Involvement and Indian Literature

DR R. S. MUGALI
Professor of Kannada (Retired), Bangalore University

It is presumptuous for anyone to talk about any aspect of Indian literature, handicapped as he is by his inevitable ignorance of the vast and varied nature of the subject. No Indian born to one language and interested in literature can claim to know even the most salient facts and trends in Indian literature, which have been produced in other Indian languages. And yet I venture to write on the subject on the basis of such information that I have been able to gather from books and persons, which supplements what I have known in my language.

Involvement usually is a forbidding word, meaning entanglement in a difficult situation, which may complicate matters and from which one had better keep aloof. That is why men of the world often think that non-involvement is the best policy in practical life. However, involvement in the right sense is, for the cultured person, a process of whole-hearted attachment to realities and concepts arising out of one’s awareness and understanding. It is an unflinching application of all the energies of one’s mind, heart and will to the realisation of one’s honest ideals, based on one’s concepts. This is a voluntary and self-chosen process as different from the involuntary and inescapable process of nature. Diversity of outlook and approach is inevitable in this process owing to diversity of human temperament. Even so, involvement is the common characteristic of all serious-minded persons, who are intent on improvement of the individual and of society, though it is frequently affected by the contradictions and conflicts, inherent in life.

Now let us see what we mean by involvement in literature. Ina sense, literature implies non-involvement. In a fuller sense, however, literature tries to hold the balance between involvement and non-involvement. A literary artist is deeply interested and involved in life all around but he does not get involved in the passions and prejudices, arising out of his personal relations, thus seeking to maintain a detached outlook in his work of art. Besides, this general approach to literature, a litterateur may be having a kind of particular involvement, which any thinking person has. That is what we have already spoken of as involvement in the right sense of the term, implying an attachment to a certain ideology and an application of one’s energies to its realisation.

But there is a vital difference between the involvement of a literary person and that of a non-literary person. A literary person considers it his main function to observe, analyse and interpret the human scene as he sees it in the light of his own ideas. It is not incumbent on him as a man of literature to get involved in any effort to seek support for his ideas and to face the social and political consequences of his action. A non-literary person like a political worker or social reformer not only observes life and forms his ideas but he is also engrossed in translating them into action and facing the consequences of that action. It is true that there are some literary persons, who are interested in the extension of their activities in the field of direct action. But their main function as literary artists does not make it obligatory on them to be so. Creative writers in particular may or may not interest themselves in action-oriented ideology. Their involvement is largely intellectua1 and aesthetic. And yet the question remains whether there can be any real, full-blooded involvement unless a writer is prepared to go the whole hog in the application of his ideas and ideals to life around him. It may be argued in support of this proposition that a writer will not be able to experience fully and express ably that sector of life or aspect of thought, with which he is neither familiar nor sympathetic in a process of genuine involvement. This will imply that involvement is a precondition of experience and expression. But this cannot be laid down as a must for all creative artists. There is such a thing as a wide-ranging sensibility and imaginative grasp, which enables an artist to create a good work of art. This, of course, does not preclude the gaining of as much experience as possible. However, the principle of involvement as a precondition seems to hold good in certain specific cases, where the writer is declaredly committed to a political or social ideology, implying in particular a radical change or a root and branch reform and revolution. If such a writer does little to revolutionise his own life and is not willing to face the consequences of his ideas, it follows that he is obviously putting up a posture in his writings just to show that he is a radical or a revolutionary. Genuine involvement in the case of such a writer or group of writers of this type is an absolute precondition of their creative activity.

We may not deny the sincerity of writers, who are attracted by a radical ideology or inspired by revolutionary ideals. But their attraction or inspiration is likely to wear out or find expression in hollow imagery and diction if it does not permeate their whole being and ensure their integrity. Those, who belong to the higher strata of society and stand for socialist and egalitarian values, cannot produce good or great works of art unless their involvement is sincere and complete, resulting in a genuine change in their life and conduct. Unfortunately in many cases, writers are little prepared to refashion their lives and face boldly all the consequences of their ideology. As a result, their writings ring hollow and become ridiculous postures, causing serious damage to their reputation both as writers and cultured persons. Generally this kind of dichotomy is undesirable in all writers, whatever their thought and vision.

Let us now turn to Indian literature and examine its position in respect of involvement. Indian literature in the past was by and large religious and mystical, sometimes sectarian. The two great national epics, viz., the Ramayana and the Mahabharata might have been originally secular but in course of time they were either given a religious colouring or religious thought was incorporated into them. In the later period we come across a few historical poems like Rajatarangini and Vikramarkacharita, secular and classical works like Kalidasa’s Raghuvamsa and Meghaduta, Shilappadikaram in Tamil, and Pampabharata in Kannada.

Though our knowledge of ancient literature and of ancient authors is limited, we can safely say that in most of that literature, there was a deep sense of involvement whether the concepts and values were traditional or revolutionary. It was only in conventional and initiative poetry that there used to be either an absence of or an illusion of involvement.

In modern Indian literature, we are in a completely altered setting, defying any attempt to define its nature in a brief campass. Of course, the impact of foreign domination and western type of education along with the forces of freedom and democracy brought into being after we won liberation from foreign yoke are some of the things common to literature in all the Indian languages. We also observe that in almost all these languages literary and ideological trends like the Romantic, the Progressive, the Revolutionary and the Modernist have manifested themselves, though the form, manner and timing of this manifestation has been varied in every language.

In the period before the advent of freedom, the national movement generated feelings of intense patriotism and a spirit of self-sacrifice. We find these feelings ardently expressed in the form of poetry and fiction as in Bankimchandra’s Song “Vande Mataram,” included in his novel Anandamath and Subrahmanya Bharati’s poems. There was a power of incantation and poetic inspiration even in such prose utterances as “Swaraj is my birth-right and I will have it” of Lokamanya Tilak and “Quit India” of Mahatma Gandhi. We could observe a deep sense of involvement in the fighters for freedom and in the patriotic writers of the day. An outstanding example is that of Shri V. D. Savarkar, who suffered the most in the cause of freedom and who produced great patriotic poetry in Marathi with his pen dipped in blood as it were. We can cite similar examples from literature in other languages. We do come across powerful national literature even when the involvement is not as complete as it should be.

Romantic literature flowered in all Indian languages as a result of the spirit of freedom, which released the mind from the shackles of convention. The foreign impact did not cause it but stimulated it. The essence of Indian Romantic writing is freedom for the individual to grow and express himself in his own way, unfettered by convention in respect of content, form and manner. This gave rise to diversity of self-expression, emanating from rich experience and self-development. An intense urge for freedom, the beauty of nature, the mystery of life and love were some of the themes, which inspired Romantic writing. It is wrong to think that the Romantics only lifted their eyes to the stars and turned away from the hard realities of life. It must, however, be admitted that in some of Romantic writing, particularly in second rate imitation, sloppy sentimentality and lack of proportion and propriety marred the creative effort. Thus along with bringing down the quality of the writings such defects raised serious doubts in the minds of critics about the authenticity of the experience and the involvement of the writer in his expression.

The progressive movement in modern Indian literature came as a sharp reaction to the aristocratic and ivory-tower approach of some of the Romantics and unfortunately turned out to be a temporary upsurge though it did some good by rousing the writer’s conscience to uphold the cause of the common man and voice his grievances. One of the reasons for the failure of this movement was that the writer’s involvement in the Communist or Progressive ideology was more or less verbal and not total. As Shri Amrit Rai has said, “Although the Progressive movement and Marxist influence had helped to give a social orientation to Indian literature Marxism became more and more a cerebral exercise or a matter of mere intellectual acceptance.” Commenting on this in his introduction to “Indian Literature since Independence”, Dr K. R. Srinivasa Iyengar has rightly observed, “Not being first experienced in the rough and tumble of actual life, Marxist writing too tended to become a new kind of hot house concoction...Only when creative, fiction is based upon the writer’s own social experience is it likely to be touched with life, only then it will be beyond pose and propaganda and become literature.” Though we do appreciate some of the Progressive writing, occasioned by a kind of imaginative involvement, we are driven to the conclusion that true Progressive writing can only emerge from a total identification, implying a necessary change in one’s way of life, a complete accord of thought and action.

Though Progressivism was a passing phase, the influence of socialist thought was spread far and wide in the context of the grinding poverty of the people and the glaring disparities in social and economic life of the nation, which Indian democracy has failed to remove even after several years of freedom. A cry for revolution, for the uplift of the weaker sections of society, including the downtrodden, is being voiced forth in poetry and fiction all over the country. It is more vociferous in certain parts like Kerala, Andhra and West Bengal. Even here, it is generally observed that revolutionary ideas are taken second-hand and unrelated to the realities of the Indian situation. Further, integrity of involvement is not ensured in many cases by a complete transformation in the writer’s life and conduct. It so happens that some intellectuals, who find themselves better placed in life by taking advantage of the existing democratic set-up, talk of revolution and wax eloquent about it in their writings without any change in their day-to-day life. This kind of revolutionary theatricality is as harmful to life and literature as Romantic sentimentality. During recent years, we have seen the emergence all over the country of Modernist writing under the strong influence of Western thought and Western literature, mainly existentialist in its approach. Such writing is currently in vogue when it is mostly outdated and has ceased to be modern in the lands of its origin. Generally speaking, Indian literature in this century has been always late in adopting Western trends and grafting them on the Indian stem without carrying to see how long and how deep it will strike root. It has not as yet learnt to rediscover its own traditions and assimilate such outside influences as go well with it so that they help real progress in life and literature. There is no doubt that some of the finest writing in the form of poetry, short story and novel has come up in the Modernist mode of which we can be really proud. If the Progressive and Revolutionary writers have mirrored the broken. image of society, the modernists have depicted in symbolic and significant images the broken visage of the self. Both of them have this in common that they are forthright, free from inhibitions and anti-establishment. One unfortunate development in the creative and critical attitude of some of these writers is a complete break with the past and indifference to or contempt for all writing except the Modernist. Thus in reflecting a broken image of the self, the Modernists seem to have damaged the very mirror, through which they look at other writing than their own. So far as involvement is concerned, there is authenticity in their deep self-analysis, finding spontaneous expression through rich and succinct images and words in a kind of free verse, though for that very reason communicability is sometimes seriously affected. Some of them are personalists and some others social realists. The latter seem to show a fervour for radical reform. But like the Progressivists their involvement is mostly intellectual without any real effort to face all the consequences of social commitment and walk through fire.

A complaint is often made that Indian intellectuals and writers keep aloof from the mainstream of life and do not make any positive contribution to the building up of free India. If at all, their attitude, they say, is negative and cynical. If there is social commitment, it is either theatrical or self-protective. Otherwise, it is either sentimental or cerebral with emphasis on inwardness and alienation. In an analysis of this complaint, it is sometimes pointed out that the present situation has arisen because of a lack of total participation in the struggle for freedom and in post-freedom activity. The deterioration of moral values in the political and social life of free India has angered and alienated the new generation of intellectuals and writers. According to me, this analysis will not be complete if we do not take into account the deep fissures caused by foreign domination and our servile education in the social and political fabric of the country. The fissiparous forces, engendered and encouraged by our British rulers have outlasted their rule. Some of the freedom-fighters, who were turned into rulers overnight, rushed forward to reap the fruits of freedom and take all possible advantage of the immature democratic system for their own self-aggrandizement.

The forces of high idealism, of service and sacrifice, have failed to make much of an impact since the leadership itself is frequently opportunist and not above reproach. As things are today, we are sitting on the top of a raging volcano. The upper class is engaged in climbing higher. The middle class is struggling to exist and withdrawing into its own world. The poor and the lower middle classes are the worst sufferers. But there is no guarantee that, when their standard of life improves, they will not behave like the middle and the upper classes as has already happened in some sectors of our society.

The writer, who is a part of Indian society and belongs mostly to the middle class, either softens and dilutes his convictions to suit the complex situation or makes it a principle of non-involvement or does not have the courage of conviction to jump into !be mid-stream and face the rising tide and deceptive whirlpool, that islife today.