Gandhian Literature

Topic: Gandhian Literature

Paper 4: Indian Writing in English

Name: Yashpalsinh Baldevsinh Gohil

Class: M.A. Sem-1

Roll no.: 24

                   Submitted To: Ms. Heenaba Zala

               (English Department,

              Maharaja Krushnakumarsinhji

             Bhavnagar University)

Gandhian Literature

The Gandhian revolution in our political life, there came about also a revolution in our writing. Gandhi was not in sympathy with the view that art or literature was absolutely autonomous and was far more included to make it a handmaid to life. He once remarked  in the course of  a conversation  with  Dilip Kumar Roy :  “ Life must  immensely exceed all the  arts  put together . For  what is this  hot house  art plan  of  yours without the life soul  and background  of a  steady  worthy  life ?  What,  after  all does  this fussing  with  art  amount  to it  all  the  time  stultifies  life  instead  of  elevating  it ?”  like  Tolstoy , Gandhi  too  erred  in  denying  art  its  particular  autonomy  and preeminence, but  at  least  their  views  have  been  a corrective  to  some  of the  aberrations  of those  who  hold  that  Art’s  sake. On the other hand, their theories notwithstanding, Tolstoy was himself the creator of a world  of  imperialistic  values, while  Gandhi readily  responded  to  mystic poetry , and one of  his favorite poems  was The Hound of heaven, to which  had request Rajaji prepared a gloss!

Indian  publicists  have  had  of  necessity  to be  bilingual since  the days  of Raja Rammohan Roy , who  wrote  in Bengali  as well as  in English. Lokmanya Tilak edited the Kesari in Marathi and the Maharatta in English.  Sri Aurobindo edited the Bande mataram and the Karmayogin in English and Dharma in Bengali. Gandhi likewise wrote both in Guajarati, his mother tongue, and in English. Under  the  influence of his  example , writing  in the  various  regional  languages flourished  as  never  before  during the  twenties  and after , acquired  a modern  incisiveness and  force , and  went  all out  to reach  the masses. But English writing in India suffered no set back. Gandhi  own  weekly papers, young  India  and Harijan, were  among  the  most  widely  read and discussed organs of public opinion although no great scholar, Gandhi  knew  very  well the  new testament  in English , and his  writing  in English  had  accordingly  a  simplicity , pointedness  and  clarity that  was in  refreshing  contrast  to the  heaviness often  characteristic  of  earlier  Indian  writing. Thanks to the Gandhian example, Indian writing in English became recognizably functional. Gone were the old Macaulayan amplitude and richness of phrasing and weight of miscellaneous learning. Gandhian  writing  was  as bare  and  austere as was his  own life;  yet  who will say that either  the one or the other  lacked  the fullness of fulfillment ?

As a rule, then, Indian writing and speaking in English since  the Gandhian revolution  has  tended  to be  wisely  utilitarian , cultivating  the virtues  of  clarity  and  directness and  brevity  rather  than  eloquence  and  elaboration  and exuberance. There is  a world  of  difference  between  the  sonorous  periods of Bepin Chandra  pal ,          Madan Mohan  Malaviya , and  Surendranath  Banerji  or  the editorials  in the  Hindu, the  Amrita Bazaar  Patrika and  the  leader  of  some  decades  ago,  and  the  speeches   of  Gandhi ,  Rajaji  and  Subhash  Chandra Bose  or the  editorials  in  some  of the  leading  English  papers of today. Two  extracts , chosen  almost  at  random , may  be  cited  to  indicate this  change in  our  habits of  thinking  and writing.

To a certain  extent ,  this  change  in style  - from  the elaborated  to the  simple ,  from  the  ornate  to the  plain , from  the  opulent to the  pointed  is  nothing  particularly  unusual  to  Indian  writing  or  speaking  in English.

The Gandhian  impact  on contemporary  Indian  literature has  brought about  results at  various  levels , and  in  various  directions. As  regards  the  writers  choice  of language , we have  seen  that one result of the Gandhian  influence  has been  a general  preference for the mother  tongue  or  the  regional  language  and  occasionally  a  purposeful  bilingualism  the  same  writer  handling  with  mastery  his  own mother tongue  as well as English. Besides whatever  the  language  medium  chosen , the  stress  has been  more on  simplicity and clarity and immediate effectiveness than  on  ornaments  or  profundity  or laborious  artistry  and this has been  as marked  in English writing  as in writing in the  regional languages. As regards the choice of themes and the portrayal of character, the Gandhian influence has been no less marked. There has been a more or less conscious shift of emphasis from the city to the village, or there is implied a contrast between the two-urban luxury and sophistication on the one hand and rural modes and manners on the other. Shanker Ram has written movingly about the ‘children of the Kaveri’ in the Tamil country, and Humayun Kabir has vividly pictured, in his novel men and rivers, the life of the children of the Padma in Bengal. In love of Dust, again, Shanker Ram shows how, for a villager like Venkatachalam, his land is not just a piece of property, a negotiable instrument almost, but rather a part of himself nurtured by his toil, tears and sweat, and the sharer of his hopes and the cause of his anxieties. Shanker Ram’s Velan and Valli are also recognizable rural types an unspoilt rural Romeo and his Juliet capable of suffering and sacrifice and silent love. The ‘other side’ of rural life is not ignored, the lights and shades are mingled as in actual life, but the essential simplicity, beauty and even nobility of the rural way of life are brought out with disarming sincerity and power. In recent years, Shanker Ram has enriched Tamil with a series of novels and short stories characterized by the same power of observation and psychological penetration that are so strikingly evident in his English writing.

Although Ventakatramani’s Kandan the patriot is picture sharp and suggestive rather than complicated and comprehensive of the Gandhian age, fusing certain individual and the total national perspectives in terms of creative art, it achieves all this without actually introducing the Mahatma himself as a character, Kamala Markandaya’s Some Inner Fury achieves a similar feat with regard to a later phase of the Gandhian age covered by the “Quit India” movement of the early forties. R.K. Narayan, however, makes Gandhi himself a character in Waiting for the Mahatma, and so does Mulk Raj Anand in Untouchable and the later The Sword and the Sickle. Gandhi materially and directly affects the fortunes of Narayan’s heroine, Bharati, and her lover, Sriram; and the novel ends with Gandhi’s death at the hands of an assassin on the way to prayer. In Untouchable, Bakha hears Gandhi making a speech, but has no personal contact with him. In the Sword and the Sickle, on the contrary, the hero Lalu Singh, a revolutionary, has an interview with Gandhi, which is given a central place in the action.

While Gandhi literature is already vast and is rapidly growing (there is even a regular quarterly journal, Gandhi-Marg), it must be admitted all the same that the impact of Gandhi at the deeper levels, provoking a transvaluation of current values, has not been effective enough to produce lasting results. Gandhi is often being cited more as a matter of form and convenience than of deep conviction. What is there in common between Gandhi and Gandhism on the one hand, and, on the other, the vogue for massive industrialization and prohibitive gigntism that are so striking a feature of the Age of Nehru, the Age of Planned Economy? Gandhi laid stress again and again on moral and spiritual values in contrast to material advancement, although this had its place too; he knew that too much industrialization must spell disaster to the seven lakhs of Indian villages and he adopted the loin cloth and the Sevagram way of life because he felt that, for the teeming millions of Indian, no other life was possible-yet he knew that even such bare colorless life could be made reasonably full and purposive.

While several contributors - Rajaji, Richard B. Gregg, Swami Ranganadhananda, B.N.Rau, and G. Rramachandran have tried to stress one or another aspect of Gandhi’s life and personality, may others have bemoaned the fact that Gandhiism is hardly a live force in India today? It would have been better had we simply forgotten him; but the things that are now being done in his name, or by his professed followers! Mr. M.C. Chagles writes:

The most dishonest, the most disreputable and the most corrupt politicians capitalize on his name, and every day, he is being assassinated again, not in the body, but in the spirit.

 

Thank You.