahi,…..'from Shivlal Jesalpura ed. Narsinh Mehta ni Kavya Krutiyo, Sahitya SanshodhanPrakashan, Ahmedabad, 1989, page 289 and 290

Two Face, FromWikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Face

Yoga, From Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga

From: " (Trans) Migrating Words: Refractions towards Indian Translation Studies', Vdm Verlag Publishers, 2010

IS THERE AN ‘INDIAN SCHOOL' OF TRANSLATION STUDIES?

2011-09-09T08:26:00.000-07:00

Sachin Ketkar

IS THERE AN ‘INDIANSCHOOL' OF TRANSLATION STUDIES?

New Quest No.156, Mumbai, Apr-June2004, ISSN 0258-0381, 29-39,

Rebirth of a text inanother language is the birth in a different yoni- in a differentvagina, a different species. Thetranslated text is a different animal altogether. But the way of looking at this differentanimal in relation to earlier one in addition to its place and function in theterritory it inhabits in the present birth depends greatly on frames through itis perceived. This framework is usuallyspecific to culture, metaphysics, history, politics, and social institutions ofthe linguistic community that produces or receives translation. One wonders then, whether there are certainthemes and concerns which recur in writings on translation in India, or morefashionably, whether there is some sort of ‘Indian School' of TranslationStudies. As there seems to be a sudden upsurge of interest in translation inEnglish Studies in India, I have attempted in this paper a brief criticalsurvey of major theoretical positions of Indian scholars regarding translationand tried to understand them in the context of Indian cultural history. I havesought to discover shared areas of emphasis and differences in order to findout whether any such school exists. Ihave also compared major theorists writing in English and those writing in themodern Indian languages in order to highlight the difference rather thansimilarity between them.

The increased interestseems to be symptomatic of a certain dramatic shift in academic values,concerns, and mindset associated with English Studies in India. This shift has been from uncriticalacceptance of literatures in dominant Western languages, their canons, as wellas their critical vocabulary, to historical and political contexts in whichthey are produced, circulated and consumed. There is a distinct attempt to de-colonize its outlook. The emphasis ontranslation, I feel is one of the cultural strategies for the agenda ofdecolonialization.

Closely allied withEnglish Studies establishment in India are the Indian writers writing inEnglish, many of them have traditionally been accomplished translators. EnglishStudies has been one of the chief patrons of this species of writing in India.In the case of the earlier generation of writers like Sri Aurobindo or P.Lal,the source language was chiefly Sanskrit and later on, in the case of modernistbilingual poets like Dilip Chitre, A.K.Ramanujan, R. Parthashastry, and ArunKolatkar, the source language is primarily their first language. The focus ofthese translators has been largely on medieval bhakti literature. Rabindranath Tagore's translation of Kabirand Sri Aurobindo's translation of Vidyapati are the antecedents of these typeof translations. The bilingual poet translators deploy translation as astrategy to de-colonize their souls by translating what is considered as ‘trulyIndian'. A noted poet and translator P.Lal has made a very significant comment about this strategic function oftranslation:

‘I soon realizedthat an excessive absorption in the milieu and tradition of English wasdivorcing me from the values that I found all round me as an experiencingIndian, so I undertook the translation of Indian-in practice, mostlyHindu-sacred texts, in the hope that the intimacy that only translation cangive would enable me to know better what the Indian "myth" was, howit invigorated Indian literature, and what values one would pick up from itthat would be of use to me as an " Indian" human being and as anIndian using a so called foreign language, English, for the purposes of writingpoetry. (Cited by St.Pierre, 1997:143-144)'.

In this light one canunderstand Dilip Chitre's remark, ‘ Why I felt compelled to translate his(Tukaram’s) poetry: as a bilingual poet, I had little choice, if any. Therewere two parts of me, like two linguistic and cultural hemispheres, and, as pertheory, they were not destined to cohere..(2003:307)’ and ‘ I have been workingin a haunted workshop rattled and shaken by the spirits of other literaturesunknown to my ancestors….I have to build a bridge within myself between Indiaor Europe or else I become a fragmented person (2003:311-312).’

Many of these writer andtranslators grapple with the issue of identity and Indianness in their worksand these themes very naturally emerge in their translation theory andpractice. AK Ramanujan, who holds a unique place as a poet, translator, and atheorist, had announced the great ambition to translate non-native reader intoa native one as one of the main motivation behind translation. Yet he tooacknowledged that ‘ Every one's own tradition is not one' birthright; it has tobe earned, repossessed. The old bards earned it by apprenticing themselves tothe masters. One chooses and translates a part of one's past to make it presentto oneself and may be to others.'(Cited by Dharwadkar, 1999:122-123) Translationbecomes a strategy to give oneself one's roots. St. Pierre aptly observes thatsuch an attitude ‘ arises out of a desire to ground oneself more fully into theIndian source culture.' (1997:143-144) Comparable to what is happening inEnglish Studies, its alienated by products also have desire to de-colonizethemselves. However, a significant pointis that of shifting notion of what is meant by ‘truly Indian'. In case of the older generations, Indiannessmeant pan-Indian Sanskritic heritage and in case of modernists, Indiannessmeans pre-colonial heritage in modern Indian languages. Translation becomes one of the inevitable andcreative contrivances of giving oneself the sense of belonging and anationality.

The main theorists fromthe English Studies establishment are the reputed scholars like Harish Trivedi,G.N.Devy, Dilip Chitre, Tejaswini Niranjana, and Sujit Mukherjee. They areconcerned with colonial history and its impact on practice and reflection ontranslation in India. They are chieflyconcerned about what is called Indian Literature in English Translation, orIndo-English Literature. The English Studies connection of these scholars isreflected in the theorizing and the sorts of concerns typical to this churchemerge everywhere in their thinking.

Harish Trivedi (1996) hasprovided a fourfold division of Indian literature translated into English: i)Indic and Indological works, mainly translations of the ancient and medievalSanskrit or Pali texts into English, ii) the translations of late ancient andmedieval works, largely to do with bhakti, for instance, A K Ramanujan'stranslations or Rabindranath Tagore's translation of Kabir. Trivedi calls these two trends as neo-Orientalistor post Orientalist trends, iii) fictional works depicting various aspects ofmodern India realistically like the work of Tagore or Premchand. Trivedi remarks that this category broadlyconforms to Fredric Jameson's inadequate description of the Third Worldnational allegory and iv) Modernist or High modernist writers translated intoEnglish, a category which Trivedi believes is contrary to Jameson's thesis asit shows that internationalism/universalism cosmopolitanism can flourish in theThird World as well (52)

In Trivedi’s firstcategory can be put works of brilliant Indologists and Sanskrit scholars likeWendy Donniger O Flatthery, Barbara Stoller-Miller, or Lee Siegel who haveproduced excellent translations of Sanskrit classical texts with erudite andinsightful commentaries, forewords, and appendices. Indian scholars like Sri Aurobindo, CC Mehta,and P Lal who have translated from Sanskrit classics into English also can beput under this heading. The list isquite long, but shadow of Orientalism looms large over these translations andso does desire to indulge in the ‘glories of past'.

AK Ramanujan'stranslations from South Indian saint-singers and of ancient Sangam classics,and many other works more or less well received belong to the second categorydescribed by Trivedi. It is unfair to label these translations as neo- or post-Orientalist as these are by the translators who belong to the colonizedcultures and they translate into language of colonizers rather than thecolonial translator translating into their first language. Besides, Orientalism worked in tandem withthe colonizing project. Nevertheless,the colonial history does play a crucial role in production and reception ofthese types of translations as mentioned earlier. The desire to relate the Eastand the West in ‘positive' manner springs from English educated Indian'sconscious or unconscious fear of alienation and of not belonging to the verycountry he or she is born in. Thiscrisis may be due to historical, or (to use a more fashionable word) ‘post-colonial'condition, but then this should definitely separate it from translations oforientalists.

The third category aspointed out by Trivedi, and is very well documented by Sujit Mukherjee (1994)who gives an excellent list of various Indo-English realistic fictional workstranslated into English in his appendix which depict various aspects of modernIndian life. Mukherjee makes a strongcase for inclusion of these works in academic study of what is called ‘Eng.Lit.'The fourth category, that of the Modernist and high modernist poets and writerstranslated into English features in Mukherjee’s list too. He also provides a list of Indian dramastranslated into English. Mukherjee'slist is not complete, but it reveals what a great help this kind of effortprovides to scholars. Trivedi's schema is useful but the last two categories ofhis four-fold framework seem to have only polemical relevance in the context ofhis argument against Jameson's view. The division between the works that dealrealistically with India and the more modernist and experimental fiction iscontroversial. He seems to imply that the latter type of fiction is more ‘international'and having ‘universal/global' appeal while the former has only local, regionalor national appeal.

Like Trivedi, Devy (1993)is interested in the historical context of translation activity in India. Hedivides the history of translating Indian literature into English into fourphases, namely: the colonial phase (1776-1910), the revivalist phase (1876-1950),the nationalist phase (1902-1929), and the formalist phase (1912- ) (120).Commenting on contribution of emergence and growth of Indian-English literaturein growth of Indian literature in English Translation, he remarks that thecreative writers writing in English have created ‘a ready language for thetranslators' as they have invented modes of ‘ representing Indian turns ofspeech, shades of sentiments, ways of feeling and social manners.' Besides, many Indian creative writers inEnglish, who are bilinguals, are translators. This fact also contributes to development of this category (124).However, one wonders whether growth and development of something like GermanWriting in English (if there is any such thing) is necessary and important fordevelopment of German literature in English Translation!

Tejaswini Niranjana'sexcellent book, apart from a rather unjust attack on Ramanujan, SitingTranslation, History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context (1995)is concerned with complex interrelationship between colonialism,post-structuralist philosophy, and translation. This concern for colonial pastand Western theories also characterize most of the contemporary theoreticalwriting on translation in English in India. One wonders why only the scholars associated with English Studies are soseriously concerned with colonial history and Western critical theory.

" In a post-colonialcontext the problematic of translation becomes a significant site forraising questions of representation, power, and historicity," shemaintains," the context is one of contesting and contested storiesattempting to account for, to recount, the asymmetry and inequality ofrelations between peoples, races, languages". In translation, the relationship between thetwo languages is hardly on equal terms. Niranjana draws attention to a rather overlooked fact that translationis between languages that are hierarchically related, and that it is a mode ofrepresentation in another culture. Whenthe relationship between the cultures and languages is that of colonizer andcolonized, "translation...produces strategies of containment. By employing certain modes of representingthe other-which it thereby also brings into being--translation reinforceshegemonic versions of the colonized, helping them acquire the status of whatEdward Said calls representations or objects without history '(p.3). She points out in the introduction that herconcern is to probe ‘the absence, lack, or repression of an awareness ofasymmetry and historicity in several kinds of writing on translation'(p.9). Her theoretical position seems tobe more relevant to translations into English and orientalist translations, butthe point she has raised about asymmetry and hierarchy very well applies totranslations between Indian languages. The lack of systematic theorization about the problems raised bytranslation between bhashas or modern Indian languages will be dealtlater in the paper.

Harish Trivedi (1997) demonstrates howtranslation of Anatole France's Thais by Premchand was distinctly apolitical act in the sense that the very selection of a text was that of a onewhich was not part of literature of colonial power and that it attempted a sortof liberation of Indian literature from the tutelage of the imperially-inductedmaster literature, English (407).

The postcolonial theoryhas, indeed, provided a powerful analytical framework for translation studies.Bassnett and Trivedi (1999) believe that the hierarchic opposition between theoriginal work and translation reflects the hierarchic opposition between theEuropean colonizer culture and the colonized culture. This hierarchy, they observe, is Eurocentric,and its spread is associated with the history of colonialization, imperialism,and proselytization (1-4). Because of these historical reasons, many radicaltheories of translation have come up in the former colonies.

G.N.Devy has formulated acredible Indian perspective to translation theory by contrasting the ways inwhich translation is perceived in India and in the West. Devy rightly notes that the metaphysicalstatus of translation determines how it is perceived in a culture. Contrasting Western metaphysics with that ofEast, Devy states, ‘ in Western metaphysics, translation is an exile and anexile is a metaphorical translation- a post-Babel crisis. The multilingual, eclectic Hindu spirit,ensconced in the belief in the soul's perpetual transition from form to form,may find it difficult to subscribe to the Western metaphysics of translation(135). He points out that Western linguistics is essentially monolingual andrules out the very possibility of interlingual synonymy. It also overlooks that fact that languagesare ‘open' to one another's influence in linguistic, social and historicalsense. Devy is of opinion that Indianconsciousness is ‘translating consciousness' and it exploits the ‘potentialopenness of language systems'. Hebelieves ‘ if we take lead from Phenomenology and conceptualize a wholecommunity of ‘translating consciousness', it should be possible to develop atheory of inter-lingual synonymy '(139-141). Devy is optimistic that anacceptable theoretical perspective on translation can emerge from India becauseit has ‘ a culture that accepts metamorphosis as the basic principle ofexistence' and its metaphysics is not haunted by the fear of exile. He notes that the whole bhakti movement ofpoetry in India had the ‘desire of translating the language of spiritualityfrom Sanskrit to the languages of people.'

Devy's call for indigenousand native theory of translation based on local context and local social,literary and cultural traditions is also found in Ayyapaa K Paniker's ‘TheAnxiety of Authenticity: Reflection on Literary Translation' (1996:36-45). Hepoints out that the fear of being unfaithful and the anxiety of being true tothe original in letter in spirit did not haunt the medieval Indiantranslators. He notes, ‘ All through theMiddle Ages, throughout the length and breadth of India, Sanskrit classics likethe epics and puranas continued to be retold, adapted, subverted and ‘translated'without worrying about the exactness and accuracy of formal equivalence.'(37).He speculates that it was with beginning of attempts to translate the Bibleinto Indian languages that this question of authenticity became a bugbear. He points out that the politics of medievalIndian translations could perhaps be understood and interpreted in terms of thevisible absence of the anxiety of authenticity on the part of these ‘translators'.He also notes that the absence of an exact equivalent for the modern sense of’translation ' in medieval Indian languages probably suggests that the Indianpractice tolerated a great deal of creative deviance in retelling or adaptationof a literary text and that the prestige of the source text did not haunt orfrighten the reader (1998). Paniker isno doubt right in pointing out this fact but it should also be kept in mindthat translation is an inseparable part of any proselytizingmovement. Spread of Buddhism in thefirst millenium across Asia also utilized practice of systematic and veryaccurate translations which have contributed not only to spread of variety ofsecular and religious Indian texts but also development of Asian languages. Sunitikumar Pathak (1978) furnishes aninteresting account of spread of Buddhist religion in Tibet, Mangolia, andSiberia. He notes that thousands ofhighly accurate renderings of Buddhist and Brahminical texts were producedunder royal patronage in Tibet and that in the ninth century AD there was aconference to standardize techniques of translation in accordance with Tibetanlanguage and prosody. Several seculartexts like the plays of Kalidasa or famous Amarkosha weretranslated. The stress was on high fidelityto source texts and translations had to get approval from council ofeditors. They were so accurate, saysPathak, that scholars could reconstruct many Mahayana Buddhist texts missing intheir original languages by translating the Tibetan translation back intoSanskrit and Prakrit. These translatedtexts also later served the role of source texts for many other languages ofAsia. Fidelity, it seems, is not an invention of Bible translators, but seemsto be associated with the project of proselytization.

What is interesting tonote is that search for ‘authentic' or truly native India seems to take modernIndian English translators as well as theorists to pre-colonial, medievalIndia. Colonial history is something ofa nightmare that one should try to forget. One notes that like the Indianwriters writing in English, the increasing interest in translation reflects theincreased awareness in English Literary Studies in India about its ownalienation from the Indian social context. This sense of alienation will play a decisive role in the new directionsin English studies in India will take.

While all thistheorization is no doubt very important, the obsession with colonial history,western theories, and the problematic of the place of English in India istypical of the scholars associated with English Studies. This obsession withpost-colonial theorization is often taken to dogmatic extremities in Indiathese days. These concerns reflectcertain self-awareness, which, one wonders, may be a form of repressed guiltamong the erudite scholars in English Studies regarding its politicalunderpinnings and history of its role in colonial times. This has led to the neglect of problems oftranslating from one Indian language to another as mentioned earlier andtheoretical writings in Indian languages.

In contrast to theperspectives mentioned, some of the well-known critics of the earliergeneration like RB Patankar (1969:61-72) had some profound things to say abouttranslation. He speculates on the possibility of translation from an aestheticand philosophical point of view. He says that translations of literary worksare said to be logically impossible but not empirically so. He points out thecontradiction in the arguments of the critics who deny the possibility oftranslation. He says that the most fundamental assumption, which underlies inthe activity of translation, is that meaning can be separated from its verbalexpression and the critics who deny the possibility of translation are thosewho believe that in a literary work the verbal expression and the meanings areunique and cannot be separated from one another. However, Patankar says thatthis later thesis will also have to deny the existence of literary criticismand aesthetics since these disciplines are based on the assumption that meaningof work of art can be abstracted in order to be understood and analyzed. Therefore, if criticism is possible,translation too, to an extent must be possible. He maintains, ‘there is no reason why the translator should feel uneasyabout this procedure (of abstraction). He is in good company; for the process of abstraction which underlieshis activity also underlies the activity of all practical criticism which isengaged in classifying, grading and rationally judging works of art' (71). Thisrefreshing perspective anticipates Andre Lefevere' s position by at least adecade or two by affiliating translation to all other forms of ‘rewriting' and ‘refraction'like criticism.

One more domain of studythat is rather neglected by the scholars in English Studies is the theoreticalwritings on translation in Indian languages. One of the oldest examples of suchwriting is by a noted essayist, scholar, and translator VishnushashtriChiploonkar (1850-1882) in Marathi. Hisessay’ Bhashantar' appeared in Nibandhmala, book 1, and twelfthissue in December 1874. His essay wouldbe of great interest to the scholars of English Studies as he too is writingabout translation from the point of view of colonialism and place of English.

In present times, writerssuch as Umashankar Joshi, Harivallabh Bhayani in Gujarati, Bhalchandra Nemadein Marathi and Bholanath Tiwari in Hindi have produced many scholarly writings,which can be of great use to anyone studying translation theory in the Indiancontext. Translation theory is beinggradually recognized as a significant area of study in regional languages andgreater numbers of writings on translation are appearing in these languages.

The noted Gujarati poetand critic Umashankar Joshi has perceptively commented on use of terms like bhashantarand anuvad for translation. Contrasting the use of bhashantar with anuvad, he saysthat bhashantar implies change of language and hence is only change offormal properties of expression, while anuvad implies an attempt torecapture the content and the voice once again. He has also discussed problems of samshloki or verse translationsin identical stanza form.

In a very dense andcomprehensive essay, the noted Marathi novelist and critic Bhalchandra Nemade(1987) has lamented the lack of significant development in translation studies.(78-85). He laments the fact that even if original work is bad, it gets moreimportance than an excellent translation. He also indicates that while in the West, the great writers-translatorslike Ezra Pound, and Dryden have theoretically discussed various aspects oftranslation, great Marathi translators have stayed away from theorizing. Hecomments on interdisciplinary nature of translation studies. His view on the notion of ‘equivalence' israther interesting. He believes thatthat it is easier to find approximate equivalence in genealogically andgeographically closer languages like Marathi and Gujarati or Marathi and Kannada.This is a commonly held view by the translators working between Indianlanguages. Being a trained linguist, Nemade goes on to discuss what is termedas ‘ problems of translation' from linguistics approach. Elaborating on often repeated statement thatthe foundation of the modern age was laid by translators, he stresses the needfor analysis of linguistic impact of English on Marathi syntax, lexis, andphonology along with stylistic aspects of literary Marathi using methodology ofcomparative linguistics. He hasextensively discussed cultural and sub-cultural aspects of translation andproblems of evaluation of translation. Essays like these are of great value to the student of translationstudies in India. In comparison to thescholars writing in English, these scholars seem to be less concerned aboutpost-colonial perspective on translation or producing an ‘Indian theory' oftranslation and tend to focus more on pragmatic aspects of translation. These essays usually tend to summarizetheoretical position of well-known Western translation theorists, as if tointroduce them to the reader of regional languages, while their counterpartswriting in English many times seems to take such things for granted.

None of these theoreticalwritings, whether in English or in regional Indian languages can be calledrepresentative of a truly ‘Indian' school of translation studies as both thesetype of theorizing mainly reflect their own specific problems and concerns. Ifa truly ‘Indian' school of translation studies is to emerge, it should notlimit itself to translations into English or be merely introductory or languagespecific like those in regional Indian languages. It should explore the relationshipsbetween the multiplicities of Indian languages. Such relationships arehistorical, political, social and literary. It should also focus on the issueslike the challenges of translating from regional language to another. Paul St. Pierre makes the best advancement inthe direction of a really Indian school of translation studies.

The essay, ‘Translation ina Plurilingual Post-colonial context: India' by Paul St.Pierre (1997) is anilluminating analysis into the problems of translating from one Indian languageto another and which offers some interesting insights into the complexities ofthis area. He discusses various projectslike Aadan Pradan (lit. interexchange) run by National Book Trust, andSahitya Akademi projects for translating a major literary work from onelanguage into another. He points outthat these projects aim at ‘forging national integration through the exchangeof creative literature'. However, he ismore interested in the disparity and asymmetrical relation between variouslanguages due to political and social reasons. He indicates that more translations are published in the northern andcentral Indian languages than in the south Indian languages, when one considersthe ratio of the population of speakers and the number of books published bythe NBT.

These, he believes,

‘ Do not simply represent what one might suspect to be an underlyingnorth south bias....' but this requires interpretation, if one takes intoaccount local contexts- availability of translators, for example, and culturaltraditions-as well as historical relations between languages and communities inIndia. Such relations and contextscontinue to exist in Modern India and they influence cultural productions, suchas translations. They are as much aresult of colonial policy-the formation of a unitary states out of a pluralityof princedoms, feudatory states, etc., - as of decisions to maintain thedivisions in modern India along linguistic lines. Thus India is not only a state in whichlinguistic divisions are maintained, but it is also a nation in which suchdivisions can lead to new rivalries or continue the old ones.'(142).

As an illustration, heexamines the case of Bengali texts translated into Orissa and evinces how fargreater number of Bengali texts in Oriya translations reflects near hegemonicstatus of Bengali in Orissa. Indeed, theunequal relations among Indian languages deeply affect traffic of translatedtexts between the languages. One hasonly to consider number of Gujarati books translated into Marathi or Bengaliand vice versa to realize that translation hardly takes between languageshaving equal footing and there is a distinct imbalance between them. An interesting picture emerges when weconsider the number of books from Indian languages translated into other Indianlanguages. Bengali and Marathi have theleast amount of translations from Indian languages (Anuvadaat TarzanchiBhartiya Bhashat Hanuman Udi, Maharastra Times 5 April 1996). Does thisnumber reflect some sort of regionalist arrogance these languages have vis-a-visother literatures in Indian languages? There is indeed such a thing as hierarchy among the literary languagesof India. Apart from this, one alsoneeds to ask that though there are better days coming for translations fromIndian languages into English, are there better days in store for translationsfrom one Indian language into another Indian language? Questions like these need to be examined morethoroughly.

St. Pierre ends his essayby underscoring the need to contextualize practice of translation in India andsays that, ‘ Translation... underscoresthe connection of translation to power: relations between languages and betweencommunities are actualized and transformed through translation; translationstrategies reproduce more than mere meaning. The close examination of such relations and strategies makes it possibleto elucidate the locations of powers within and between cultures in a concretefashion, and this should, it seems to be one the goals of translationstudies. ' (145). It seems that a soundtheoretical framework for studying a crucial, yet neglected area of translationstudies in India has come from someone who is not an Indian. It is interestingto consider the fact that while Western orientalist and Indian scholars followingtheir example the nineteenth century were giving most of their attention topan-Indian and privileged languages like Sanskrit, Christian missionaries weredoing a great service to the bhashas. So today, while most of the critics are focussing mainly on translationinto or from English, people like St-Pierre has produced a major statement onproblems of translation between Indian languages. An extensive and intensive study on basisof such a theoretical framework can yield excellent results.

The study of translationpractice and theory in the context of globalization is crucial significance fora multilingual, post-colonial nation like India. Paul St.-Pierre (2002) and Lawrence Venuti(1998) have made some insightful reflections on the relationship between translationpractices and the processes of globalization. St.-Pierre points out theproblems of making generalized observations regarding the relationship betweenglobalization and translation. As against Venuti’s generalized observation that globalization results in morecapital being spent on translation into the regional languages, Paul St.-Pierrecalls attention to the fact ofincreasing emphasis on translations fromIndian languages like Oriya into English. This is says is due to theplace of English in a multilingual, post-colonial society like India. He notesthe important contradiction in the situation like this where the processes ofglobalization are threatening the local languages and cultures on the one handand at the same time it also valorizes the regional and the local by considering it worthy of translation andpublication by important publishers.

One can sum up the characteristicconcerns of existing ‘Indian School ' of translation studies: colonial history,the ambivalent place of English in multilingual Indian society, translation asquest for identity and a quest for ‘true' ‘authentic' India, Indian literaturein English translation, search for indigenous or native theory of translation,contrast between Western culture and metaphysics and Indian culture andmetaphysics, all these seem to be recurring concerns of the theoristsassociated with English studies. These concerns as well as the growingattention to translation are an attempt to decolonize itself. Their neglect oftheoretical writings in regional languages is typical of certain vanity andsnobbishness associated with departments of English. In general, historical study of translationas a process, product and as a notion in India is hardly undertaken. Dr. Bholanath Tiwari (1972) has discussed thenotion and practice of translation in ancient India in some detail. I have in my own humble way, attempted to piecetogether several writings that analyze diachronically the notion and practiceof translation and have tried to narrate briefly the story of translation inIndia. (Sachin Ketkar, 2002). The translators who are practicing writers inEnglish also translate in order to overcome their own feeling of alienation.The question of identity and ‘roots' lie at the base of intention behindtranslations, especially English. Though what is meant by ‘truly' Indian haschanged over a period for these translators, the purpose behind the translationactivity remains the same. The writings in English as well as those in regionallanguages have a limited relevance, if some sort of strong Indian school oftranslation studies is to emerge. They are usually narcissistic and self-obsessedas they deal only with the problems and issues specific to their domains. Itcan emerge only after intensive and extensive study of historical, political,social cultural and literary relationships between the plurality of Indianlanguages. The essay of St. Pierre can be considered as a step in rightdirection.

WORKS CITED

AK Singh ed. Translation: Its theory and Practice, New Delhi:Creative Books 1996

Anuvadaat Tarzanchi Bhartiya Bhashat Hanumanudi! Maharastra Times, 5 April 1996.

Ayyapaa K Paniker, ‘The Anxiety of Authenticity: Reflections onLiterary translations ' in A.K.Singh (ed.) Translation Its Theory and Practice,1996,

Ayyappa Paniker, Towards an Indian Theory of Literary Translation,in Tutun Mukherjee ed. Translation: From Periphery to Centrestage, 1998

Bassnett and Trivedi eds. Post Colonial Translation: Theory andPractice. Post-Colonial, London and NY: Routledge 1999

Bhalchandra Nemade, Sahityachi Bhasha, Aurangabad: SaketPrakashan, 1987 78-85

Bholanath Tiwari, Anuwad Vigyan, Delhi: Shabdakar, 1972

Dilip Chitre, ‘Life on the Bridge’ Text of the Third Ajneya MemorialLecture delivered by Dilip Chitre under the auspicies of the South AsiaInstitute at the University of Heidelberg, Germany, in 1988, in ‘Says Tuka-1’ Selectedpoems of Tukaram, Translated from the Marathi with an Introduction by DilipChitre, the Sontheimer Cultural Association, Pune. 2003

GN Devy, In Another Tongue: Essays on Indian English Literature,Madras: Macmillan India, 1993

Harish Trivedi ‘ India, England, France, A (Post-) ColonialTranslational Triangle' in S.Ramakrishna ed., Delhi: Pencraft International1997

Harish Trivedi. The Politicsof Post-Colonial Translation' in AK Singh ed. Translation: Its theory andPractice, New Delhi: Creative Books 1996

R.B. Patankar, Aesthetics and Literary Criticism, Bombay:Nachiketa Publications, 1969

S.Ramakrishna ed. Translation and Multilingualism. PostColonial Contexts, Delhi: PencraftInternational 1997

Sachin Ketkar, Translation of Narsinh Mehta's poems into English:With a Critical Introduction, unpublished doctoral thesis submitted to theSouth Gujarat University, Surat 2002

S.K.Chatterjee ed. The Cultural Heritage of India. vol.v.Calcutta: The Ramkrishna Mission, 1978.

St. Pierre, Translation in a PlurilingualPost-colonial context: India' in S.Ramakrishna ed. Translation andMultilingualism. PostColonial Contexts,Delhi: Pencraft International 1997.

______________ ‘Translation in an Era ofGlobalization’ in Journal of Contemporary Thought, Summer 2002, Vadodara, ed.Prafulla Kar et. al, Guest Editor Paul St.-Pierre.

Sujit Mukherjee, Translation as Discovery and Other Essays onIndian Literature in English Translation, Hyderabad: Orient Longman 1994

Sunitikumar Pathak ‘Tibet, Mangolia, Siberia.' Indian literatures abroad. In S.K.Chatterjee ed. The Cultural Heritage of India, vol.v. , 1978.

Susan Bassnett Translation Studies, London and NY: Methuen,1980.

Tejaswini Niranjana, Siting Translation History, Post-Structuralism,and the Colonial Context Hyderabad: Orient Longman. 1995

Tutun Mukherjee ed. Translation: From Periphery to Centrestage,New Delhi: Prestige Books, 1998.

Umashankar Joshi. Kavi Ni Sadhana, Mumbai: Vora and Co.publishers pvt. Ltd., 1961, pp.111-124

Vasant Bapat. TaulnikSahityabhyas: Multatve Ani Disha Mumbai: Mauj Prakashan Gruh andAanterbharti, 1981

Vinay Dharwadkar's AK Ramanujan's Theory and Practice ofTranslation' in Bassnett and Trivedi eds. 1999

Vishnu Shastri Chiploonkar’ Bhashantar' Nibandhmala, book one twelfth issue, twelfth essay; December 1874

Dionysus in Gandhi’s Ahmedabad

2009-10-10T04:19:00.000-07:00

Dionysus is not exactly a Gandhian God. He is the god of cruelty, excess, orgy and transgression. Restored to the Western pantheon in 1872 by Fredric Nietzsche, chiefly in order to blitzkrieg the dominant values of the Western Civilization, Dionysus presides as the chief deity of modernism. The Greek God whose philosophy is `excess of anything is good’ counters both the Christian ideas of moderation and self restraint as well as the bourgeois ideology of `excess of anything is bad’. Monroe K Spears’s book `Dionysus and the City’ (1970), whose title I have stolen for the title of this article, examines the relationship between the Nietzschean Dionysus and the context of urbanization in the development of modernism in the west says,

` Dionysus presides metaphorically over most of the recent trends in theater, from cruelty and absurdity to audience participation, nudity, and the tribal rock musical. On and off the stage, he is apparent in two contemporary figures: the black militant, violently releasing dark and repressed forces both in society and within psyche, and the rock musician, with his female devotees and his orgiastic cult of collective emotion.’ (1970: 35)

Professor Spears in his insightful analysis points out that the word City etymologically comes from the civitas, city-state, which is properly an aggregation of cives, citizens and the term civilization too comes from the same root. As a poetic trope, it stands for both the city within and the city without. Professor Spears, drawing upon ideas from Walter Pater’s essay ` A Study of Dionysus’, comments that modernism began when Dionysus entered the city. In earlier times, Civitas Terrena or the Earthly City was seen as striving towards a Heavenly City, Civitas Dei, but for moderns, says Prof Spears, it is seen as falling or fallen and moving towards the Infernal City the City of Dis, the city of Dante and Baudelaire, and of Eliot. In short, when the modernist poets paint the city in dark and sinister colours, they are in many ways censuring and negating the process of urbanization as well as the entire foundation of civilization, they are criticizing the city within and without. If modern city stands for modernity, then modernism, as a cultural movement often stands in contradiction and negation to modernity.

However, the relationship between the city and the village is crucial not just in analysis of modernism, but also for entire literary historiography and historical analysis of culture as demonstrated by Raymond Williams’ seminal book ` The Country and the City’(1973). Giving a lucid and rigorous analysis of shifting values, perceptions and associations of the opposition between the country and the city as embodied in English literary history, Williams remarks that this contrast,` is one of the major forms in which we become conscious of a central part of our experience and of the crises of our society’. (1973:289). He argues that capitalism, as a mode of production, is the basic process of most of what we know as the history of country and city. He cites Marx and Engels from the Communist Manifesto where they say, ` the bourgeoisie has subjected the country to the rule of the towns...has created enormous cities...has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilized ones.’ (1973:303).

Williams, in spite of being a Marxist, is critical of the idea implicit within Marxism and socialism, the avowed enemies of capitalism, in their perception that the city is more `advanced and progressive’ than the country because the industrial capitalism is a more progressive than the feudal capitalism. However, what is important to us in our analysis of the relationship between modernism and the city in the Indian context is Raymond Williams’ awareness of relevance of this thesis to cultures beyond the British and the western culture. He is aware of the fact that the historical process he is studying is `now effectively international, means that we have more than material for interesting comparisons. ‘(1973:292)

While it would be illuminating to examine the imagery and sensibility associated with the urban experience in the modernist Indian poetry, I would be delimiting myself to Gujarati. The meaning of the term modernism is indeed ambiguous and contested; however, I would characterize modernism as a sense of discontinuity with tradition and rebellion against established artistic and ethical norms. The earliest glimpse of modernism in Gujarati poetry can be found in Niranjan Bhagat (b.1926)’s ` Pravaal Dveep’ or The Coral Island. The poems are centred on the experience of the megapolis called Mumbai and exhibit influences of the western modernist poets like Eliot and Rilke along with Tagore. Among the famous contemporaries of Bhagat is Suresh Joshi (1921-1986). A lesser-known contemporary of Bhagat is Hasmukh Pathak (b.1930) also exhibits early modernist sensibility centred on the urban experience. In `Saherni Ghadio Ganta..’ or Keeping a count of time in the city, he uses a typical modernist metaphor:

` and the evening ( with lipstick decorating her lips)

Kisses the streets and lanes;

Hundreds of mercury lamps dance to the Jazzy beats,

And fires find their way into gutters.

The orphaned dreams wandering and lost at midnight

Weep for a while and turn silent.

While Mumbai has played a very significant role in formation of modernist sensibility in Gujarati and Marathi, it would extremely interesting to see how the city called ` the Manchester of the East’ Ahmedabad emerges from Gujarati modernist poetry. Ahmedabad or Ahmadabad is the largest city in Gujarat and the sixth largest city in India with a population of almost 5 million. The city is also sometimes called Karnavati , an older name and as Amdavad in colloquial Gujarati . Ahmedabad is the administrative center of Ahmedabad District, and was the former capital of Gujarat State from 1960 to 1970, when Gandhinagar replaced it.

One of the most famous poems on Ahmedabad is a ghazal written by `Adil’ Mansuri (b.1936) one of the rebellious Gujarati poets who had to leave Ahmedabad, his homeland. Mansuri was associated with the avant-garde `Rhey Math’, a group of rebellious poets based in Mumbai. He is also credited with introducing modernist sensibility to Gujarati ghazal. The ghazal in question here is romantic and looks at the city he is leaving in a sentimental fashion.

You might never see it again

This city playing in the sands

You might never catch a glimpse of it again

On the plains of your memory

Fill up its fragrance in your breath

You might never catch the scent of its wet earth again

Ahmedabad emerges as an idyllic Eden from which Adam and Eve are driven away. The ghazal ends with romantic idealization of the motherland:

Let me rub the dust of my homelands to my forehead, `Adil’

Who knows I may never see the dust in my life again.

However, not all are so sad to leave Ahmedabad or mind losing the so-called ` Paradise’:

Ahmedabad

Manilal Desai

Only in the eyes of the camels, you find compassion in Ahmedabad. Humans don’t have eyes at all. Walking on the hot tar roads, cataracts have covered their brains. I too live in Ahmedabad. I live in Ahmedabad too, and a translucent film has started to envelope me. The air conditioners of Niroz and Quality restaurants struggle to breathe in the Bhatiyar lane. The lane, however, casts shadows of the whores of Maninagar. The sands of Sabarmati have spread over every street of Ahmedabad, and the roads wait to be inundated with frenzied floods. It wasn’t for fishing by the river, did Gandhi build Sabarmati Ashram, nor was it for dallying with the Ahmedabadi dames coming for a bath here. He, in fact, wanted to procure an auto-rickshaw for Ahmedshah, who happens to drive a cycle-rickshaw here. But Ahmedabad can’t think of anything other than spitting on the tracks of Balwantrai Mehta’s car or banging its head against Indulal Yagnik’s cap. Yesterday, the horses of Ahmedabad neighed in the tombs of Sarkhej- tomorrow, Adam will ask, ` What have you done with the feelings I gave you?’ and I will take hold of the finger of a shoe-polish boy from Lal Darwaja who has agreed to polish shoes for a paisa, and run away from Ahmedabad.

Only camels are capable of compassion in Manilal’s Ahmedabad and the speaker is scared that he too will turn callous by living here. The poet flattens out the history and makes a collage out of it. Mahatma Gandhi ‘s Sabarmati Ashram for the speaker is built because Gandhiji wants to buy an auto-rickshaw for Ahmed Shah, the founder Sultan of Ahmedabad of the fifteenth century, who happens to be slogging on a cycle rickshaw here. History has reduced the glorious Islamic emperors to cycle rickshaw drivers. The resplendence of the Sultanate is reduced to poverty. Yet Ahmedabad does not care and given a chance the modernist Adam, unlike Adil’s Adam prefers to flee Ahmedabad holding the finger of a shoe polish boy from Lal Darwaja. Manilal’s Adam is more concerned about turning thick-skinned in Ahmedabad.

Manilal Desai (1939-1966) belongs to the later generation of modernist Gujarati poets, which include poets like Labhshanker Thaker (b.1935), Ghulam Mohammed Sheikh (b.1937), ) Ravji Patel (1939-1968), Chandrakant Sheth (b. 1938) , Chinu Modi (b.1939) and Sitanshu Yashashchandra Mehta ( b.1941). What is most important here is the experience of metropolis and urbanization pervades their works in terms of imagery and sensibility. Sheikh, for instance, has many surreal sequences based on the cities like Delhi and Mumbai.

Gandhi’s Ahmedabad is no longer the land of non-violence and peace. In a poem called ` Maru Shaher’ by Chinu Modi, we find Ahmedabad behaving in more of a Godseian way:

My City

Chinu Modi

You won’t find any fog here anymore

Even if every mill is shut down

No heart melts here anymore

The city exhausted of serving Gandhi

Violently seeks vengeance in innumerable ways

My city: Ahmedabad

They measure your shadows

Not bodies

To stitch clothes;

Here you have to live like bugs

On borrowed breath

Roads are of tar here

And sunlight black as tar

Falls here

My city: Ahmedabad

This city is an old man

Groaning with constipation

This city is all the fancy aerobics

Of a back broken spider

It’s a museum of fallen stars

A grand crematory

Incessantly

Incinerating corpses

My city: Ahmedabad.

Tomorrow a rabbit

Will prey on a dog

Will reduce my honour

To ashes

Who knows what sins of my past life

Is this city avenging?

I cant forego it even for a moment

And it doesn’t let me live

In peace even for a while

O Ahmedabad

Why did you become Karnavati again?

Why don’t you become Aasapalli?

Ahmedabad is neither the `Manchester of the East’ nor is the land of ahimsa. The mills are closed down and like Manilal’s Ahmedabad, it gives a damn for it. The city is exhausted of serving Gandhi and seeks vengeance with incredible violence. The poem written in 2001, which compares Ahmedabad to a `grand crematory constantly burning the corpses’ is indeed sinisterly prophetic. We can feel reverberations of the Post Godhra carnage in it. Like Manilal, Chinu Modi too flattens out history in a form of collage and uses plenty of allusions to historical legends surrounding Ahmedabad. The line about a rabbit preying on a dog is the story associated with the Sultan mentioned in the Manilal’s poem who is famed to have founded the city of Ahmedabad on the Hindu city of Karnavati after he saw a rabbit chasing a dog in that place in 1411 AD . The poem ends with the speaker moaning the return of the Hindu Karnavati and asks why Ahmedabad doesn’t become Assapalli again. Assapalli was the kingdom of a tribal king by the same name, which was conquered by the King Karnadev I of Patan in the eleventh century. Chinu Modi wants the Dionysus back in the city. The primitive tribal kingdom of Assapalli stands for the Eden, which was destroyed by so-called civilized Hindus. We can fruitfully compare the longing for tribal past in Chinu Modi’s poem with Manilal’s wish to escape dangerous side effects of being an Ahmedabadi and contrast it with Adil Mansuri’s sentimental application of Ahmedabadi dust to his forehead.

However, the experience of urbanization and city life is not limited to what EV Ramakrishnan (1995) in his very important study of modernism in Indian context has termed `High Modernism’ or individualistic and elitist modernism, but is also crucially present in what he calls the later avant-garde or collectivistic or subaltern modernism. The Dalit movement in Marathi was largely Mumbai based or based in the city. In Gujarati too, Dalit poetry has taken a note of the city and its discontents. One can cite a poem by Sahil Parmar, a Dalit Gujarati poet:

AHMEDABAD 1974 AND 1984

Sahil Parmar

The outstretched sky plays its own tune

Scattered stars

Flicker feebly

Like the squeaking whistles

Of cloth mills razed by fire

The horizons hazy

Due to the suppressed sobbing

The moon is pulverized

One...two...three...ten...a dozen fragments

Falling upon this city

Crushing

Millions of people

Millions of eyes

Millions of dreams

Under them.

This city is now a crematory of dreams

Darkness like a cemetery

Wrings this city

Before I choke

I can only say

`That hostel mess bill was a very big event indeed!”

The poem, like the poem by Chinu Modi calls the city insensitive to the closing down of the mills in the seventies. Like Manilal’s poem, it accuses the city for shattering people’s dreams and lives. Like Modi’s poem, it uses the metaphor of crematory for the city. Like the other two poems, this poem too interweaves historical references into its metaphorical fabric. The last line alludes to the event of the price hike in the hostel mess bill in LD Engineering College in February 1974, which resulted in an outcry and a strike by the students. The strike snowballed into the famous Nav Nirman Movement, a mass anti-Congress agitation to remove the then Chief Minister of Gujarat Chimanbhai Patel. JP Narayan movement backed up the Nav Nirman Agitation. The poem, as the footnote says in his collection, commemorates the event.

We can see that the modernist Gujarati poetry articulates voices of dissent and alternative notions of Gujarati culture and identity by employing the trope of city and the poetic material drawn from urban experience. The poems by Chinu Modi, Sahil Parmar and Manilal Desai protest against the established culture by voicing their anguish caused by the urban experience of Ahmedabad. The perceptions presented in the poems are critical to the predominant ideas of `culture’. The poems are rebellious and anarchic like the presiding deity of modernism, Dionysus. Modi’s poem is more direct in its Dionysian longing to return to the primitive tribal kingdom and its anti commercial stance (They measure your shadows/ Not bodies/To stitch clothes). The poems are also full of images of morbidity, darkness and decadence. Unlike Adil’s ghazal which is `pretty’, the modernist poems about Ahmedabad are often ugly (consider Chinu Modi’s metaphor of ` This city is an old man/ Groaning with constipation/ This city is/all the fancy aerobics/Of a back broken spider...). These poems interweave references to historical references like Gandhi’s Sabarmati Ashram, Ahmed Shah, Karnavati, Assapalli and the Nav Nirman Movment with legends like the rabbit that chased a dog and dense surreal metaphors of darkness, pulverised moon and surreal humour of Ahmed Shah driving a bicycle rickshaw. The images are anarchic and subterranean.

Raymond Williams notes that ` the key cultural factor of the modernist shift is the character of the metropolis. (1990:166).’ What Prof Williams says about the Modernism in the West has implications and uses for us too. The examination of urban experience is crucial for understanding the Modernism in Indian languages. This article is a concise attempt to do so and a beginning of a more elaborate research project. It reveals that The City is a crucial trope in the modernist poetry as the cities like Ahmedabad, Vadodara and Mumbai have played a formative role in moulding of modernist sensibility in Gujarati. It briefly examined the tortuous affiliation of Indian modernism to its urban context with a specific reference to a handful of modernist Gujarati poems by poets like Adil Mansuri, Chinu Modi, Manilal Desai and Salil Parmar dealing with Ahmedabad. I sought to demonstrate how these poems intricately weave history, sociology and politics into their dense fabric to articulate multiple and often dissenting perceptions of cultural history of Ahmedabad and by extension Gujarat.

Notes:

All translations in the article are mine. The poems of Adil Mansuri, Manilal Desai and Hasmukh Pathak are taken from ` Adhunik Gujarati Kavita’ ed. Suresh Dalal and Jaya Mehta, Mumbai: Sahitya Akademi 1989.I am grateful to my friend Piyush Thakker for procuring a copy of Chinu Modi’s poem for me. Sahil Parmar’s poem is from his collection `Mathaman’, Self published, Gandhinagar, 2004.

WORKS CITED

1. Dennis Walder ed. Literature in the Modern World: Critical Essays and Documents. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990

2. EV Ramakrishnan, Making It New: Modernism in Malayalam, Marathi and Hindi Poetry’, Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study, 1995

3. Monroe K Spears, Dionysus and the City: Modernism in Twentieth Century Poetry, New York: Oxford University Press, 1970

4. Raymond Williams, Modernism and the Metropolis. In Walder ed. 1990, p.166

5. -------------------------The Country and the City, New York: Oxford University Press, 1973.

6. Sahil Parmar, Mathaman. A collection of Gujarati poems. Self Published. Gandhinagar, 2004

7. Suresh Dalal and Jaya Mehta ed. Adhunik Gujarati Kavita’Mumbai: Sahitya Akademi 1989

The article appeared in New Quest, Pune, June 2009

SCANNING FOR TROJANS IN INDIAN POETRY IN ENGLISH: HEMANT DIVATE’S VIRUS ALERT

2009-07-04T10:06:00.000-07:00

Virus Alert: Poems by Hemant Divate, translated from Marathi by Dilip Chitre, Mumbai: Poetrywala, 2004, pp. 76, Rs. 100/-

Is English translation of contemporary Marathi poetry a part of Indian English Poetry? Or does translation from non-English Indian languages occupy a separate compartment? Following this rather controversial query can lead us to the cultural sites haunted with spectres of history, sociology and politics. These spectres usually remain usefully masked and only reveal themselves at uneasy moments in intensive discussion of Indian Poetry appearing in English. The unequal status of Indian Writing in English vis a vis writing in other Indian languages mirrors the asymmetrical and hegemonic status of English language in India and this discrepancy surfaces when we probe deeper into the ideological sore.

If one examines ` Virus Alert’ poems by Hemant Divate, one of the prominent contemporary Marathi poets, translated into English by Dilip Chitre in the context of these old haunting debates, it will offer us fresh insights into tortuous relation between poetry and politics.

If we are to hypothetically consider English translation from the bhashas at par with Indian Poetry in English, a collection like ` Virus Alert’ is a rarity in Indian writings in English. Going by the canons of Indian English poetry, something like

` Dhullu is switching the TV on and off with the remote

He’s telling me to switch on one channel after another

Till his favourite channel is found

Any moment soon after

He begins to hate the channel..(p.2)

Would be considered `too loose’, ` too direct’ and less informed by the Anglo American modernist aesthetics of formal precision, irony and mythopoetic imagery. The chances of a longish, directly confessional and often flat poetry like that of Virus Alert of being rejected by the established canons of Indian English poetry are great.

Yet one cannot fail to acknowledge that there is something unsentimentally honest and humane in these poems which make them attractive in spite of being ` quite different’ from the `acceptable’ norms of Indian poetry in English. The themes of the poems as well as their treatment differ from the ones usually found in Indian poetry in English.

Chitre in his Foreword suggests that anxiety and panic seems to be the most common themes of Virus Alert. However, it seems that the central theme of the collection seems to me is inability to come to terms with what the City like Mumbai has done to you:

“ One is just a domesticated animal kept by this city

The one that sniffs around the city the whole day long

Day by day

One’s turning into a fuckin’

Unprinted roll of newsprint thats found defective

Or the key number in the material of an ad

A pimp, a pimp, a pimp...( p.12)

Or consider how the poem whose title says it all ends:

“ and Hemant Dayanand Divate

Belongs to no one anymore

He belongs to the e-universe

And here too he gets waylaid and screwed

But he hardly lets out an `e’ from his mouth

He utters` Aai-ee-ga!’

(And here too he gets screwed, p.19)

The metropolis of Mumbai transformed by globalization transforms the speaker, who sometimes signals his intimacy with the poet, into something he never was. It decontextualizes him, uproots him, dehumanizes him and what is left is only the memories of thirty one years.

The speaker is always afraid of losing his individuality, not to mention his sanity, under the cultural bulldozer of globalization:

Am forgetting

No trace remains

Of colour, form, speech, touch, or meaning

To me

There does not remain

God, parents, relations

No remainder

Like caste, class, religion, nationality, language, script

Breath, mind, body and soul

I am reaching out

Beyond birth and death

I don’t know

(p.29)

The standardization and homogenization of culture that globalization threatens people is a real danger, especially for the poets.

Uniformity

While reading the poems of contemporary poets

You do not

As the blind in the parable

Of Chakradhara do

Feel the whole elephant

But feel it as though it were a piller, a wall, and so forth

And therefore perhaps

If a poem

By one of you is

Passed around as anyone else’s

It wont add a whit

To language.

(p.28)

The speaker is paranoid and self obsessed hypochondriac who worries about poetry being bedridden in this time of great cultural crisis.

The Poem Should Not Be Bedridden

Word constipated poem

Its skin’s become prickly

Its restless, itchy

Slowly, its sores will fester

Begin to stink as well

Language languishing as through under a curfew

Words silent as though prohibited from assembling

With this sort of strict patrolling

One cant even curse meanings

Freely

(p.34)

The sense of urgency, fear and the feeling of being a misfit in the culture pervades Hemant’s poetry. Unfortunately the poetry written in English is too busy trying to conform to the modernist conform to sense this cultural `emergency’ and voice the dilemma of the person trying to cross the street of contemporary Mumbai.

The contemporary poetry translated from non-English Indian languages will often be loaded with concerns, which are not merely aesthetic or academic. Though both Indian Poetry in English and Indian Poetry in English translation use the same medium of English language, they exhibit distinct texture, styles and obsessions. Though the chances of poetry like that of Hemant’s remaining on the margins of the Indian poetry in English, the very accessibility of such poetry in English is bound to affect the sensibility of Indian readers of poetry in English. A point to be noted is that both these traditions can co-exist and something fruitful may emerge from mature and unprejudiced interaction among them.

Hemant’s poetry will definitely appeal to younger readers of poetry in English translation for its freshness and unsentimental directness.

This Review Appeared in The Dhauli Review, Sept 2008

Readability as Conformity: The Politics and the Commerce of English Translations from the Indian Languages

2009-07-04T09:59:00.000-07:00

One of the substantive differences between a serious literary publication and a commercial one is the attitude it has towards its readers. What separates a serious literary publication from other types is whether it merely caters to its own idea of `what the readers want’ or it considers its readers as intelligent discriminating people willing to explore various alternatives. It refuses to take the reader for granted. The other essential difference lies in its attitude to the writers and their writings. Both these aspects are of course interrelated. The question is of the commercial facet of publication. The question here is regarding certain extremely prestigious publications professing serious literary concerns while they are actually interested only in their calculations of profit and loss. The issue becomes very striking in the context of publishing literary translations from Indian languages. It revives the long-familiar deliberations about politics of English in India, but in the context of `marketing’ these translations.

The editors of these prestigious English-language publications recklessly impose `stylistic modifications’ on the translations from the ‘regional languages’ of India so as to make them more `suitable’ for their readers. Interestingly, these editors have hardly any knowledge of the source languages or the processes of translation, or even of the aesthetics of literary genres. They feel that they are making translations more `readable’. However, what one means by `readable’ or `natural’ is the question not many of these editors would like to pursue. Linguistically, whether there is such a thing as a single `natural’ English register even where English is the first language is a question that one would like to ask before asking whether there is a single universal `natural’ English register in the world. Today, when we are talking of Englishes rather than a single `English English’, asking for conforming to one subjective perception of `natural English’ is nothing more than neo-colonial arrogance. While I admit that editors have the right to proofread the text for grammatical `errors’ (a question equally vexed) or point out (not change but suggest changes) the existence of clichés and idiomatic oddities, I believe that changing the imagery, syntax, lexis, paragraph sequences, descriptive passages without any knowledge of the source text and the aesthetics of form is nothing less than the perpetuating of a tyrannical colonial mindset by the twenty-first century brown sahibs and memsahibs. I believe English is very much an Indian language but the Indians who speak English have yet to learn how to treat the other languages as equals.

However, there is another side to this story as well. As every translator of Indian literature into English knows, a great many writers in Indian languages, though they may be vehemently opposed to the oppressive presence of English in India are, in fact, exceedingly eager to get their works into English. The thirst for instant fame and the desire for some sort of `international’ recognition make many of the writers submit to this editorial colonialism. After all, exploitation is a two handed game. Very few writers are willing to stand up and resist the editor’s policy of such a `back-seat’ translating. However, not every writer is so timid as to compromise with his or her art. And the case of Nazir Mansuri and Mona Patrawalla becomes particularly significant in this context.

Nazir Mansuri and Mona Patrawalla are two young and brilliant Gujarati fiction writers. They are marginalized in Gujarat not only because they belong to the minorities in Gujarat but also because what they are doing is something radically new in the Gujarati literary context. Both these writers are exceptionally meticulous about their craft and aesthetics of the form of fiction. They give great importance to literary and stylistic aspects of their craft such as imagery, symbolism, paragraph sequences, and the structure of their stories. Both these writers are remarkable in their artistic use of locale, dialects, and their knowledge of subcultures. Nazir writes about a small fishermen community in Diu and Mona writes about the Parsis and the interior villages like Vasda in South Gujarat. Though their stories are mythopoetic, they are extremely realistic in their descriptive style. They write with deep knowledge about the rural areas and their stories have a very indigenous texture to them. Though both of them are influenced by some version of nativism, they are thoroughly modernist in their treatment of their themes. They are also postmodern in the sense that they are aware of the shortcomings of Indian modernism and move beyond it. Their stories reveal their aesthetic employment of myths, symbolism, and archetypes without ever losing their realistic mode. They are extremely bold in their depiction of the existential dimension of sexuality. Homosexuality, obsessive desires, and illicit relationship often come under their lenses. Both these writers use cinematography-like devices in their narrative technique. A good reader is able to identify layers and layers of mythical, historical, and existential meanings in their texts. No wonder they are marginalized in Gujarat. Translating these writers is a great challenge even for a native speaker of Gujarati. These stories are very difficult for the urbanized Gujaratis as well as those who have no knowledge of the archetypal and symbolic modes of narrative fiction. I have managed to translate these writers merely because I was lucky to have them beside me. While translating these writers, I tried very hard to retain all the things mentioned above like technique, aesthetics, native textures, and dialects and so on in some form.

Mona Patrawala very spiritedly rejected a very prestigious award for translated Indian fiction in English because the editors insisted on sticking to their `version of the story’ though they had absolutely no idea of the source text and they hardly understood what is meant by the aesthetics of narrative. Thanks to their own class, regional, and caste location, they wanted the story to be more `urbanized’ and `urbane’, something that these stories are definitely not. What they meant by `natural’ English was, I suspect, some metropolitan variety of Indian English, irrespective of the fact whether this idiom represented the source text in some form or not. They insisted on this sort of idiom because they thought their readers are like them: ignorant of the other interior Indias and ignorant of artistic aspects of the narrative mode. Mona Patrawalla and her nominator for the award, Nazir Mansuri, threw away the award because the version they wanted to see published was not the one their editors wanted to publish---something that other Indian writers in regional languages rarely do. This experience was repeated when another smart-looking metropolitan `literary’ journal published a tampered and doctored translation of Mona’s story. When she and Nazir, who also had contributed his story, protested and demanded that the other stories should be published with doctoring, they received a curt reply from the memsahib saying that the magazine has rights (given to them by the ex-rulers of the British Raj, I suppose) to make `necessary stylistic modifications’ in the interest of the readers. To an extent, they may be right, for they may be thinking of their readers as belonging to the same location and ability as readers of Ms. Shobha De.

New Quest, on the other hand, is publishing two stories, one by Mona Patrawala---the version which she finds acceptable, and a story by Nazir Mansuri, because it has faith in the intelligence and ability of its readers. Mona Patrawalla has rejected the earlier draft of the same story that appeared in another magazine.

Before concluding, I would like to comment as a translator and a theorist on certain theoretical issues involved in this question. As a literary translator, I believe that my editors should have reasonably good knowledge of aesthetics, literary devices, and ideological debates and so on and if they do not know the source language and the text, they should have faith in what I am doing. As a translator, I aim for approximate equivalence not at the level of word but at the level of poetics. I believe these editors are simply ignorant of such things.

I also recommend two ideas for serious consideration by the editors of so-called literary publications. The first is Professor Lawrence Venuti’s radical position as propounded in Translator's Invisibility (1995). He critically examines history, politics and economics of the norm of nativization of the translated text in order to make it appear as if it were originally written in the receptor language, to make the translator `invisible' and marginal. He examines historically how the norm of fluency prevailed over other translation strategies to shape the canon of foreign literatures in English. He makes a strong case for `foreignness' and `awkwardness' of the translated text as a positive value in the evaluation of translation.

The other idea that I would like these editors to think about comes from a great German hermenuetician Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834). He says that there are two ways of translating: ` Either the translator leaves the writer alone as much as possible and moves the reader towards the writer or he leaves the reader alone as much as possible and moves the writer towards the reader' and favours the first method which emphasizes the idea of drawing out the readers from the linguistic world they inhabit. I believe that the first method is radical and the other one is commercial. Though I am not suggesting that one should publish awkward and unreadable translations, I believe that if the editors do not know the source language and the text, they should have faith in what the translator is doing, however `awkward’ it is, in the interest of the source text. I am also suggesting that in a serious literary work, the things like paragraph sequences, descriptions, imagery, textures, and other artistic aspects of the source work have a very important function in the totality of the target text. If the editors do not know such things then they should stop calling themselves editors of literary publications.

REFERENCES

Schleriermacher, F. 'from "On the Different Methods of Translating" Translated by Waltraund Bartscht.' in R.Schulte and J.Biguenet (eds.) 1992.pp.36 -54

Schulte, R and Biguenet. J. (eds.) Theories of Translation: An anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida. Chicago, University of Chicago, 1992.

Venuti, L. The Translator's Invisibility: A history of translation. London and New York: Routledge, 1995

_______ `The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference.' London and New York: Routledge, 1998

This article appeared in New Quest , A quarterly journal of participative inquiry, Mumbai, April June 2005

A THIRD WAY OF READING KOLATKAR: BEYOND FORMALISM AND POLITICS

2008-06-24T08:17:00.000-07:00

The pre-modifier and the post-modifiers of the word `writing’ in the term `Indian Writing in English’ have perpetually shackled the creative writing in English in India to the relentlessly hounding questions of nationality and the politics of English language in India. Both, accusations as well as apologies sound tiresome to our ears today. Amit Chaudhari’s recent review in the Hindu of a short book called `Jejuri: Commentary and Critical Perspectives’, edited and, in part, written by Shubhangi Jayakar, stirs up the same old weary debate about nationality of Indian writing in English. While one tends to agree with his complaint ` for 20 long years, influenced by Said and post-colonial theory, the aesthetics of estrangement has been confused with the politics of representation.’ one wonders if these questions will ever stop dogging the Indian writer in English. It is high time literary studies today stopped looking at the Indian Writing in English merely from the formalistic point of view or from the postcolonial approach, which highlights the politics of nation in the text. The ancestor of this disputation is the antiquated debate about `form’ versus `content’ in aesthetics. One has to go beyond this `either/or’ approaches and search for some ecumenical critical view.

It is a true that much of the recent academic criticism reads the politics of representation in literary texts. Reacting against its own earlier formalistic orientation, literary studies in the past couple of decades have obsessively focussed on the social, historical, and political context of literature. While this focus reveals that art is never `autonomous’, the formalist approach analyzes literature as a special form of language by isolating the `literariness inducing devices’ like defamiliarization. The inordinate preoccupation of the recent academic criticism with the political and historical context of art seems to promote a fallacy that these are the only contexts of art. They forget that literature is an intricate `language-game’ and has its own rules, which cannot be understood in these contexts alone. They also fail to explain why sorcerous appeal of certain works has cut across the specifics of time, region, and society. The nationalist, nativist or versions of Marxist criticism taken to their dogmatic extreme, reduce the work of art merely to its social existence and make it unidimentional.

While formalist criticism will find Kolatkar poems teeming with literary devices of `defamiliarization’ due to his oblique idiosyncratic vision , the opposite approach, which is usually some version of socialism, will focus on the theme of alienation of an elite English educated bourgeoisie from his cultural context. Both these approaches have predetermined notions of what Kolatkar’s poetry will yield. However, I believe that a successful work of art transcending the polarities of `social existence’ and ` individual vision’. One only has to take a closer look at Kolatkar’s poems to see that they are not only, in Bruce King’s phrase `defamiliarization and transformation of the commonplace’, but are also deeply embedded in the cultural and historical milieu.

Defamiliarization is not restricted to Kolatkar’s poetry only but is an indivisible part of the creative process. It is at once aesthetic and political because to perceive something, or to think in the ways that seem strange to the conventional ways of thinking, is an act of non-conformity. It may not be political in the obvious sense of conforming to some party doctrine, but simply because it dares to see something in a different way, it becomes deeply political. It is both art and politics and it is politics because it is art.

Poetry of Kolatkar does not just `employ the literary devices’ of defamiliarization nor does simply deal with the theme of `alienation of the western educated intellectual’ from his roots. His texts have complex, multiple meanings and operate at more than one level. His oblique vision dislocates the established ways of perception only to yield richer insights into Indian culture. This is certainly not the `tourist’ eye-view, nor is it written with the western audience in the mind.
Consider a poem from Jejuri:

The Reservoir
There isn’t a drop of water
In the great reservoir the Peshwas built.

There is nothing in it.
Except a hundred years of silt.

(Jejuri p.36)

Perhaps nativists, nationalists, or even formalists haven’t read the poem closely at all. Kolatkar’s oblique view of the things is obviously not merely a device. To say that the great reservoir of the Peshwas, one time potentates of Maharastra has run dry and contains nothing but clay deposits of history, is not a simple use of some literary figure of speech, but a significant cultural comment on the decadence and the irrelevance of the once powerful community. This point of view is not that of a person alienated from the culture but of a person who feels that the culture has very little to offer to him. Culture is distanced from the sensitive and intelligent speaker rather than the other way round. Therefore, it is better to take all the discussion about `alienation’ in Kolatkar’s poetry with a little pinch of salt.

Art is about divergent ways of seeing; poetry, about divergent ways of using language. Inseparable from the creative process, defamiliarization achieves its effects from uncovering relationships that are not obvious to others. Defamiliarization yields insights and discovers truths. It sees things from a different angle and a different level and this is what makes it semantically complex and multilayered. In epiphanic moments, the visual artist in Kolatkar sees things that startle the readers only to enlighten them. For instance, the `Pi-Dog’ in Kala Ghoda Poems, lying on a traffic island at midnight reveals

“I look a bit like
a seventeenth century map of Mumbai
with its seven islands” (p.16)

The perceived similarity between the appearance of a mongrel and an old map of the city with a history of cultural hybridization is not simply a technical device but a revelation, a discovery of truth. Discovery of these truths in Kolatkar’s poetry makes it difficult to understand it as poetry of estrangement and alienation. The defamiliarization in these poems is a road that leads to discovery and illumination, rather than being an agonized expression of an `alienated’ consciousness.

On reading the poems in `An Anthology of Marathi Poetry (ed. Dilip Chitre, 1967), we notice that much of Kolatkar’s early Marathi poetry was intensely dark, unsettlingly subjective, and surreal. Many of his poems are the types which TS Eliot in his extremely perceptive essay `Three Voices of Poetry (1953) called the poems of the `first voice’. Alluding to the observations made by Gottfried Benn, Eliot observes that the poetry of first voice is addressed to no one in particular and is a result of the intense struggle between the poet and his unknown dark psychic material. Many of these poems were called `kalya kavita’ or ` dark poems’ in Marathi. Metaphysical angst, depression, and existential sense of absurdity and all the stuff found in the early modernist poetry in India are abundantly found here.

In a Room Next to Death

In a room next to death
In a hotel in a way out town…
Lizards on the wall
Will cast my horoscope

In the ill humoured room in the hotel
Ina a way out town
Witness to masturbation
Will be spider in sardonic corner….

(In a Room Next to Death, An Anthology of Marathi Poetry, translation Dilip Chitre, and p.127)

Much of his later poetry became more and more allegorical, narrative, and mythopoetic. Eliot in his essay has pointed out that the poetry of second voice is that of the poet addressing an audience and the poetry of the third voice is when the poet attempts to create an imaginary dramatic character addressing another imaginary dramatic character. Poetry of Sarpa Satra, Kala Ghoda Poems, Bhijki Vahi, Droan, and Chirimiri (all collections published by Clearing House or Pras Prakashan, 2003) and some of the poems from his earliest collection including Jejuri belong to these voices.

Bhijki Wahi (A Soaked Notebook) is a remarkable collection of poems strung together with the archetypal motif of `The Weeping Woman’. Employing narratives, myths and legends from all over the world, Kolatkar has evoked woman’s suffering and agony. In this collection, one comes across poems on legends from Greek, Egyptian, Arabic and south Indian cultures and poems on the life of Osip Mandelstam’s wife Nadajada and on the series of painting `Weeping Woman’.

The Weeping Woman III

The splayed butterfly of the handkerchief
Is sitting
On your face

Drunk
On the honey
Of the dark lotuses of the eyes

Now how will it lift
Its wings daubed with pollens
Of grief

It will be difficult
No very difficult
For it to fly in this state

I don’t think
The Pandavas of tear
Will permit it to fly

(The Weeping Woman III, Bhijki Wahi, p.287 , translation Sachin Ketkar )

Woman’s tears seem to symbolize the suffering of entire humanity. Human tears transcend cultural and temporal contexts and become universal. All the contexts of human suffering, historical, cultural, or regional are incidental. The collection ends with a prayer to the Cosmic mother and evokes the redemptive power of human tears:

When all this filth flows out
Out of your eyes
Then only a pure drop of tear
Just one
Will remain in the end
Save it in the eye
It will be the useful one
To create afresh
The Universe

O
Cosmic Mother
(The Last Tear, translated by Dilip Chitre, New Quest 157-158 July Dec 2004)

However, Kolatkar uses extremely contemporary language while dealing with his legends and myths. One has only to consider a poem called ` Kovalan’ based on the ancient Tamil classic `CilaPattiKarm’. After shuffling the Marathi word order of Kannagi’s line ` Ajun Kasa Parat Ala Nahi Kovalan’ (Why hasn’t Kovalan returned yet?) eight times in eight lines,

`How will the poor woman know
That the goldsmith whom he had approached with her anklets
Accused him of theft
And that police have finished him in an encounter?’

( Bhijki Vahi, 197 translation Sachin Ketkar)

To say that Kolatkar’s poetry is not embedded in its cultural environment and politics of his location is to be ignorant of much of his work. One has to consider a very early Marathi poem like `Suicide of Rama’ from the Dilip Chitre Anthology (p.137). The poem speaks of the epic hero committing suicide by leaping out of the epic-legendary narrative into the elemental presence of the river. After

`winding verses stir him up
the turreted epic shrugs him off…

from valmiki’s roof top rama jumps
disturbing a tile or two... .’

The godhead can have presence only in the epic imagination of the bard and the world of semi fictional narrative. The leap out of the world of cultural imagination into the phenomenal world symbolized by the river is the way Rama prefers to commit suicide. This `defamiliarized’ and poetic way of (mis) reading a culturally charged text create multiple layers of meanings. Playing on the binarism between cultural imagination and the phenomenal world, it obliquely asks if the whole effort of extracting a semi-fictional character out of a narrative and turning him into an unquestionable historical truth for political reasons is anything less than killing the spirit of the hero.

To look at poetry, like Kolatkar’s, merely with the questions its relation to nation state or merely from a formalist angle is be extremely reductive and simplistic. Obviously, both these ways of reading are inadequate. Both these approaches overlook the individual contours and specifics of the complex artistic texts. We can discover something new and interesting if only we abandon predetermined notions of what one hopes to discover in poetry and access it with more open mind. Serious engagement with Kolatkar’s poetry will begin once we abandon these stereotypical critical approaches and start reading it more carefully, sensitively, and intelligently. Once we start doing this, Kolatkar’s poetry will gladly share its wisdom with us.

REFERENCES

Amit Chaudhari, `On Strangeness of Indian Writing’ in The Hindu (October 2, 2005)

Bruce King. "Two Bilingual Experimentalists: Kolatkar and Chitre." Modern Indian Poetry in English. Delhi: OUP, 1987, 162-82

Dilip Chitre. An Anthology of Marathi Poetry (1945-1965). Bombay: Nirmala Sadananda Publishers, 1967

____”_____ translation of Arun Kolatkar’s ` The Last Tear’ and `Reduced to Beggary by Mumbai’ in New Quest, 157-158, July Dec 2004

T S Eliot, `Three Voices of Poetry’ (1953), The Norton Anthology of English Literature, Major Author Editions, ed. MH Abrams et.al (p.1986-998)

Of Pathare and Prejudice: Or Reading Contemporary Marathi Poetry

2008-06-24T07:49:00.000-07:00

The recent article by Rangnath Pathare `The Impact of LPG (Liberalization, Privatization, Globalization) on Contemporary Marathi Literature (New Quest No. 169, July September 2007) is an excellent illustration of how literary criticism functions in Marathi today. Prejudice, dogmatic outlook and sloganeering politics have replaced intelligent analysis of literary texts and sharp sense of literary values. Posturing and sectarianism have replaced the critical ability to provide substantiating evidence to statements made by the critic. I intend to point out how Pathare’s assumptions are merely assumptions born out of his own limited understanding of literature and sociology of literature rather than penetrating original insights into contemporary Marathi literary scenario.

The first severe limitation of Pathare’s observation is a rather superficial understanding of extremely complex and dynamic relationship between literature and society. Assessment of the impact of liberalization, globalization and privatization is a still matter of debate among trained sociologists and economists. Demonizing capitalism is typical of a certain leftist ideology which has failed to live up to its claims of explaining persistence of capitalism long after its soothsayers had announced its collapse. The problem with this kind of leftist politics is its own inability to account for its own internal contradictions in its ideas and actions. It views contemporary society from apocalyptic and catastrophic perspective- a view which is not very scientific or rational as it claims to be. Nor is it as saintly as it claims to be on human rights issues. Besides, a huge chunk of Pathare’s article consists of this sort of `sociological’ survey of Marathi society done by person who is neither a trained sociologist nor an economist. It consists of observations which have not been backed up any evidence of sociological data or economical statistics. Hence it is an excellent example of how not to do sociology or economics. One wonders if Prof. Pathare who is probably a professor of Physics writes articles on his subject in similar way: peppering sweeping generalizations without adequate evidence, with dogmatic sloganeering.

However, more serious problems arise when such a narrow minded stance is transferred to the area of literary criticism. Its outlook is extremely reductive and deterministic. It confuses social values with literary values. Even if we accept that the dividing line between the two is often blurred, their relationship is not of simple identity. However what Prof Pathare does is even more illogical. He rails abuses on certain cosmopolitan Marathi poets like Hemant Divate, Salil Wagh, Manya Joshi, Sridhar Tilwe, and Sachin Ketkar without naming them. I wonder what prevents him from naming these new poets unequivocally. Probably he wants to be on good terms with some of them even after criticizing them. This is again very typically timid Marathi middle class attitude of criticizing someone who you want to retain as a friend. His railing is typical:

They don’t recognize any authority other than themselves. Barring one or two exceptions, their reading and understanding of the Marathi literary tradition is doubtful. Based on their pseudo-witty remarks, one tends to feel that writing poetry at deeper levels is not their cup of tea.....These are self styled dons and "Mafiosi", who live in their own shallow, illusionary universe. Obviously, nobody other than themselves and their small coterie has any reasons to question their "junky" theories or their "funky" observations. They are their own self appointed critics and thinkers. They are a new post-1990 band of postmodern flag bearers, who make use of modern means of communication like blogging on the internet or websites of their own.' (New Quest: 169, July Sept 2007 pp. 19-20)

I wonder who `appoints’ critics and thinkers in a given society. I would like to know from Pathare if the `post' of a writer and critic or thinker is `appointed' after an ad in newspaper, interview, `fixing' and all that. Probably that’s how he got `appointed' as a novelist and critic. With friends in high post in Sahitya Akademi and academia, Prof Pathare himself has managed to `post' himself as a `major' voice in fiction. I would also like to know if people require Pathare's under-the table-recommendation to get an `appointment' in literary scenario.
I feel that people like Pathare are the ones who claim to be authorities (`They don’t accept any authority’ can be translated as they don’t accept people as Pathare as authorities) are self appointed, or are appointed by their friends in academia, official institutions and award-giving organizations. Otherwise, how come after writing mediocre stuff they manage to become `reputed' and sole bearers of Marathi traditions? If we are behaving like Mafia dons, they are behaving like military Junta and rejecting them involves rejections from their chamchas and `appointment' walahs. Actually, it is people who share Pathare’s dogmas and biases populate Marathi literary establishment, literary academia, and award-giving institutions and occupy the posts of `literary critics’. Any wonder that most ridiculous thrash from Pathare’s coterie is being celebrated as `great writing' and is given prestigious prizes. Sorry Mr Pathare, we can’t help it. We don’t recognize you or your agents, or your bosses as our authorities and neither do we need your `appointments’, `awards’ or `certificates’ for the post of writers and thinkers

Besides how can you declare that someone is living in their `shallow illusionary universe’? How does one verify whether Hemant Divate’s or Manya Joshi’s universe is any shallower or profounder than Prof Pathare’s? Such a subjective and impressionistic remark itself is an indicator of Pathare’s prejudiced and naïve `critical’ (?) practice.

I also wonder if there is anything wrong with the use of ` modern means of communication like blogs and the internet. However, I think that Pathare’s technophobia owns something to the emancipating power of technology. The internet and technology offers a space for expression outside the dogmatic, feudal and parochial Marathi literary culture. Technology thus becomes a liberating force. When the local puddle becomes bondage, reaching out into the global domain is refreshingly empowering, especially for those who dare to think differently and write differently. This does not of course mean that there is no digital divide or social inequality. It means that technology is a powerful tool which can be used as well as abused. It means that for a creative and independent thinking it can be used as a means of articulating oneself.

Pathare has labelled these writers as Postmodern but fails to explain exactly what he means by that and what features of postmodernism does he find in their writings. The term `postmodernism’ is a weird term as Appignanesi and Garrett (1999) point out. He points out how etymologically the term is self contradictory and problematic. The term `modern’ is from root `modus’, which means `now’. Postmodern, then would mean ` after now’, which means something which has not yet arrived and will never arrive!

Marathi critics have a curious way of periodizing the twentieth century Marathi literary history. The conventional literary history marks the late nineteenth century the beginning of the `modern’ literature (which is in keeping with many other Indian literatures), and the phase after BS Mardhekar (c. 1940s) as `Modernist’. For some critics, like Chandrakant Patil, the phase of rise of little magazine movements in the sixties marks a new phase in Marathi literature, which is termed as ` Sathottari’ or `the post-Sixties’ borrowed from the friendly neighbourhood of Hindi literature. This phase is set off as a rejection or rebellion against the modernism of the 40s. This term is however is extremely problematic. The first problem is that the earliest little magazine movements began in the early fifties, with Dilip Chitre, Arun Kolatkar and others starting the cyclostyled little magazine named `Shabda’ in 1954, so it is not really `post-Sixties’ at all. The second, and more serious problem, is that some of the important preoccupations of the so called `post-Sixties’ can be traced back to Mardhekar himself. The preoccupations like amalgamation of international modernist movements with the Bhakti traditions, or with idea of alienation or the depiction of dark subjectivity and explicit sexuality, which is common in the writings of Dilip Chitre, Arun Kolatkar, Bhalchandra Nemade( whose famous novel `Kosla’, shows clear impact of JD Salinger’s `The Catcher in the Rye’, in spite of his xenophobic version of nativism), Namdeo Dhasal ( who co-founded Dalit Panthers inspired by the Black Panther’s movement in America), Vasant Abaji Dahke ( the dark surreal vision of Kafka is a major influence on his works) and others are prominently present in Mardhekar’s poetry. Hence, people who want to depict the post Sixties movement as a `nativist’ rejection of the earlier modernist phase (termed `Satyakatha’-Modernism disparagingly by the little magazine wallahs after the name of a reputed literary magazine which published the works of early modernists as well as the early works of Chitre, Dhasal and Kolatkar) have not read their literature carefully and critically.

Recently, a controversial position is taken by Sridhar Tilve (1999), who claims the post-Sixties little magazine is a third `modernity’ (or alternatively `postmodernism’) and the new generation of poets who deal with social and cultural problems of post liberalization phase are the poets of `Fourth modernity’ (`post-post modernist’, by Tilve’s arithmetic, the first phase being the late nineteenth century , the second phase being the early modern phase of Mardhekar, Vinda Karandikar etc and the third phase is the `post modern phase’ of Chitre, Kolatkar etc.) The debate over the terminology is largely futile according to me, because in India, no period exhibits complete break with the preceding period and at the same time there is no period in which there is some discontinuity with the previous period.

The point here is that the term, `Postmodern’ used by Pathare is used not as a historical category in literary history but as a derogatory label from a parochial point of view. I find Lyotard’s discussion of the term `postmodern’ very useful in this context. Lyotard defines post-modern as precisely the avant-garde spirit to question received dogmas, parochial and received norms of literature. If questioning the received dogmas and established norms of literature is postmodernism in Lyotardian sense then postmodern even predates modernism. In the Indian context, this spirit can go back to the Bhakti period which was a period of intense questioning of norms and customs. It is not limited to Sanjeev Khandekar or Manya Joshi.

However, Pathare is not alone in Maharashtra to resist the experimental and the new. This prejudice is deeply ingrained and widely held. Another and more insidious attack on the new avant- garde in Marathi comes from Nitin Rindhe (2006). He believes that the present generation of Marathi poetry, whose cultural and social context is that of globalization is bifurcated in their attitudes on the basis of the economic class and the regional location. The poets based in metropolis belong to the class which has benefited from globalization and hence, they uphold globalization directly and indirectly. They are not critical of globalization. The poets based in non-metropolitan locations have not benefited by globalization and therefore they are critical of globalization. The conclusions he draws from his argument is that the poets and critics like Hemant Divate, Sachin Ketkar, Manya Joshi and Saleel Wagh lack sensitivity and celebrate globalization. He complains that the poets and critics who come from metropolitan location consider the poetry from non-metropolitan location `backward’ and `inferior’. Thought the argument is attractive, it is deceptive and fallacious. It is simply based on his ignorance of the poetry written by the above poets. He assumes that it is the sacred duty of poets and poetry to criticize globalization. In short, his criticism is NOT descriptive but NORMATIVE. He imposes his own ideas of the poet’s duties on the poet. No contemporary critic, Sridhar Tilve or Sachin Ketkar or Saleel Wagh has called non-metropolitan poetry as being `backward’ or `inferior’ just because the poets come from non-metropolitan location. Likewise, one only has to read some poets like Hemant Divate or Manya Joshi or Saleel Wagh carefully to realize that they are not celebrating globalization but are actually expressing their own perception of the crises created by globalization. Thus, in the face of a widespread tendency to run down the new experimental avant-garde in Marathi, I urge its detractors to read it closely first before attacking it. The close textual reading precedes close contextual reading and the critical estimate of literature can only come after careful double reading.

To illustrate what I said, I will look at two poems written by Hemant Divate and Manya Joshi to verify if the said poets are actually celebrating globalization uncritically. Both the poems can be found in ` Live Update: An Anthology of Recent Marathi Poetry’ (2004). Both the poems are translated by me.

In the poem titled ` Shopping at Mega-Mall’, the speaker realizes that he has turned into a commodity a consumer item and is being displayed in the mega mall.

I am Whisper Sanitary Napkin
Lying on the first rack
And I am dreaming of living very close to a young girl
Absorbing her juices.

Or that I am a Huggies Nappy Pad on the second rack
And I am accumulating the excreta as I snuggle
some infant
Who I look after tenderly
For five to six hours.

Or I am a high-priced toilet soap
Camay, Yardley or Lux International

The consumer becomes the consumed; the subject becomes the object, not just any object but an object to be sold in a flashy wrapper as the entire world turns into a one huge Mega-mall. This indeed is a dehumanizing predicament.

Or I am the television
And the entire family is sitting in front of me
Eating and surfing my channels
Or that they have switched me off
And have left me alone in this room
Or that I am a foot wipe
Costing twelve bucks
Given free with a purchase
Of upholstery
Good looking
Yet my master coming out of the bathroom
Is wiping his wet feet on me

Or that I am a broom
With which the folks
Are causally cleaning their floor
Or dusting away cobwebs.

My mistress drops me
While using me
And dreams of a vacuum cleaner.
She spits on me
Even if I touch her husband's body
By mistake.

This sense of commodification of self is also an awareness of being used, abused and used as a foot wipe. The last stanza quoted above is almost an example of Dalit poetry, where the owner of the broom spits on it dreaming of vacuum cleaner. The consciousness of the dehumanizing, asphyxiating and sinister aspects of globalization pervades poetry of many contemporary poets like Hemant Divate. However, it goes undetected even by people who call themselves trained readers of poetry like Pathare and Rindhe, which puts a question mark over their ability to read contemporary poetry or for any poetry for that matter.

Manya Joshi’s poems often touch upon the segregation of human being from a human being in the age of `communication’ revolution. His poem ` An Announcement for Mr and Mrs Limaye’ can be read as an expression of alienation in the `global village’:

An Announcement for Mr. & Mrs. Limaye

i)

Mrs. Limaye aap jahan
Kahibhi ho forein
Mulund station par chale aaiye
Wahan aapke pati
Aapka intezaar kar rahe hai

ii)

Maalik who is sabka ek
Bang everyone
O Shirdi king Sai Baba bang bang

iii)
People lose their way
People lose each other
People make civil statements
On a superbuiltup world

iv)

In a public local train
There is an unimagined itchiness
On your private emotions
You mentally advertise it to yourself

v)

Mr. & Mrs. Limaye
Hiding behind popular philosophies
Wait for
Each other
Facing each other.

The poem which mixes up registers and languages expresses how people lose each other and are alienated from one another. In spite of being a very small world, a married couple travelling in Mumbai suburban train fails to recognize each other on the crowded railway platform. Manya Joshi’s perception of the predicament of alienation in the `super built up’ world is not celebratory. It is a rather agonizing situation from which even Sai Baba cannot save us. However, the critics who attack Manya or Hemant for lack of sensitivity fail to respond to the sense of crises and suffering implicit in their poetry, primarily because they are deeply prejudiced against these poets before hand and secondarily because they simply don’t know how to read a poem.

Poetry need not be sloganeering in order to be `political’. The expression of personal anguish needs only to be situated in the historical context to be realized as political. Social is nothing but the individual contextualized. However, setting off with biases and dogmas and wanting to straight-jacket certain writings even without reading them closely is a sign of substandard critical practice. Needless to say, it is fairly widespread in Maharashtra and Prof Pathare’s essay is just one example of it.

References
Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, translated by G Bennington, B. Massumi, Manchester University Press, 1984

Nitin Rindhe, `Aajchya Kavitetli `Navta’ ani Samikshakanchi Gochi’, Abhidhanantar,, Mumbai, April-June, 2006

Richard Appignanesi, Chris Garratt , ` Introducing Postmodernism’, Icon Books, 1999

Sachin Ketkar ed. And trans. ` Live Update: An Anthology of Recent Marathi Poetry’, Poetrywala, Mumbai, 2004

Sridhar Tilve, Teekaharan, Shabdavel Prakashan, Kolhapur, 1999

Programmable Women A Short Story

2008-06-24T07:47:00.001-07:00

Pity, he had to dismantle her. He stood gloomily on the escalators watching swaying buttocks of pretty women with their customary hunks by their sides. His light blue eyes wondered if these buttocks were real or collapsible like Asha’s. The brilliant arrays of lights and colourful trendy people at Rodeo, the great interplanetary super mall, failed to uplift Angiras’s spirit. After someone hacked her, Asha started doing exactly the opposite of what he had programmed her. She used to wake up late in the morning, refuse to make coffee, and instead of playing with him in the bed, she used to turn wintry. Though he had programmed her to exhibit orgasm, she simply lay expressionless. He frequently spied her standing naked and looking vacantly at her dejected oval face in the bathroom mirror. The sight of her back used to arouse him and he would pounce upon her, but she used to respond like a rubber doll. She even stopped talking to him. When he spotted the dark circles under her eyes, he immediately contacted her manufacturers, Messer Rastogi and Sons. Their robot, one of those dull expressionless and matter-of-fact machines, arrived and discovered that some of Asha’s essential files were corrupt, significant data stolen and replaced with some substandard sequences of self-executable instructions. She was simply beyond repair. ` Do not connect your bionic mates to the intergalactic networks', the robot had cautioned him, ` And if you to buy more skins, then you would better procure them from a good retail outlet. It is extremely unsafe to download them'

Organisms from all the neighbourhood planets would flock to Rodeo to shop for their annual provisions: the newest biochips for their bodies, body part replacements, popular software, virtual games, latest security packages, and programmable mates. Repugnant creatures from the surrounding planets sickened him. He shuddered at the sight of those huge cockroach-like insects from some god-forsaken planet shopping for androids. He wondered what they did with them. Angiras had purchased Asha from a similar mall last year and had grown quiet fond of her. He even repented dismantling her and felt he would have kept her even if she were disobeying his instructions. He loved her for her sadness. It made her almost human. Funnily, he had grown to like her inability to live with him or to relate to him. His compassion got better of him and he had her dismantled. He remembered inquiring with Messers Rastogi if they could construct another mate for him who resembled Asha. They replied that she was an outdated piece and they had better utilities nowadays, which not only looked better but also felt better. Besides, these utilities were far more compliant to the customer’s wishes. They also had an up-to-the-minute user-friendly interface, which allowed the customer to personalize them effortlessly. Nevertheless, Asha’s departure left him a strange feeling of vacuity and an unexplainable sorrow.

`Never ever fool around with real human females', Angiras’s mother had admonished him when she was alive. `For, they would not give you what you want and would only make you cry'. `Did you make Dad cry too mommy?' Angiras remembered asking her much to her annoyance. `I never saw your father and I never cared for any human male', she had answered applying mettalic red coloured nail polish. He remembered how the wrinkles on her aging face deepened as she looked away. He recollected his mother keeping a programmable bionic female as a domestic help who slept with her as part of her duty. Angiras was drawn to this slave and he was furious when his mother refused to modify the programme a little so that he could have a little bit of fun with her. He watched in horror his mother started resembling the android female in her blank look and coldness. He even suspected that both of them hated him. Some days later, the software of the domestic help was corrupted and she started disregarding her mistress and so his mother had disposed her. Angiras sighed and felt that even after one generation they don’t make bionic mates who don’t conk out. He wished that technology should evolve faster. After that incident, his mother became increasingly bitter in her life and finally decided to deanimate herself.

Angiras worked for a small accounting firm owned by someone who lived in a different galaxy. The employer was so amiable that Angiras suspected him of being some sort of machine working for an unknown big shot. He had a terrible time when he had worked for humans. He felt it was high time some smart chap invented software that would make humans less insecure and less attention seeking. The more authority they had, the more insecure they would become and more attention seeking their behaviour would be. And what about envy, Angiras mused; there is no software, no genetic engineering project that would silence the gene of envy. Even after all this horseshit about human progress, there is very little we have gained on this front.

Even though he lived in an admirably compliant house, the memory of his mother’s assistant along with Asha`s case more recently, the thoughts returing home and his home going berserk at times used to turn his stomach. The home discerned his genetic information, moderated the temperature, cooked food for him, and showcased his favourite programmes on the monitors after judging his mood. It also kept a genial watch on his health and symptoms of abnormal behaviour. Occasionally, Angiras used to think that his home was in fact his father and smile at such thoughts. These days it had repeatedly warned him often of depressive behaviour and recommended physiochemical repair for his brain. He had activated the robotic physician of his home and he had managed to restore his hormonal balance many times. Nevertheless, these days it used to happen too frequently. The physician suggested he should try keeping a mate, preferably an gynoid.

`Because there is a risk in having a human,’ the tin head spoke in the Angiras’ pre-recorded digital voice, ` You hardly find a compatible specimen. It would be a better idea if you purchase another programmable bionic companion and personalize it.”

`What will happen if it goes the way the previous one did,’ asked Angiras sceptically.

`It would be a better option even then,' the tin head answered shrugging. `There is less danger of infection too.'

Angiras decided to trust the machine’s wisdom. Unsurprisingly it had more faith in ones of its own kind. Curiously, thought Angiras, his advice matched his mother’s.

In fact, he knew no one who lived with human companions these days. Some of them had tried to live together but had later on decided to go in for machines. Moreover, most of the human females had lost interest in human males long ago. They kept female androids that were not only quite capable of protecting them but were also far more reliable. They were also more fun in bed as they instinctively understood what the other wanted. When they felt like reproducing, like his mother they would simply walk into a near-by gene bank, selected, and ordered the suitable genes for their offspring. God alone knew what his mother desired when she sent for his father’s genes.

When he was growing up, he was drawn to many women, only to find that women were not being drawn to him. They were interested in those who were better looking, more intelligent and richer than Angiras. In short, they preferred chaps who had better genes to him. Since he resembled his mother, he was not as good looking as others. He had taken her weak chin, nervous eyes, and a tendency to put on weight. He must have inherited his height and morose detached expression from his unknown father. These days you can engineer the code even better, silence many of these genes, and have a better body.

Though he knew many friends who went in for the things like having male bionic mate, Angiras found the idea unthinkable. That thing would resemble him too closely. You cannot really think of fucking your own reflection. Therefore, after considerable thought, he decided to go to Rodeos and buy an interesting cybernetic mate. He had a feeling that he would never have a real companion in his life.

Rodeo was a gigantic labyrinthine mega market, swarming with organisms from diverse planets in the solar system. Angiras walked into a huge superstore where they displayed all types of companions and pets. He saw a group of women watching a large convertible mannequin who had a fairly long piston and a pair of big breasts. There were also many animals and polar bears were particularly popular with women. Men were interested in the serpents with adjustable head sizes and the monkeys with red buttocks. Angiras felt ashamed of his preferences. He thought he was ordinary, conventional, and boring. He glanced upon an attractive pair of female legs and walked up to it. The store attendant, a plain looking woman in blue uniform, who Angiras suspected of being a programmed android approached him and asked, `May I help you sir?”

Angiras looked at her and found a strange twinkle in her eyes and warmth in her smile that he did not associate with programmable bionic mates. She smiled and took down the pair of legs and asked, ` May I show you the rest of her?’

Angiras nodded. She went into a room and as she walked, Angiras grumpily watched her back. She brought the rest of the android from a hanger. Angiras watched her assemble the naked torso, the pair of legs, and the remaining parts. The sincerity with which an unprogrammed human female did her work surprised him. He would have enjoyed simply watching her as she went about her work unaware of his presence. He felt like holding her hand and touching her palm to confirm she was real. Under the pretext of looking at the android, Angiras brushed against the attendant’s hand. The touch of human tissue astonished him. He had never touched a human female before. The attendant looked at him peculiarly and Angiras tried to control himself.

She fished out a remote control device from her uniform pockets.

` You can vary the size of her breasts with this.’

She demonstrated how the naked torso responded to the remote control. The breasts puffed up into the size of melons and then shrunk to the size of gooseberry.

` You can hold them, sir, and find out how real they feel.’

Angiras did not want to find out.

` I will never know how real they feel because I have never felt the real ones in my life.’ He said. The bluntness caught her off guard. She did not know what to say and looked at him in bewilderment. Angiras looked elsewhere and then held her hand. She did not withdraw.

` Will you live with me?’ He blurted and felt very awkward.

The woman laughed so loudly that the customers in the shop looked at them in surprise.

` But I am not programmable, sir.’ and politely withdrew her hand.

Angiras was embarrassed.

` I know. I just wondered if you are not living with anyone, we should give it a try.’

`But I simply don’t know how to play either mother or slave to the male of our species.’ She laughed, still unable to believe her ears.

She looked at the gauche man in front of her with a twinkle in her eye and flicked her hair. He was not looking at her.

`Besides she is prettier. She will look after you when you are ill, make coffee for you in the morning, and do all the things you want her to do.’

The attendant did not know why she was reasoning with this man.

` You need not execute the instructions I give you. I will obey your commands instead. But having you just by my side will make all the difference.’

` When I was very young, I remember some boys telling me similar things. But I discovered that they all wanted was a slave who would slog for them and spread when they wanted, or that they wanted momma who would breastfeed them when they were sad and change their nappies when they were ill. And if we ever feel like cuddling and hugging a hairy thing we can always have a polar bear, a male android or something.’

Angiras looked at the floor in silence.He felt as though as if a looming skyscraper had collapsed within him and the entire cosmos had caved into a blackhole.

` In fact if you look at this gynoid, you will discover that she is admirably designed to suit all the needs of human males. With this latest skin-changing utility you can even make her resemble your mother or sister or someone.’

`Cant we give it a try...? Angiras interrupted, almost pleadingly, without looking at her.

`Sorry sir, I am simply not interested in such experiments. She said harshly, ` I can’t take risk and let human males ruin my life. It’s the only one I have.There is even less danger of some abominable disease.’

Angiras walked out of the departmental store into the darkness. He did not know where he was going. He was crying.