The early years of the progressives

Soource: http://www.dawn.com/news/1051994

Copied from The Dawn
The early years of the progressivesby Kamran Asdar Ali

From February 28 to March 6 of 1948, 632 delegates assembled in Calcutta for the second congress of the Communist Party of India (CPI). The most important task performed during the meetings was the shift toward a more radical political line by the party that followed a critique of the reformist politics of its leadership during most of the 1940s.

The delegates also took some time to divide the party into two constitutive parts: the CPI would confine its working to the boundaries of the Indian Union while the post-August 1947 separated territories of Pakistan would be free to form a different communist party.

The CPI’s radical position followed the Soviet post-Second-World-War political line that was articulated forcefully by Andrei Zhdanov, one of the three secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in his speech at the inaugural Cominform Conference in Poland in September of 1947. As the earlier alliance of the three superpowers — the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union — on the basis of defeating fascism was no longer viable in the changed political climate, the Soviet Union argued for a mass resistance against the Anglo-American line of imperialist expansion. In India, this was translated by B.T. Ranadive (the new CPI secretary general) and his group as a call for more radical confrontational politics of struggle and political strikes, a general uprising which had little to do with the level of preparedness of the public as well as the rank and file of the party itself. Some of this confrontational politics was accepted by the newly formed Communist Party of Pakistan (CPP) as well.

It is evident to most who know the history of the period that culture and intellectual creativity was of immense importance to the CPP and to its new secretary general, Sajjad Zaheer. Zaheer, an accomplished short-story writer and literary critic, did not produce much literary work during these early years in Pakistan, yet he was constantly writing for the party newspapers and sending long letters to different party committees. He also found time to read what was being written in various literary journals and newspapers and would send individual comments and criticism to foes and friends alike. The militancy in his letters to party comrades was represented often in dictatorial language, giving much importance to the dissemination of party literature, opposition to Muslim League leaders and the building of an open political front linked to other progressive forces in the country. One of these fronts was the re-establishment and the re-organisation of the Progressive Writers’ Association (PWA). The PWA was one of the most influential literary movements in the decade preceding the partition of British India. It was initially formed by a group of Indian students like Mulk Raj Anand, Sajjad Zaheer and Ahmed Ali who were living in England during the 1930s. With annual gatherings, regional meetings and affiliated literary journals, the movement attracted writers and intellectuals from almost all Indian languages. However its strength lay among the Urdu-Hindi writers of the era.

From its very inception, the PWA was influenced by socialist and Marxist tendencies and soon after his return from Britain in 1935-36, Sajjad Zaheer joined the CPI. Hence, although the PWA was open to all those who broadly agreed with its manifesto — that called for a new literature that addressed progressive ideals and focused on the issue of poverty, deprivation and servitude of the Indian masses — it soon became closely aligned with the CPI.

Carlo Coppola, who has written a history of the PWA, argues that young Zaheer and others were influenced by Marxist writings while studying at Oxford and the person who encouraged them to establish a formal organisation was the leftist writer Ralph Fox (Fox later died in the Spanish Civil War). However, what is missing in Coppola’s account (and also from Roshnai, the biographical account of the PWA that Sajjad Zaheer wrote later) is any discussion of how the manifesto borrowed heavily from the reports and speeches of the first Soviet Writers Congress in 1934, especially if we see the speeches by Zhdanov and Maxim Gorky. There is much thematic similarity between Zhdanov’s position and that of the emerging manifesto of the young Indian students in Britain. This influence remains a story still untold.

The All Pakistan Progressive Writers Association (APPWA) was a continuation of the All India Progressive Writers Association (AIPWA) and similarly closely affiliated with the newly formed CPP. For example, in 1948, the various CPP district organising committees supervised the formation of local APPWA chapters. Zaheer himself, as a founding member and past president, was keen on pushing the role of intelligentsia in society. In his communiqués he asserted the need for writers to have a thorough mastery of Marxist ideology and insisted on study circles so that intellectuals and creative people, especially those linked to the CPP, could study the works of Marx, Lenin and Stalin, as well as literature coming from the Soviet Union and progressive literature from Europe and Britain. Writers were also encouraged to write essays, articles and literary criticism for popular consumption to counter bourgeois and “reactionary” ideologies that were being propagated by, according to him, state and class enemies. Within this context, by the late 1940s the CPP, in control of APPWA and influenced by the CPI’s radical line, had started to purge from its ranks those that did not completely toe the new party line. This became more evident after the introduction of the new manifesto which targeted “non-progressive” writers during the first APPWA conference held in Lahore in November 1949.

During this conference, “non-progressive” intellectuals were severely criticised for their perceived political failings, alliances with state machinery, sexual perversions and lack of social consciousness. The manifesto for this meeting clearly divided the Pakistani cultural scene into many factions and spoke positively of those intellectuals who raised their voices against the ruling class and who struggled against oppression and for independence, peace and socialism (the new manifesto was published in the literary magazine Savera in 1950). Their writings, the manifesto proclaimed, were full of optimism, progressive ideals and a willingness to move the working class toward action.

In opposition to these intellectuals were the groups that were undemocratic, supported the status quo and through their writings, created confusion in peoples’ minds. The manifesto, in strong and uncompromising language, established three groups of reactionary intellectuals. The first were the writers who proclaimed the ideology of art for art’s sake. The text criticised these writers as denying class struggle and hence colluding with the ruling classes. The second group was designated as those that claimed to write Pakistani literature. They too were condemned as people who favour the capitalist and feudal classes of the new country and who, in their communalist hatred toward India, could not differentiate between Nehru’s fascist government and the Indian working classes. The third group was labelled as Islamic writers who seeked to establish Islamic law in the country. The manifesto lumped all of these writers — the Islamists, nationalists and liberals (art for art’s sake) — together and painted them as reactionaries.

The manifesto then turned toward those writers who used bourgeois psychology and Freudian parameters to understand society. These authors were labelled obscene, perverse, pornographic and decadent for their depiction of life through the lens of sexuality. They not only distorted peoples’ experience, the manifesto asserted, but also disrespected love as a pure form of desire. Hence the manifesto portrayed these writers as anti-humanists who could only make fun of the peoples’ creative faculty and were insensitive to the struggle for human existence. The protagonists of their works were killers, thieves, prostitutes, and those elements of society that do not contribute in the productive process; they wrote pessimistic stories that sang of darkness and of death (this is a clear reference to Saadat Hasan Manto’s work).

During the late 1940s, the progressives were dominant on the literary scene and their insistence on creative activity that focused on a clear ideological position was the legacy of their anti-colonial and class-based politics. They argued that reactionary authors did not understand or write about the social and political aspect of Partition violence and merely presented psychological and sexual renditions of the events. In an essay, the progressive poet Ali Sardar Jafri (Taraqi Pasand Adab, 1957) asserted that the progressives deeply analysed the situation from social and political angles and found the light of humanity even in this darkest hour of the nation’s history. Echoing progressive stalwarts like Ali Sardar Jafri, even Sajjad Zaheer argued that free thinkers and liberal artists possessed a sick mentality that made them avoid peoples’ problems. Hence in Pakistan’s early years there was much anxiety among progressive writers to create a distance from those who were perceived by them as the standard bearers of middle-class values and perverted literature. For example, Jafri attacked poets like N. M. Rashid by arguing that he and others like him were perpetrators of the death wish, escapists, obsessed with sexual themes and condemned him and Manto for raising such topics to the level of religious belief.

Writing during the late 1940s, Aziz Ahmed, another progressive intellectual, in his book on the subject, said that people like Manto were so obsessed with sexuality that he wondered whether they were mentally stable. He goes on to say that this perversion had entered Urdu literature due to the influence of D.H. Lawrence who, according to Ahmed, did not hold the respect of British literary circles any more. Within this context, Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi (who was then the secretary general of the APPWA), in an important defence of progressive literature, proclaimed that the progressives had learnt from their mistakes and cleansed their house of impure infections brought in by perverted artists whose pornographic work and psychological analysis was influenced by the decadent intellectual Sigmund Freud (‘Kuch to Kahiye’ Nuqush 9, 1949). Ironic as it may seem, calling works of literature obscene meant taking them out of public circulation, a framing that seemed akin to the censorship that the progressives themselves at times suffered from under the moral surveillance by the community and the state (colonial or post-colonial).

What I have recounted about the new manifesto is fairly common knowledge among the literary circles in Pakistan. What is not so well known is that the language of the manifesto may have been influenced by, as did the first manifesto in 1935, the Congress of Soviet Writers, the renewed Soviet criticism of writers and intellectuals who were not following the state sponsored ideological line. One example of this form of attack was by the same Andrei Zhdanov in 1946 on the journals Zvezda and Leningrad for publishing the works of Mikhail Zoshchenko (1895-1958) and Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966). This became the basis for what was later to be called the Zhdanov Doctrine in cultural debates within global socialist circles. The journals were reprimanded for giving space to Zoshchenko’s short stories. They were deemed commonplace, rubbish, devoid of ideas and apolitical literature that aimed at disorienting the youth and poisoning their minds. He is called a vulgar lampoonist for the satirical short stories he published during the war.

Similarly, the poet Akhamotova, who has now become the icon of modern Russian poetry, was condemned for ideologically empty poetry of pessimism reflective of a spirit of decline. She was accused of bourgeois aristocratic aestheticism, of “art for art’s sake,” which does not follow in the footsteps of the people. She is portrayed as a poet of the elite that mixes fornication and prayer, of a kind of religious eroticism (we see the echo in how N.M. Rashid, Manto, Meeraji and others were condemned during the period of the new manifesto). As was the case with the APPWA manifesto of 1949, so was the ideas put forward in Zhdanov’s argument that literature should become party-oriented in order to counteract the bourgeois individualistic moral code and literary forms (Zhdanov’s speech was published in Pravda, September 21, 1946).

It is obvious to a lay reader that there are connections between the Soviet positions on culture and literature and the PWA during the late colonial and the early post-colonial period in South Asia. These literary linkages need to be elaborated and discussed for us to understand the literary debates in Pakistan’s early years.

This said, there was of course opposition from various quarters to the understanding of culture and literary undertaking by the progressives. But other groups were not as organised and consisted of a range of free thinkers, modernist poets and independent-minded intellectuals along with those who sought to link the question of Pakistan with Islamic morals and values. The latter group was intellectually eclectic and divided (Hasan Askari wrote a scathing critique of M.D. Taseer during the late 1940s in his discussions of Pakistani culture) and many had also previously been close to the progressives. However, it is also clear that intellectuals like Mohammad Hasan Askari and others continued to question and accuse the progressives for negating the completeness of the independence project and denying Partition as the logical end-point of the struggle, which for them was the emancipation of the masses through a proletarian revolution (a clear attack on Faiz’ poem ‘Subh e Azadi’). To take an example, Mohammad Din Taseer, an eminent man of letters who was also one of the founders of the PWA in the 1930s, had by the late 1940s become one of its major opponents. In a trenchant piece published in 1949, Taseer clearly states that although all progressives are not socialists, and all progressives are not traitors, all socialists are traitors to the cause of Pakistan. This is so, Taseer explains, because their loyalties are with Soviet Union or with India and they seek the destruction of the new nation. Such proclamations aided the ruling elite in the first years of Pakistan’s existence in becoming suspicious of any communist challenge to its authority.

Hence, in Pakistan’s early years, groups of intellectuals debated the future course of the country after the catastrophe of Partition. Whether the answer was in class solidarity (as the communists believed) or in the moral community of South Asian Muslims (as the Pakistani state desired) was a continuing discussion. Further, irrespective of the CPP’s desire to open up a discursive space to convince people of its political agenda, the government of the time was adamant to put important members of the CPP’s central committee and its workers periodically in jail and ban or confiscate communist publications. Further, the state also started using Islam as a political weapon to counteract various the communists and other democratic forces. Islamic doctrine was employed in the media to persuade people against the anti-religious (meaning anti-Islam) and, linked to it, the perceived “anti-Pakistan” political stance of the communists. The party was under perpetual government surveillance and attack. During the early 1950s, Zaheer spent several years in jail and soon after his release in 1955 he went back to India. The CPP was officially banned as a political organisation a year earlier in 1954.

Postscript: Under Sajjad Zaheer’s leadership, the progressives in Pakistan, at least in this era (perhaps as a reaction to their own suppression), sought to tame the conditions of the debates according to their own vision of a more egalitarian future. They used the trope of sexual deviancy, ideological purity and social commitment to curb the chaos that they thought would ensue from “non-progressive” literature. In this world of order and truth they sought no contingency and no ambivalence. In later years however, Syed Sajjad Zaheer went through a transformation of sorts. In a recent key note address at the Jamia Milia University in Delhi on Zaheer’s 100th birthday, writer and critic Intizar Husain related the following: Zoe Ansari, a critic and literary figure in India had written a critique of the great Persian poet Hafiz and called him an escapist poet whose work was perverse. In responding to him, Zaheer admonished Ansari for throwing the priceless gem of Muslim cultural history in the proverbial dustbin of history. He argued that we cannot read Hafiz in terms of some mechanical relationship between social practice and artistic expression. Husain suggests that this was a provocative response, but a bit late. Zaheer should have proclaimed such ideas in the 1940s, in the early days of the progressive movement. But perhaps he could not as the “tides were riding high with revolutionary fervor and some young radical would have announced that now even Banne Bhai (meaning Sajjad Zaheer) has also become reactionary” (Dunyazad #17, 2006).

---

Kamran Asdar Ali teaches anthropology at the University of Texas, Austin

Sajjad Zaheer and Progressive Writers’ Movement

Source: http://www.dawn.com/news/1069449

Copied From: The Dawn
Sajjad Zaheer and Progressive Writers’ MovementBy Mushir Anwar

THAT literature will meet our criteria which has thought, passion for freedom, beauty, a constructive spirit, the light of life’s realities; that moves, creates a turmoil and turbulence, makes us restless, does not put us to sleep since it would be akin to death if we sleep more. Thus Munshi Premchand defined the objectives of the Progressive Writers’ Movement in his presidential address at the movement’s first congress held in 1936. The standard bearer of this movement was Sajjad Zaheer, a scion of nobility who renounced the advantages of his birth to work for the cause of the downtrodden. Celebrations of his birth centenary beginning last year have revived some spirit of the time and good men who are still there have tottered to the aid of the Party.

The 41st edition of Irtiqa is devoted to Banney Bhai, his pet name, and the Progressive Writers’ Movement that he founded. It is a document of considerable interest for the present day reader who can find a great deal of thoughtful material on the life and work of Sajjad Zaheer as well as a candid discussion on the course of the movement, its achievements, drawbacks and its likely future. The issue presents a selection of the papers that were read at centenary conferences and seminars in the subcontinent. A brief account of the proceedings of the conferences held in Karachi and Lahore as well as in India has been covered for the issue by Jamal Naqvi.

Sajjad Zaheer saw in literature that force which could bring about a qualitative change in the life and thought of the people since it anticipated the profound and the deep unseen as well as the surface tensions springing from the font of ambition that not only make men dream but goad them to their realisation. But that in effect meant changing the aesthetics of art which some thought to be inflexible. Sajjad Zaheer who believed in scientific thinking that changes with new discoveries and does not remain wedded to old concepts saw no harm if literature could give a helping hand in social transformation. Why should this be so abominable, asks Dr Muhammad Ali Siddiqui since the artist has never been unconcerned about the form and content of his creation and its relevance to society. A piece of literature is after all a narrative. It is saying something. It is an expression. It is not therefore possible for art to be dumb. Sajjad Zaheer like other progressive thinkers wanted literature to be alive to the human situation and its needs. What was so unliterary in that?

Wasn’t that that the Greek and Roman writers of yore sought in their tales of the gods and goddesses and hasn’t that been the motive in religious texts and hymns and dirges that embody the classic tradition? And nobody seems to have any quarrel with that.

Irtiqa holds that Sajjad Zaheer with time’s passage has become a leading symbol of the movement and its unending struggle for its ideals. He will continue to inspire others to join the caravan. That may be true, yet, it is a fact that the movement wilted which Ashfaq Saleem Mirza, in his essay on its rise and fall, blames on the excessive optimism of our armchair revolutionaries while Dr Qamar Rais sees it not so much as a reaction to the inflexibility and extremism of the doctrinaires as to the changes that came at the end of the colonial rule when it was thought that a number of objectives of the movement had been achieved and the nationalist governments banned the PWM and jailed its leaders leaving others disenchanted and prone to pursue writing in the spirit of their own creative urges and bent of mind.

Sajjad Zaheer’s centenary celebrations after years of the demise of the Soviet Union serve as a reminder that neither has history ended nor the class struggle ceased. The subjugated masses of Asia, Africa and Latin America do not see the realisation of their dreams in the nightmare of globalisation. Closer at home the voices of men like Sajjad Zaheer are beginning to echo more resoundingly as the rude sight of corporate plunder is bared to even the dim-eyed on the street. In any case the clouds of dust from the debris of the Berlin wall seem to be settling down making the vision of the dazzled and the dazed clearer. The success of Left parties in South America and reassertion of the progressive politics even in Western Europe and signs of renewal of stirrings in the Non-Aligned Movement as was seen at the Havana summit are developments that should not surprise anyone. What should be more worrying for the sages of statecraft and movers and shakers of our world is the sight of a supine mass of humanity that does not rise to claim its rights and where the intellectual class plays the courtesan.

* * * * *

AWAMI JAMHURI FORUM: The 31st issue of this Left monthly magazine being published from Lahore features critical analyses of national issues by eminent writers like Kaiser Bengali who dismisses the claims of economic revival as temporary glitter which will soon fade, Salman Abid who analyses Muttahida Qaumi Movement’s (MQM) failure in the Punjab and Ashfaq Saleem Mirza who reviews where we stand after 59 years of freedom. Then there is a very candid interview with comrade Jam Saqi who rejects the concept of dictatorship of the proletariat and declares he is not opposed to Trotsky, whose political thought is examined in another essay by Khurshid Javed. A juicy piece in the charming Punjabi of Iqbal Dhallon suggests the biggest challenge is the promotion of democratic thinking in the society. There are two other interesting studies, one on Maulana Sindhi who suggested 50 per cent tax on the rich and a secular federal government; and the other on Lenin’s view of imperialism. Edited by Aamir Riaz, at Rs20 a copy it helps sustain the glow on the horizon.

CM’s visit and after

By Shakeel Ahmad

POLITICAL leaders of the area have termed last week’s visit of Multan by the Punjab chief minister ineffective and unproductive.

During his visit the chief minister inaugurated the Multan Industrial Estate Phase II, Multan, the PTV centre and under-construction building of the Multan Press Club.

He also visited the under-construction building of the Cardiology Centre and held meetings with MNAs, MPAs, Nazims, and a delegation of High Court Bar Association, Multan bench.

PPP (Parliamentarians) deputy secretary-general Shah Mehmood Qureshi said that the establishment of industrial estates was a welcome step but the basic element that could run these industries was electricity of which there was a crisis in the country.

He said that the high markup and bad law and order were major hindrances in the way of investment and in such circumstances nobody was ready to invest. He said that all the running projects in the city were from the World Bank and were planned before but the Punjab government was insisting on taking the credit while they did not give anything except making false promises.

Dr Javed Sadiqi, the Punjab Assembly member, said that in the past whenever the chief minister visited Multan he announced something regarding the development of the district whether or not it was implemented but this time he disappointed the people of Multan. He said that three days before his visit (to Multan) the chief minister visited Faisalabad and announced a Rs11 billion grant for its development projects. He announced Rs7 billion for the construction of Faisalabad Ring Road and Rs4 billion for the Faisalabad Industrial Estate, besides promising more money if this grant fell short.

He said the Punjab government had acquired 4,500 acres for the Sundar Industrial Estate in Lahore and they had established two industrial zones in between Lahore and Sialkot where they acquired 2,500 acres for each industrial zone while they did not acquire even an inch of land for the Multan Industrial Estate and it was being established on the land that was acquired in 1964.

He said, according to the chief minister, the Industrial Estate Phase II Multan would create 100,000 job opportunities while Faisalabad Industrial Estate would create four million job opportunities and Sundar Industrial Estate in Lahore would create 600,000 jobs while zones between Lahore and Sialkot would create one million employment opportunities.

He said the Women’s University, Multan, was working in two rooms of Government Degree College for Women, Multan, while on the other hand the chief minister announced a university in Gujrat last year and the Punjab government had allocated Rs2 billion for it.

He said that a new district headquarters hospital in Multan had been announced by the Punjab government some four years ago but it could not be established to this day.

He said that all these facts proved that rulers were not interested in reducing the deprivation of southern Punjab and their all attention was on the development of upper Punjab.

He said that investors would not invest in Multan or any part of southern Punjab until the government announced special incentives to encourage them.

PML-N’s Babu Nafees Ahmed Ansari, also the Punjab Assembly member, said that the inauguration of Multan Industrial Estate Phase II, which was actually part of Industrial Estate Phase I, was not a glad tiding for the people of Multan.

He said the City District Government had spent a huge amount on the arrangements for the visit of the chief minister and an air-conditioned tent was brought from Lahore which was a misuse of national resources.

He said that Mian Faisal Mukhtar, City District Nazim, actually was a businessman who was not a people-friendly person and he purchased the Pak-Arab Fertilizers at the price of Rs14 billion while the actual price of it was Rs70 billion. He accused the city district nazim of making hundreds of workers of factory jobless and said that a person who could make people jobless could do everything for his personal benefit.

Hafiz Iqbal Khakwani, adviser to the chief minister, said that it is true that southern Punjab is less developed as compared to central and upper Punjab but the process of development had accelerated during the tenure of the present regime.

He said that the chief minister visited Multan for the inauguration ceremonies of Industrial Estate Phase II and the PTV Centre and he (the CM) himself had asked President Pervez Musharraf for the establishment of a television station in Multan.

He said that classes had been started in Multan Women’s University while the land for its campus would be acquired very soon and construction work on a new District Headquarters Hospital would also start shortly.

He said that the chief minister had told him during his recent visit that he would announce a mega development package for Multan after the holy month of Ramazan and he would also declare Multan a big city and the construction of an international airport in Multan was among our priorities and work on this project had also started.

Marxist Influence on All-India Progressive Writers’ Movement

Source: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cmkp_pk/conversations/topics/20033

Marxist Influence on All-India Progressive Writers’ Movement

Jamal Ali Bashir

In contemporary times, Urdu literature has lost its significance in the eyes of the common Pakistani. The situation is such that the new generation is alien to the progressive writers movement and hence, literature. Those acquainted with Marxism have, at times, failed to relate the progressive writers’ movement in Urdu literature with Marxist ideology. This paper will elaborate upon the influence Marxist ideology commanded over the progressive writers’ movement. The first part will be on the history of this movement before partition, the second part will elaborate on the contributions of several progressive writers’ for this movement and last part will shed light on how this movement declined after partition.

Modernism in Urdu literature emerged after the film “Gadar” in 1857. The War of Independence was a mutiny in which Muslims and Hindus united to gain freedom from British rule and failed badly in June 1858. In this event, there was a brutal massacre of Muslims and Hindus as they failed to gain control over the British army (Marshall). This tragic event had a significant impact on the minds of the writers of that time. One of them, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was severely shaken by this event. Later, Sir Syed would come to be known as the pioneer of modernism in Urdu literature. After Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Allama Muhammad Iqbal, Maulana Shibli Nomani and Maulana Hali were torch bearers of modernism. Sir Syed Ahmed tried to mobilize Muslims through his writings and is credited with having added an entirely new vocabulary to the Urdu language. Allama Iqbal wrote about the terrible conditions the Muslims of the subcontinent offered solutions to their problem. The book, “Musaddas” by Hali completely changed Urdu poetry by introducing new form of parody and imitation which was unknown in Urdu poetry as he spread the message of patriotism and social progress. Shibli also contributed to mobilize people, he started writing poetry that had an was aimed to agitate minds and confront them with the problems of people. He also introduced the art of criticism and biographies in Urdu. These were the people who deliberately related literature with society. However, there was no organized or collective effort to change the passage of Urdu literature until the 1930’s. Often, in the existence of a vacuum in any society due to the inefficiency of old values to meet new demands, there is the possibility for modernism to emerge. Its birth is inevitable as old values start becoming meaningless and new possibilities start to emerge (Kiran).

This was exactly the situation faced by four young writers, Sajjad Zaheer, Ahmed Ali, Muhamuduzzafar and Rashid Jehan. Jehan wrote the book Angare, which comprised ten short stories, and published it in December 1932. This marked a major change in the history of Urdu Literature. This book was one of its kind because its form and content was completely different from the prevalent Urdu literature of the time. The book helped to build the foundation of All-India Progressive writers Association later on which is considered to be the most significant movement in the history of Urdu literature in twentieth century. Angare drew its inspirations from Marxism by attacking ferociously on existing political, religious and economical institutions. By writing this book, young writers tried to convey the message that man is the creator of his own destiny and he is capable of utilizing nature for his own benefit. A prevalent theme in the entire book is the individual self-respect of every man. Moreover, it also talks about the class antagonisms present in the then Indian society. Also, this book seems to be inspired by social realism because it tries to present a real picture of society. These ideas lie at the root of the progressive movement which started formally in 1936 (Mehmud).

The central committee of the soviet communist party passed a resolution on April 23, 1932 and created a single union of soviet writers which was organized later in 1934. This union invited other writers to join it but their membership was conditional; the condition was adherence to the doctrine of socialist realism in literature. Meanwhile, many Western critics maintained that Soviet literature has become a mere “instrument of propaganda”. At the same time, in India, Marxist intellectuals under the leadership of Sajjad Zaheer were uniting and called for the first conference of All-India Progressive Writers’ Conference in Lucknow on April 10, 1936. Pandit Jawaher Lal Nehru was invited to preside over the sessions of the conference. It must be kept in mind that within the Congress, Nehru was one of the left wing leaders. Moreover, this was a period of posing a united front for Soviet Union Diplomacy and it encouraged foreign communist parties to enter into anti-fascist alliances throughout the world. Nehru in his speech during this conference showed his support for All-India Progressive Writers’ Association (AIPWA). Other leftist leaders like Jai Parkash Narain, Yusuf Mahraly, Indulal Yajnik, Kamla Devi Chatopaddhaya and Mian Ifthikhar-ud-Din also participated in this conference and showed their support (Malik).

Nevertheless, the number of literary delegates was not particularly encouraging or promising. Only thirty eight writers participated in the conference, twenty five of whom were from Uttar Pradesh and it is significant to note that none of them was a Hindi writer. Actually, many other Hindi writers recognized the existence of this literary movement but were hesitant to participate in this conference due to the presence of large number of Muslim writers and they were confused about the nature of the movement. As Sajjad Zaheer points out,“a good many of them were reluctant to enter into any cooperative endeavour with Urdu writers”. However, Munshi Prem Chand, a renowned Urdu and Hindi writer presided the conference which compensated partially for the absence of other Hindi writers. Moreover, Munshi Prem Chand’s selection as a president of the Progressive writers’ movement was tactically wise because he had command over both the central languages, Urdu and Hindi, and he was at that time at the pinnacle of fame due to his writings. He had by then published dozens of novels. All-India Progressive Writers’ Association at its best was a semi political literary organization; this is demonstrated by the resolutions adopted in its Manifesto. Moreover, its manifesto categorically condemned Mussolini’s aggression against Ethiopia, the Japanese attack on China and the British government for repressing civil liberties and the press in India. The constitution of the association was drafted by three young graduates from different universities: Sajjad Zaheer, Muhammad al-Zafar and Abdul Alim (Malik).

Furthermore, it was tacitly stated in the Manifesto of Progressive Writers Association that their aim was to introduce new literature in India which would address basic problems existent in the Indian society. Some of these key problems were hunger, poverty, social backwardness and political subjection. These problems appear to be very important in the Marxist analysis of social conditions, which tries to offer solutions to eliminate these problems from society. However, it must be noted that the conditions in British India were quite different from those of other countries mainly because India was less industrialized. So, its main problem was the subjugation of farmers, women and particularly of the lower strata of society, including labourers. But it was not focused on only labourers, as was the case in Soviet Union and other countries (Kiran).

When we consider responses to the movement, it must be considered that the All-India Progressive Writers’ Association (AIPWA) faced severe hostility from the British Government from its inception. In addition, statesmen of Calcutta wrote and published two articles which claimed that this association was being controlled by communists and that the association posed a threat to the harmony of India. Moreover, the articles went as far as proclaiming that the association has been designed to create anarchy and lawlessness in the country. These worries were clearly exaggerated but as far as the connection with communism was concerned, their message was true. This is because this association was, to some extent, a diffused belt of Communist party of India (CPI) because Sajjad zaheer was its main stake holder and he was one of the well-known communist leaders, but it was utterly wrong to say that this association was dominated by only Marxists. This is evinced strongly by the fact that non-communist writers like Munshi Prem Chand, Maulana Hasrat Muhani, Maulvi Abdul Haqq, Sarojini Naidu, Doctor Abid Hussain, were also among the prominent patrons of this association. So, it was practically impossible for Sajjad Zaheer who was Secretary General to dictate these people, who were all strong writers with individual agency and personality. However, for AIPWA there were two main problems; firstly, how to infuse Marxist content in the current Urdu Literature and secondly, how to win the confidence of Hindi writers (Malik).

Let us review the situation in its historical context. The Hindi-Urdu controversy was at its peak in the 1930’s. Hindu’s insisted that Hindi should be the national language of India while Muslims, on the other hand, were of the view that Urdu should be the national language of India. Since AIPWA was dominated by Muslim Writers, Hindi writers felt insecure and suspicious regarding its ambitions. However, later on, their suspicion was reduced due to continuous persuasion by Communist Party of India (CPI). The movement evolved in many ways over time, as it gained popularity amongst different people. From 1936 to 1947 this movement seriously influenced young Muslim writers. However, after partition the movement became popular amongst many Hindi writers as well. It flourished in Punjab due to devoted Marxist writers like Faiz Ahmed Faiz, Zahid Kashmiri, Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi, Sahir Ludhianvi, Krishan Chander and Rajhnadra Singh Bhedi. The contribution of these writers was that they successfully blended Marxist form and content with the traditional style of Urdu poetry. Moreover, these writers tested newer techniques of short story writing and novels. They therefore contributed to the corpus of Urdu literature at that time by articulating their ideas in a mode more accessible to many people traditional forms of political advocacy: the mode of literature (Malik).

Sajjad Zaheer was one of the conspicuous figures of the movement. He proved to be a political and literary guide for other members of the movement. Zaheer belonged to an upper-class, bourgeoisie family of Uttar Pradesh. He was sent to Britain for his education where he obtained his bachelor’s degree from Oxford University and then three years later he received his barrister-at- law degree from London University. He was greatly influenced by communism and he never practiced law later on. Progressive writers were committed to the cause of peasants and proletariat but they had no proper idea about how these two classes actually lived. These writers debated this issue passionately in late nineteen thirties and they proposed that their place in this social ladder is determined by the capitalist social order and they urged everyone to defy their social order (Malik).

Likewise Faiz Ahmed Faiz tried to analyze the teachings of Marx, Hegel and Engels and he advocated amongst his colleagues the point that none of these three were themselves manual workers but they all understood the problems of workers wisely and urged everyone to be empathetic in understanding the problems faced by labourers. Moreover, he said that at least our message should reach to the middle class even if it fails to reach the labourers. In his poem “Bol”, Faiz tries to convey the same message in the following words:

Speak, for your two lips are free;

Speak, your tongue is still your own;

This straight body is yours still-

Speak, before its breath is gone. (28)

Another writer who worked passionately and zealously for this movement was Sayyid Mutalabbi Faridabadi. Soon after the creation of this movement, a school for peasant poetry emerged and he made a serious contribution to it. He was a humorous writer who discussed serious things by presenting them in an unprecedented way. These verses from his poem, “Hayya Hayya” demonstrate this point better than any other words can:

Rise and shine hayya hayya, raise your head hayya hayya;

Eight months of hunger, Sher Bahadur, long months of hunger;

No tattering rags, no clothes to wear, hayya hayya;

Here you go, hayya hayya; hunger will hurt, hayya hayya;

What do you mean brother mine, hayya, hayya, Sher Bahadur, hayya hayya:

Yes my brother, hayya hayya, belly will fill, hayya hayya! (Malik)

One of the unique contributions of the Progressive Writers Movement to the Urdu literary tradition in the subcontinent was its evocation of social problems, an aspect of life that was rarely discussed otherwise in such a serious and grave manner in Urdu literature. The latter was mostly about imaginative and romantic themes detached from social realities of life. But the new stream of poetry that emerged shows how Urdu writers were now concerned with such social realities.

Another writer, Munshi Prem Chand was not considered a Marxist writer but a genteel reformer who lacked an understanding of the concept of dialectical materialism, a feature central to Marx’s teachings. Moreover, his works reflect a reluctance to demonstrate a refutation of religion. This is portrayed by how Munshi delivered an address while presiding All-India Progressive Writers’ Association in which he completely rejected the idea of religious revivalism. Moreover, he also rejected the idea of art for the sake of art. This was an influence derived from Russian social realism that emphasized that artists should rebel against the out dated modes of society and they should work for political and economic freedom (Malik). Similarly, he tried to expose British politics and he criticized industrialists for their inhumane treatment of labourers (Kiran). From this it could be said that he did have the tendencies of Marxist thought. However, it should be kept in mind that this declaration by Munshi did not come as a surprise to at least Muslim Urdu writers who had previously committed art to the awakening of Muslims under the leadership of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and Allama Muhammad Iqbal (Malik).

Karl Marx’s writings about social and economic problems can be considered a form of protest against existing problems of subjugation in society. In the same way, the writers of the Progressive Movement in their writings were often writing in the form of protesting about different problems that perceived. Literature is one way of individuals engaging with the reality they see around them and this is perhaps, why the process of literature took writers in different or unexpected directions. Saadat Hasan Manto can be seen as one example of this. Manto was a unique and renowned writer but also, to this day, a controversial figure in the world of literature, because of the content of his short stories. He wrote mainly about social problems and linked them with sexual deprivations. Mostly his stories revolved around prostitutes and attempted psychoanalysis of them by showing the real motives behind their actions. This was something unbearable to a large section of society because they regarded it as obscenity and as unethical. The slightest mention of sex appeared indecent to them and they did not allow even covert references to sex in literature. This led these progressive writers especially Manto to protest against this hypocrisy and this narrow mindedness of the middle class. Manto translated large number of texts from Russian literature in Urdu (Kiran). Ismat Chugtai like Manto was also a social realist. Both of them are said to share much in common, both in terms of style and content of their writing. Both of them were greatly influenced by Soviet socialist literature and they adopted the same style and represented the reality of human condition. Moreover, they were influenced by the works of Freud and it prompted them to write about human sexuality more openly than others of the time. Their writings were mostly about human sexuality and this made their relation with AIPWA ambiguous and even alienated, because in the early years of progressive writers’ movement these writers were involved in it. However, in later years when more dedication was required they were less interested in those issues (such as..) and they kept writing about human sexuality. In 1941 Manto was charged in Lahore high court for his short story named “Bu” (“Odor”). Similarly, Ismat Chugtai was charged for her story “Lihaaf” (”quilt”) in the same year. Sajaad Zaheer at this point in time started to disavow any connection between Progressive and “obscene” literature (McLain).

Progressive writers were in fact social realists as it is obvious from their work. This word has its origins in Russian-inspired beliefs. This belief is about the function of literature in revolutionary socialist society. This is the belief that words have the power to portray the structure of social reality. This belief is in many ways inspired by the Russian revolution, Soviet communism and international Marxism. It urges the need to respond critically to repression and the feeling of frustration. This frustration can be due to the collective or personal aspirations of people. Prior to the Mutiny of 1857, Urdu literature lacked an instructive function. However, led by this event many reform movements materialised which believed in socio-religious reforms that were targeted at some level, at reclaiming people’s ancient heritages. After 1857, literature was perceived as a medium of writing that began to provide both a social and an aesthetic purpose. This is because Urdu writers were greatly influenced by late nineteenth-century Russian writers whose writings had a strong social aim, which was reform. The content of new writing that thus emerged shifted its focus from being about the elite class to being about the masses (McLain).

Many writers of this movement were indirectly active on the political front. They protested to events occurring in the world of foreign affairs which were an affront to their Marxist beliefs and loyalties. An example of this occurred when on September 2, 1939; British viceroy in India declared that India would participate in the world war. Progressive writers condemned this act of British government and this period led to the shifts in progressive writers’ poetry. One could argue that this action by progressive writers was in some ways motivated by the actions taken by The Communist International (Comintern), an organization initiated in 1919 in Moscow, had condemned Germany and its allies for engaging in a war forced by the thirst to gain world power. Moreover, these writers in their writings predicted that this involvement in war will eventually bring an end to British imperialism (Malik). These thoughts were expressed eloquently by Ali Sardar Jafri:

This lightening was nurtured in your home; this dagger was sharpened by your own hands.

This long-awaited calamity has befallen, and your anchor of fate is beyond your control.

Your throne is no longer safe on its pedestal, and your crown has fallen off your head;

Your imperialism has been shaken to its foundations.

Freedom-lovers rejoice at this occasion, all the rebels sing the anthem of freedom.

Let us burn sorrows with fires of glad-tidings

Let us dance under the blood-drenched flag. (Malik)

These impassioned verses show the new stream of thought amongst many people regarding what Indians viewed as their war of “Independence”. The passion and intensity embodied in these verses also show how literature can and has functioned as a strong stimulation for people’s sentiments.

Moreover, demonstrating a similar zeal and emboldened confidence to assert oneself, Faiz Ahmed Faiz wrote poems like “Siyasi Leader kay Naam”(“To a Political Leader”) and he warned Congress leaders of the upcoming success of the Soviet Union and advised them to put off their strategy of joining second World War. Similarly, Makhdum Mohy-ud-Din wrote “Tarana-I Azadi” (“Song of Freedom”) to highlight the changes going on in the nature of war (Malik).

In the years preceding the partition of India, the writings of the progressive writers evolved, affected by the external realities around them. Soon after the World War 2, it became obvious that the British were going to leave India and it was made clear that the country would be partitioned into two parts, one for the Muslim majority and the other one for Hindu majority. The Progressive Movement’s impartiality was affected by this divide and it led many of these progressive writers to become partial. Also for some Muslim writers, the pull of Muslim nationalism proved to be stronger than Marxism. Asrar al-Haq Majaz was one of the progressive writers who led many agitational rallies demanding the creation of Pakistan (Malik). Moreover, he wrote a poem named “Pakistan Ka Milli Tarana” for the future state (Malik).

In the mid 1942 The Communist Party of India was hesitant to support the cause of the independence of Pakistan and it presented the idea that India was a multinational entity and it should give the right of self-determination to these nationalities. But one year later it was supporting the cause of Pakistan openly. During this period, certain progressive writers like Ibrahim Jalis and Nazir Hyderabadi ended their relations with CPI and Progressive Writers Association. They joined Majlis Ittehad-al-Muslamin which was a right wing Muslim organization committed to the independence of Hyderabad. Meanwhile several progressive writers joined to create Anjuman Muslim Musanafin which was committed to the same aim. During this chaos they forgot Marxism and proletarian solidarity and they struggled instead to create South Pakistan in Hyderabad. This example shows how the partition of British India affected the loyalties of certain writers’ and that partition was in fact a very polarising event (Malik).

However, on the other hand there were still several committed supporters of Progressive Writers Movement who remained true to its cause and consistent in its support even in those uncertain and turbulent times. By 1947, CPI was successful in starting a serious communist revolution against the Nizam of Hyderabad. Progressive writers like Ali Sardar Jafri and Makhdum Mohy-ud-Din participated vigorously in this revolt, which aimed to overthrow the Nizam. Progressive writers considered these communes of Telengana (district in Hyderabad) modal communes (Malik). Zahir Kashmiri composed a poem dedicated to these communes:

Today, Communes are sprouting from the land of Telengana,

Today, the scorched earth is bearing varieties of beautiful life;

Today, Men of Telengana are spreading the glad tidings of conquering love,

Today, Men of Telengana are giving the blessed news of the renaissance of east,

Today, Men of Telengana have joined in the struggle of Java and Greece. (Malik)

In late forties when partition was imminent, Mian Ifthkhar-ud-Din founded the Progressive Papers Limited. It published Pakistan Times and Daily Imroz. Daily Imroz was a magazine which openly propagated leftist ideas. Soon after its creation this leftist joint stock started publishing several other literary-cum-political magazines. Faiz Ahmed Faiz who was by then an appointment holder of Public Relations Directorate of the British-Indian Army resigned from his position and he was appointed as the first editor of Pakistan Times and the Managing Editor of the daily Imroz. Even when he was imprisoned he technically held these positions (Malik).

Ironically, while partition ravaged thousands of people’s lives and constrained human relationships widely, it did not break the bonds between all Muslim and Hindu writers. This is evinced by how even after partition, literary journals and commercial publishers in Pakistan continued to publish the literary works by Hindu and Sikh writers who wrote in Urdu. On the other hand, partition had created very serious financial problems for the Urdu progressive writers present in India. When Hindi was made the official language of India, it enjoyed official aid for its development and it expanded. Conversely, readers of Urdu decreased with the passage of time. In this situation of insecurity Krishan Chander became General Secretary of AIPWA in 1953 and he replaced Dr Ram Bilas Sharma. In order to defend the rights of Urdu language in India All-India Urdu writers’ convention was held in April 1960 in Nagpur. The committee passed resolutions at this conference to improve the deteriorating position of Urdu Literature. One resolution was to raise funds and publish books of higher quality at cheaper prices. Unfortunately, however, this aim yielded no concrete results (Malik).

On the other hand in Pakistan, the Progressive Writers’ Association was unwelcomed due to its political ideology. On 26th march 1948 CPI in its Calcutta session decided that separate communist party should be established in Pakistan. Sajjad zaheer who was secretary general of AIPWA and member of central committee until 1948 now became secretary general of Communist Party of Pakistan. He resigned from his previous positions. Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi was made its first secretary. Communist Party of Pakistan operated as a legal party from 1948 to 1954. However, during this time party was under constant surveillance of Pakistani government. But soon after the creation of CPP in 1951 Faiz Ahmad Faiz and Sajjad Zaheer were arrested and convicted for conspiracy along with some military officials. They were accused of a conspiracy to overthrow the government. This party was repressed by the successive governments. So, it can be said that Progressive Writers’ movement was at its peak between1930 and 1950. One of the main reasons behind the fall of progressive writers in Pakistan was that they boldly challenged Pakistani establishment. Other reason could be their uncompromising attitude towards those writers who deviated from the doctrine of association (Malik).

In November 1949, progressive writers held their first all-Pakistan conference in Lahore. Four delegates from Soviet Union participated in this conference. Sajjad Zaheer could not participate because Pakistani government had issued his arrest warrant. Moreover, in this conference big posters of Marxist revolutionaries were decorated. In this conference progressive writer presented manifesto which stated that with the creation of Pakistan new era of revolutionary struggle has started and poets and writers cannot remain neutral to it and they must chose avenues of action. Moreover, they raised their voice against the aggression of Pakistani establishment and they emphasized on the idea of true democracy. They laid out different proposals on how to accomplish the progress of socialism. In this manifesto, writers of Pakistan were divided into different categories, which were neutral writers, progressive writers and reactionary writers. Neutral writers were writers who believed in art for art’s sake and they were connected to stylistic embellishments. Reactionary writers were writers who presented the ideas of elite and status quo and they concealed their tyranny. Progressive writers were writers who thought that reality is the product of social actions and they believed in realism and therefore believed that art cannot be divorced from class struggles (Malik). This is the same idea propagated by Karl Marx. Marx did not believe in alienated forms of literature, history and philosophy. In Marx’s view, alienated form is a form which does not account for the material conditions that shape the society (Slaughter). Therefore, the progressive writers were following Marx’s view when they depicted the social realities in the societies around them, in their work.

Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi contributed enthusiastically to this movement and under his leadership, the movement made vigorous attempts to influence young intellectuals throughout Pakistan. This movement’s success can be credited mainly due to the personal charm of Faiz Ahmed Faiz and Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi. They were very famous poets of Urdu, who are still read today by large numbers of people. Large numbers of young poets and intellectuals were attracted towards this movement based on its appeal to the causes of social and economic justice. These intellectuals mainly drew idealistic picture of socialism and contrasted it with the existing poles of the rich and the poor in Pakistan. Moreover, they analyzed social relations in terms of Marxist concepts-economic determinism and class struggle. In Ahmed Nadeem’s short stories we see a portrayal of rural life in the Punjab, where there is continuous struggle between the famer and the landlord. On the other hand Faiz talked about economic and political struggle and proposed solutions to it. Faiz Ahmed Faiz was awarded Lenin Prize in 1958 by Soviet Union for his contributions to the cause of world peace. This shows the far reaching and long lasting impact that some writers of the progressive writers movement had, due to the strength, authenticity and beauty of their writings even when they were publicly disgraced and even when their cause had declined (Malik).

In conclusion, All-India Progressive writers’ movement changed the passage of Urdu literature by introducing new form and content inspired by Russian literature. This movement however, to some extent, degenerated due to partition and it declined due to the conditions it faced in the two newly independent countries. One limitation faced when conducting research for this essay arises out of the fact that Urdu literature has not been made subject to extensive research and analysis. Discovering reliable sources and conducting secondary research on the subject matter is a tedious task. At times, multiple reliable sources have diametrically opposed views regarding the same subject. Hence, a personal analysis of the available literature had to be conducted. What is required is that extensive research be conducted and due importance be given to the unsung heroes of Urdu Literature – literature that best portrays a mourning heart. It must be realised that this entire movement and the wide array of writing it produced has a strong element of Marxist thought in it. However, these writings also created entirely new form of social consciousness and added a new style of writing in Indian Urdu literature- a style that made evident deep and grave realities about life and problems faced by common people, in a language rich in aesthetic beauty and sensitivity to human feelings and conditions. An overview of the history of the movement reveals that it underwent several phases of change and in Pakistan, was crippled due to certain political and ideological factors. However, its contribution to Urdu prose and to forms of writing in the rich and diverse world of Urdu literature is indubitable and must be appreciated. I would like to end with some verses of Faiz Ahmed Faiz, an immemorial jewel in the realm of Urdu poetry whose words impart a sublime beauty that is felt by the soul:

This thought keeps consoling me:

though tyrants may command that lamps be smashed

in rooms where lovers are destined to meet,

they cannot snuff out the moon, so today,

nor tomorrow, no tyranny will succeed,

no poison of torture make me bitter,

if just one evening in prison

can be so strangely sweet,

if just one moment anywhere on this earth.

Works Cited

Keirnan, V. G. Poems by Faiz Ahmad Faiz. New Delhi: People's House, 1958. Print.

Kiran, Sobia. “Modernism and the Progressive Movement in Urdu Literature.” American

International Journal of Contemporary Research, Mar. 2012. Web. Apr. 2012.

<http://www.aijcrnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_3_March_2012/20.pdf>.

Malik, Hafeez. "The Marxist Literary Movement in India and Pakistan." JSTOR. Association for

Asian Studies, 1967. Web. 07 May 2012.

<http://www.jstor.org/stable/2051241>.

Marshall, Professor Peter. "British India and the 'Great Rebellion'" BBC News. BBC, 17 Feb.

2007. Web. 07 May 2012.

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/indian_rebellion_01.shtml>.

McLain, Karline. "The Fantastic as Frontier: Realism, the Fantastic, and Transgression in Mid-

Twentieth Century Urdu Fiction*." University of Texas, Austin. Web. 5 May 2012.

<http://www.urdustudies.com/pdf/16/14_McLain.pdf>.

Mehmud, Shabana. "Angare and the Founding of the Progressive Writers' Association." Scribd.

Cambridge University Press, 1996. Web. 07 May 2012.

<http://www.scribd.com/doc/16085320/Angre-and-the-Founding-of-the-

Progressive-Writers-Association>.

Karnad’s Hayavadana

Source: http://museindia.com/regularcontent.asp?issid=34&id=2312

Karnad’s Hayavadana

Bharathi Chinnasami – 

Themes of Incompleteness and Search for identity

Girish Karnad is regarded as one of the three great writers of contemporary Indian drama, along with Badal Sircar and Vijay Tendulkar. His work takes off from Indian myths and legends and makes them a vehicle of a new vision, while Badal Sircar and Vijay Tendulkar deal with the problems of the middle-class. Karnad’s significant plays include Yayati, Tughlaq, Hayavadana, Naga-Mandala, Tale-Danda and The Fire and the Rain.

Hayavadana is a play on the search for identity in the midst of tangled relationships. Devadatta, the man of intellect and Kapila, the man of the body, are two intimate friends. Devadatta marries Padmini, but Kapila falls in love with Padmini. Consequently, the two friends kill themselves. But the comic touch is seen when Padmini transposes their heads, giving Devadatta Kapila’s body and Kapila Devadatta’s. This act reveals the ambiguous nature of human personality. M.K. Naik comments on the technique of this play: “ Karnad does not succeed fully in investing the basic conflict in the play with the required intensity, but his technical experiment with an indigenous dramatic from here is a triumph which has opened up fresh lines of fruitful exploration for the Indian English playwright”.

The play concentrates on “the theme of incompleteness” and the superiority of mind on body. Karnad has the genius and the power to transform any situation into an aesthetic experience. This is the main theme of the play Hayavadana. Karnad has rendered the story of the completeness of Hayavadana in a lighter tone but the pathos of it is touching. The superiority of the primitive force in a horse rather than in the intellect is implied through this.

When Hayavadana begins, a mask of Ganesha is brought on the stage and the Bhagavata (the Sutradhar or Commentator) sings verses in praise of “Vakratunda- Mahakaya” with the crooked face and distorted body, who is the Lord and Master of Success and Perfection. The play starts with the worship and then the description of Lord Ganesha, the elephant-headed god, who symbolizes alienation since his head and his body are incompatible. (Karnad 73) The Bhagavata sings the hymn to Him and comments:

An elephant's head on a human body, a broken tusk and a cracked belly- whichever way you look at him he seems the embodiment of imperfection, of incompleteness. How indeed can one fathom the mystery that this very Vakratunda –Mahakavya, with his crooked face and distorted body, is Lord and Master of Success and Perfection (1).

Hayavadana is a man with the head of a horns: “haya” means horse and “vadana” means face. He is the son of the Princess of Karnataka, a very beautiful girl, who fell in love with a white stallion. She was married off to the horse and lived with him for fifteen years. One fine morning, the horse turned into a beautiful celestial being and revealed that he was a gandhara cursed by the God Kubera to be born a horse for some act of misbehaviour. After fifteen years of human love, he had become his original self again. Released from his curse, he asked the Princess to accompany him to his Heavenly Abode. But she wanted him to become a horse again. So he cursed her to be a horse herself. She became a mare and galloped away without thinking in the least of Hayavadana, the product of her marriage with the white stallion. So Hayavadana is in search of identity and completeness of his physical body

The story within- the –story starts when the Bhagavata takes the reader to the city of Dharmapura where live two friends – Devadatta, comely in appearance, unrivalled in intelligence, the only son of the Revered Brahmin Vidyasagar, and Kapila, dark and plain to look at, having no equal in strength and in physical skills, the only son of an ironsmith Lohita. The Bhagavata's narration is interrupted by a Nata (Actor) who rushes on to the stage in fear and informs the Sutradhar that outside in the street he has met a talking horse. This is Hayavadana, who has a man's body and a horse's head who has all his life been trying to get rid of his head and become a complete man. Hayavadana, the eponymous character, comes and like Ganesha he too is a symbol of alienation since he is a horse-headed man. Karnad makes use of these mythical figures to throw light on the alienation of man and its consequences in human society. He tries to show suggestively the hegemony of Apollonian culture that has captured the racial unconscious of mankind. The modern man represented by Devadatta-Kapila suffers from self-alienation.

Devadatta is comely in appearance, fair in colour, unrivalled in intelligence, and the only son of the Revered Brahim Vidyasagara. Having felled the mightiest pundits of the kingdom in debates on logic and love, having blinded the greatest poets of the world with his poetry and wit, Devadatta is as it were the apple of every eye in Dharmapura. The other youth is Kapila. He is the only son of the ironsmith Lohita, who is to the King’s armoury what an axle is to the chariot-wheel. He is dark and plain to look at, yet in deeds which require drive and daring, in dancing, in strength and physical skills, he has no equal.

Devadatta is ‘the mind’ and Kapila ‘the body’. Devadatta falls in love fifteen times in a period of two years. Yet he fails to get married to any one of the girls. Even his sixteenth love seems to be a fiasco. He feels utterly hopeless and helpless: “I swear, Kapila, with you as my witness I swear, if I ever get her as my wife, I’ll sacrifice my two arms to the goddess Kali, I’ll sacrifice my head to Lord Rudra (14). Unlike Devadatta, Kapila does not fall in love. He does not feel it difficult to arrange the marriage of Devadatta and Padmini. Devadatta’s body does not respond as adequately as his mind readily loves and Kapila’s mind is not nimble enough to feel the sensations of his body. Thus both suffer from self-alienation.

The incompleteness of human desire is symbolized by Padmini. As the ideal of all womanly attributes she is the lotus itself. Rooted to the earth and with the flower turned skyward, she symbolizes the fundamental nature of the human body: it is torn between the downward earth and the upward heavens, itself being impressionable. Thanks to the incompleteness in nature, even when the eyes see, a lot of things cannot but be taken on trust:

Padmini : How about your eyes? Do they work properly?
Kapila : Yes.
Padmini : So there’s nothing wrong with your eyes. As for the other thing, I'll have to take you on trust (17).

The key theme of the play is the Cartesian division between body and mind, intellect and instinct. In this tussle the mind rules, a conclusion taken from the story of Vikrama and Vitala in Kathasaritsagar as well as in Vetalpanchavimsati. It is interesting to note that Thomas Mann in Transposed Head opposes this view and suggests that body is as important as head. The common Indian view is an ascetic one-body is to be subjugated to the mind or spirit for spiritual growth. But woman who represents the creative principle and earth is drawn to the beauty and power of the body. And so is Padmini in the play. She needs a man of steel like Kapila and naturally feels strongly attracted towards him from the very beginning. Devadatta cannot satisfy her body’s need the way Kapila can. This is evident from the very first meeting of Kapila and Padmini when this blacksmith, friend of the Brahmin intellectual, Devadatta, visits Padmini’s house to plead the case of Devadatta. Appreciation of her beauty by the poet Devadatta, cannot satisfy her bodily hunger after their marriage. During their way to Ujjain, as Kapila climbs up a tree, looking at his beautiful and strong body, Padmini gets enamoured of him. The dolls inform that during her dream, Padmini sees Kapila. Kapila is dark; in Lawrentian terms he is the life of instinct. Devadatta is fair and represents intellect or white consciousness. Like Lady Chatterley, Padmini is drawn towards this low-born blacksmith.

Devadatta and Kapila cut their heads at Kali temple. Left alone, the pregnant Padmini dares the dark evening in the forest and to her horror stumbles over the bodies: “How selfish you are-how unkind!” (31). She wails and in order to escape from blame decides to offer her head too. The Goddess intervenes and shows her a way out. In her eagerness to live closer to nature, Padmini attaches Devadatta’s head to Kapila’s body. Though the Goddess appreciates Padmini’s action. “My dear daughter, there should be a limit even to honesty” (33) exclaims the Goddess seeing Kapila’s head on Devadatta’s body and that of Devadatta’s on Kapila’s body. Kapila’s body weighs a ton on Devadatta’s mind and Devadatta’s head feels heavy on Kapila’s body. The friends laugh merrily seeing their bodies as if they have donned themselves in a new pair of clothes. Padmini, at her wits’ end, is unable to react.

Goddess Kali’s power proves to be very weak since the transposition of their heads fails to liberate Devadatta and Kapila from alienation.

Padmini : Must the head always win?
Kapila : That’s why I am Kapila now (56).

Padmini's juxtaposition of Kapila's strong body and Devadatta's brilliant head miserably fails to achieve unification because their heads carry Apollonian ego in themselves. For the same reason, Devadatta and Kapila become their old selves again. When Padmini realises this, she says to Kapila:

Your body bathed in a river, swam and danced in it. Shouldn't your head know what river it was, what swim? Your head too must submerge in that river- the flow must rumple your hair, run its tongue in your ears and press your head to its bosom. Until that's done, you'll continue to be incomplete (58).

Human desire for completeness represented by Padmini ends in a fiasco as the transposition of heads gradually proves that it is the mind that rules. After the transposition of heads by Padmini at the Kali temple, complications arise. Initially, Devadatta-actually head of Devadatta on Kapila’s body-behaves differently from what he was before. Devadatta’s head on Kapila’s body and vice-versa solves her problem only temporarily. Devadatta’s head- Kapila’s body combine slowly reverts to the nature of Devadatta. And so the other combines of Kapila’s head and Devadatta’s body. But there is a difference. Devadatta stops writing poetry while Kapila is haunted by the memories in Devadatta’s body. Padmini, after the exchange of heads, feels that she has the capacity for complete experience. Her situation is beautifully summed up by the images of the river and the scarecrows in the choric songs.

Practicing deceit on her husband, Padmini sends Devadatta to the Ujjain fair to fetch new dolls for the child and herself walks into the embrace of Kapila. She takes the child with her and claims it to be the child of both Devadatta and Kapila. Padmini’s visit disturbs Kapila. He had buried all those faceless memories but Padmini has dug them up. He finds himself in a tough situation and asks Padmini: “Why should one tolerate this mad dance of incompleteness?”(57)

Immediately after he sees Padmini, Kapila says to himself, “What she needs is a man of steel.” That he is a blacksmith should make it easy for us to discern what Kapila feels about Padmini but he quickly subjugates his feelings to his more representative role; that of a loyal friend who is almost like a dasa to Devadatta. Later on when Devadatta decided against going to the picnic, Kapila’s individual feelings surface, only to be submerged in the role that he has accepted to play:

So it’s off. What am I to do for the rest of the day? What am I to do for the rest of the week? Why should it feel as though the whole world has been wiped out for a whole week? Why this emptiness. . . Kapila, Kapila, get a tight hold on yourself. You are a slipping, boy, control yourself. Don’t lose that hold. Go now- don’t come here again for a week-Devadatta’s bound to get angry with you for not coming. Sister-in-law will be annoyed. But don’t come back (23).

Devadatta and Kapila are close friends. Both love Padmini and yet each recoils from the obvious solution: namely they should both live with Padmini.

Devadatta : Tell me one thing. Do you really love Padmini?
Kapila : Yes.
Devadatta : So do I.
Kapila : I know. (Silence) Devadatta, couldn’t we all three live together - like the Pandavas and Draupadi?
Devadatta : What do you think? (Silence. Padmini looks at them but doesn’t say anything.)
Kapila : (laughs). No, it can’t be done.
Devadatta : That’s why I brought this. (Shows the sword) (60).

The end of the play is quite interesting. A duel leaves both the friends dead and subsequently Sati of Padmini has been presented. But this end is not tragic. The deaths serve the absurdity of the situation. What Karnad wants to convey is that the world is of incomplete individuals, indifferent dolls that speak. The world is indifferent to the desires and frustrations, joys and sorrows of human beings. Padmini says to the Bhagavata:

My son is sleeping in the hut. Take him under your care. Give him to the hunters who live in this forest and tell them it’s Kapila’s son. They loved Kapila and will bring the child up. Let the child grow up in the forest with the rivers and the trees. When he’s five take him to the Revered Brahmin Vidyasagara of Dharmapura. Tell him it’s Devadatta’s son (62).

Soon after Padmini commits Sati the question remains unanswered that who is her real husband for whom she does it. The problem is not solved but disposed of through death of the trio. What the play underlines is that one way completeness is possible but not a perfect combination or polarity of the opposites. The central refrain of the play is expressed by the Female Chorus: “ A head for each breast, a pupil for each eye. A side for each arm”( 64). She asks why cannot a human being be like a many petalled, many flowered lantana? But Padmini and Devadatta’s choice of death affects the child’s growth adversely. “Children of his age should be outtalking a dictionary, but this one doesn’t speak a word. Doesn’t laugh, doesn’t cry, doesn’t even smile- - - There’s obviously something wrong with him” (66) as the actor puts it.

At last, Hayavadana has emerged not as a complete man but as a full fledged horse. He too had gone to the goddess and implored to her that he would kill himself if she did not help him. The goddess had appeared and had said rather peevishly why people did not go somewhere else if they wanted chop off their heads. She, however, has said “So be it” to Hayavadana and has disappeared even before he could ask her to make him a complete man. Thus Hayavadana's dream of becoming a complete man remains unfulfilled. Kali grants the wish of Hayavadana to become complete and he becomes a complete horse because it is not possible for men with Apollonian ego to be free from self-alienation.

Hayavadana tells the Bhagavata that in the temple of Goddess Kali, he prayed, “Mother, make me complete”(68) and even before he could say, “Make me a complete man”(68) the Goddess granted him the boon and he was transmuted into a complete horse, not a complete being as he still possessed the cursed human voice. After five years, Padmini's son is like Kapila. He is as morose as he. But he starts laughing for the first time in his life when Hayavadana who is now a complete horse except his human voice talks and laughs like a human being. His liberation is complete only when the five-year old son of Padmini asks him to laugh and soon the laughter turns into a neigh. In the “Introduction” to the play, Kirtinath Kurtkoti comments on Hayavadana’s transformation into a horse: “The horse-man’s search for completeness ends comically, with his becoming a complete horse. The animal body triumphs over what is considered the best in man, the Uttamanga, the human head”. The horse gives him a ride while the boy sings a nursery rhyme. He now loses his human voice and starts neighing. Thus they free each other from their incompleteness.

The princess of Karnataka finally got the body of a horse since it has a perfect form and grace. Hayavadana achieves completeness when finally he becomes a complete horse and loses the human voice through singing the Indian national anthem. But this is one-sided completeness. But for human being, who is a combination of flesh and spirit, body and mind, completeness requires a harmonical relationship between body and mind but cartesian division seems to be a perennial irresolvable problem for man.

The major reality of this world is self-division. Both man and society are self-divided and disturbing antinomies struggle for supremacy. The problem of Hayavadana, alienation, absurdity, incompleteness and search for identity are central of the plays of Karnad. Incompleteness is an inescapable and insurmountable reality. This concept helps to solve such riddles in Hayavadana as why Hayavadana's mother chooses for her husband a stallion rather than a man and why Goddess Kali makes Hayavadana a complete horse instead of a complete man.

The play depicts the realm of incomplete individuals, magnanimous gods, of vocal dolls and mute children, a world apathetic to the longings and frustrations, ecstasies and miseries of human beings. In this play Karnad brings back poetry, music, a sense of gaiety and celebration traditionally associated with a theatrical event. U.R.Anantha Murthy, critic, in his “A Note on Karnad’s Hayavadana” has this to say about theme: “The play exposes the audience to a significant theme like ‘incompleteness’ in a comic mode”. A few paragraphs later he says, “The play tries to create an illusion in us that the head determines the being of man”. R.S. Sharma in a lively note says: “That completeness is a humanly impossible ideal is suggested first in the story of Hayavadana and later in the transposition of heads. By showing the absurdity of the ideal of completeness the play finally achieves its aesthetic goal. It implicitly asserts the value and significance of human imperfection which makes any upward movement possible”.

Karnad, in almost all his plays, makes use of ancient myths, legends, stories, and traditions to interpret this age-old human situation with reference to contemporary experience. He leads the reader deep into traditional mythology to reveal the conflict that tears man’s mind. Here, inHayavadana he seems to toy with the theme of incompleteness and search for identity. According to Krishna Gandhi, in Hayavadana,

“The theme of the play is an old one . . . man’s yearning for completeness, for perfection. It is this yearning which makes people restless in their ordinary existence, and makes them reach out for extraordinary things. . . . But the ideal of perfection itself is ambiguous. The character of Hayavadana is invented as an example of this ambiguity”.

Works Cited

Ahmad, Sheikh Mushtaq. Existential Aesthetics: A Study of Jean Paul Sartre’s Theory of Art and Literature. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers, 1991.
Choudhury, M.K. The Theatre Idiom of Girish Karnad. New Delhi: Prestige Books, 1999.
Dodiya, Jaydipsih.The Plays of Girish Karnad:Critical Perspectives.New Delhi, Prestige Books, 1999.
Esslin, Martin. The Theatre of the Absurd. England: Penguin Books, 1961.
Greene, Norman N. Jean Paul Sartre: The Existentialist Ethic. Michigen: The University of Michigen Press, 1983.
Karnad,Girish.Hayavadana. Oxford University Press, Chennai, 1975.
Kaufmann, Walter. Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. New York: Meridian Books, 1957.
Khandelwal, K.N. Girish Karnad’s Tughlaq. Agra: Lakshmi Narain Agarwal, 2003.
Marcel, Gabriel. The Philosophy of Existentialism. New York: Citadel Press, 1956.
Misra, Lalji. Girish Karnad’s The Fire and the Rain : Analysis and Interpretation. New Delhi: Prestige Books, 1999.
Patka, Frederick. Existentialist Thinkers and Thought. New Jeresey: The Citadel Press, 1962.
Sartre, Jean Paul. Existentialism and Human Emotions. New York: Philosophical Library, 1957.
Warnock, Mary. Existentialism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1970.