Unit 1 :- Comparative Indian Literature

Unit 1:

1) Sisir Kumar Das, ‘Why Comparative Indian Literature? (ed. Dev and Das,1989) 

1) Abstract:-

At the beginning of the century, some of the scholars tried upon the idea of Indian Literature emphasizing the unity of themes. and forms and attitudes between the different kinds of literature produced in different Indian languages during the last three thousand years. It discovers the essential threads of unity in two ways. Coming back to the nature of Comparative Literature as taught in India, the epigraph by Sisir Kumar Das states the pressing concern of relationships that exist between Indian literature. It is also the comparatist's need to move away from narrow geographical confines and move towards how literature across the subcontinent are to be understood in their totality.

2) Key Arguments:- 

For a country like India which has a history of literary traditions oscillating between script and orature, new methods of teaching and reading were to be envisioned. While dealing with the formal elements that go into the making of any text in India-which shares a similarity with African situations in terms of oral, written, and indigenous sources identification of these methods as contours that aid in the reading of literature would apply. When speaking of kinds of literature in the plural, the succeeding questions point towards the direction in which these pieces of literature tend to inhabit a geopolitical location, otherwise termed a country, which is demarcated by boundaries, social, religious, and linguistic. When reading any text, the value-loaded term 'national', 'international', and 'indigenous' prop up any student pursuing literature.

Subdivisions, generic differences may occur, but identifying these differences and reading them as contours, instead of straight lines is what Comparative Literature sets out to engage with. While questioning the idea of an 'Indian literature' vis-à-vis 'Indian literature', he highlights the notions one attaches to the word 'Indian' which could in itself be a pluralistic outlook of life, wherein the concept of Indian literature as inherently comparative may be considered.

According to Das, the necessity of evolving a framework when two distinct languages/cultures are encountered is inevitable. Das states in this regard: Arabic, Japanese with Chinese, and Indians with the literature of Europe.

All these contacts have resulted in certain changes, at times marginal, and at times quite profound and pervasive, in the literary activities of the people involved, and have necessitated an enlargement of critical perspectives (S. K. Das 18).

Das states how Warren Hastings, the first governor-general of India, in his introduction of Charles Wilkin's translation of Gita (1785), advocated for a comparative study of the Gita and great European literature.

I should not fear' he wrote, to place, in opposition to the best French version of the most admired passages of Iliad or Odyssey, or the 1st and 6th books of our own Milton, highly as I venerate the latter, the English translation of the Mahabharata (S. K. Das 22).

Translation brought world-renown to a number of regional writers. In -The Task of the Translator, Walter Benjamin argues that translation does not conceal the original, but allows it to shine through, for translation effectively ensures the survival of a text (Bassnett 180).

3) Main Analysis:-

For a country like India which has a history of literary traditions oscillating between script and orature, new methods of teaching and reading were to be envisioned. While dealing with the formal elements that go into the making of any text in India-which shares a similarity with African situations in terms of oral, written, and indigenous sources (Thiong'o 1993)- identification of these methods as contours that aid in the reading of literature would apply.

When speaking of literature in the plural, the succeeding questions point towards the direction in which this literature tends to inhabit a geopolitical location, otherwise termed a country, which is demarcated by boundaries, social, religious, and linguistic.

When reading any text, the value-loaded term 'national', 'international', and 'indigenous' prop up any student pursuing literature. Das ascertains how Indian scholars in the ancient period did not endeavor to explore such connections between the two languages. Das has a clear insight into this phenomenon that may be owing to myopic tendencies and the lack of a framework to place literature from two linguistic roots. Das forgets to mention that were no appropriate frameworks to study identity politics that went beyond the frontiers of language in a country strongly informed by caste hierarchies, the subjugation of women, and the suppression of the LGBT. And even when literature shifted from nation bases to identity bases it happened outside the discipline of comparative literature.

4) Conclusion:-

In his article, "Comparative Literature in India," Amiya Dev bases his discussion on the fact that India has many languages and literature thus representing an a priori situation and conditions of diversity. He, therefore, argues that to speak of Indian literature in the singular is problematic. Nonetheless, Dev also observes that to speak of Indian literature in the plural is equally problematic. Such a characterization, he urges, either overlooks or obscures manifest interrelations and affinities.

His article compares the unity and the diversity thesis and identifies the relationship between Indian commonality and differences as the prime site of comparative literature in India. He surveys the current scholarly and intellectual positions on unity and diversity and looks into the post-structuralist doubt of homogenization of differences in the name of unity.

Dev also examines the search for common denominators and a possible pattern of togetherness and Dev underlines location and located inter-Indian reception as an aspect of inter literariness.

It is t/here Dev perceives Indian literature, that is, not as a fixed or determinate entity but as an ongoing and inter literary process: Indian language and literature ever in the re/making.

2) Amiya Dev, "Comparative Literature in India." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 2.4 (2000) :-

1) Abstract:-

The essay gives an overview of the trajectory of Comparative Literature in India, focusing primarily on the department at Jadavpur University, where it began and to some extent the department of Modern Indian Languages and Literary Studies in the University of Delhi, where it later had a new beginning in its engagement with Indian literature.

The department at Jadavpur began with the legacy of Rabindranath Tagore's speech on World Literature and with a modern poet-translator as its founder.

While British legacies in the study of literature were evident in the early years, there were also subtle efforts towards a decolonizing process and an overall attempt to enhance and nurture creativity. Gradually Indian literature began to receive prominence along with literature from the Southern part of the globe. Paradigms of approaches in comparative literary studies also shifted from influence and analogy studies to cross-cultural literary relations, to the focus on reception and transformation. In the last few years, Comparative Literature has taken on new perspectives, engaging with different areas of culture and knowledge, particularly those related to marginalized spaces, along with the focus on recovering new areas of non-hierarchical literary relations.

2) Key Arguments:- 

Tagore used the word 'visvasahitya" (world literature), and stated that the word was generally termed 'comparative literature". His idea of 'visvasahitya" was complex, marked by a sense of a community of artists as workers building together an edifice, that of world literature. The notion of literature again was deeply embedded on human relationships. and hence the aesthetic sense was linked with the sense of the human.

Bose, also well-known for his translations of Baudelaire, Hoelderlin, and Kalidasa, wrote in his preface to the translation of Les Fleurs du Mal (The Flowers of Evil) that his intention in turning to French poetry was to move away from the literature of the British, the colonial masters, while in his introduction to the translation of Kalidasa's Meghdutam, he wrote that it was essential to bring to life the literature of ancient times in a particular tradition in order to make it a part of the contemporary.

Comparatists dealing with Indian literature also necessarily had to look at the interplay between the mainstream and the popular, the elite and the marginalized and also to some extent foreground intermedial perspectives as different forms existed together in a composite manner, particularly in earlier periods in which textual and performative traditions existed simultaneously.

The department continues to develop teaching material on various aspects of Indian literature from a comparative perspective, beginning from language origins, manuscript cultures, performative traditions along with painting, sculpture, and architecture, the history of print culture, and questions related to modernity. That Comparative Literature studies necessarily had to be interdisciplinary was highlighted by the pedagogy practiced in the department.

T.S. Satyanath developed the theory of a script-centric, body-centric, and phono-centric study of texts in the medieval period leading a number of researchers in the department to look for continuities and interventions in the tradition that would again lead to pluralist epistemologies in the study of Indian literature and culture.

In 1986 a new full-fledged department of Comparative Literature was established at Veer Narmad South Gujarat University, Surat, where the focus was on Indian literature in Western India

Also in 1999 a department of Dravidian Comparative Literature and Philosophy was established in Dravidian University, Kuppam. It must also be mentioned that comparative poetics, a core area of comparative literature studies and dissertations, particularly in the South, was taken up as a central area of research by the Visvanatha Kaviraja Institute of Comparative Literature and Aesthetics in Orissa.

During this period two national associations of Comparative Literature came into being one at Jadavpur called Indian Comparative Literature Association and the other in Delhi named Comparative Indian Literature Association.

The two merged in 1992 and the Comparative Literature Association of India was formed, which today has more than a thousand members in the early years of the Association, a large number of creative writers participated in its conferences along with academics and researchers, each enriching the horizon of vision of the other.

3) Main Analysis:-

Again while Shelley and Byron were often critiqued, the former for having introduced softness and sentimentality to Bengali poetry, they were also often praised for upholding human rights and liberty in contrast to the imperialist poetry of Kipling. Contemporary political needs then were linked with literary values and this explained the contradictory tensions often found in the reception of romanticism in Bengal. It must be mentioned that Shelley, the poet of revolt, began to have a very positive reception when the independence movement gathered momentum.

In another context, a particular question that gained prominence was whether Shakespeare was imposed on Indian literature, and comparatists showed, as did Sisir Kumar Das, that there were different Shakespeares. Shakespeare's texts might have been imposed in the classroom, but the playwright had a rich and varied reception in the world of theatre.

From reception studies, the focus gradually turned to cross-cultural reception where reciprocity and exchange among cultures were studied. For example, one tried to study the Romantic Movement from a larger perspective, to unravel its many layers as it traveled between countries, particularly between Europe and India. The translation of several texts from Sanskrit into German played a role in the emergence of the Romantic movement and then in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries Romanticism came back to India, though in different shades.

Reception studies both along vertical and horizontal lines formed the next major area of focus - one studied for instance, elements of ancient and medieval literature in modern texts and also inter and intraliterary relations foregrounding impact and responses.

While one studied Vedic, Upanishadic, Buddhist and Jaina elements in modern texts, one also looked at clusters of sermons by Buddha. Mahavira and Nanak, at qissas and katha ballads across the country, the early novels in different Indian literatures, and then the impact of Eastern literature and thought on Western literature and vice versa.

With the introduction of the semester system the division was abandoned and certain other courses of a more general nature such as Cross-cultural Literary Transactions, where Rudyard Kipling's Kim and Rabindranath Tagore's Gora, were taken up, or sometimes in courses entitled Literary Transactions one looked more precisely at the tradition of Reason and Rationalism in European and Indian literatures of the eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries

The department of English and Comparative Literary Studies at Saurashtra University, Rajkot, took up the theme of Indian Renaissance and translated several Indian authors into English, studied early travelogues from Western India to England and in general published collections of theoretical discourse from the nineteenth century.

The Department of Assamese in Dibrugarh University received the grant and published a number of books related to translations, collections of rare texts and documentation of folk forms.

The department of Comparative Literature at Jadavpur University also received assistance to pursue research in four major areas, East-West Literary Relations, Indian Literature, Translation Studies and Third World Literature. Incidentally, the department had in Manabendra Bandyopadhyay, an avid translator who translated texts from many so-called "third-world countries.

From a very different perspective it was felt that stories poems, songs and performances from oral traditions that were found in most parts of the country had their own knowledge systems that could provide valuable and sustainable alternatives to contemporary urban modes of life and living and in several cases also reveal certain cultural dynamics and value systems that were constantly replenishing mainstream expressive traditions.

The second area in the Centre for Advanced Studies was the interface between literatures of India and its neighbouring countries. The first preliminary research in this area led to links that suggested continuity and a constant series of interactions between and among Asian cultures and communities since ancient times and the urgent need for work in this area in order to enter into meaningful dialogue with one another in the Asian context and to uncover different pathways of creative communications. Efforts towards this end led to an International Conference on South-South dialogues with a large number of participants from Asian and European countries. An anthology of critical essays on tracing socio-cultural and literary transactions between India and Southeast Asia was published.

 Among the projects planned under the inter-Asian series was one on travelogues from Bengal to Asian countries and here an annotated bibliography that could provide an initial foundation for the study of inter-literary relations was published. A second project involved working on the image of Burma in Bengali and Oriya literature in late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Travel narratives and diaries, newspaper articles from old periodicals, excerpts from literature and pictorial images of Burmese people in the Indian press were compiled.

4) Conclusion:-

It must be mentioned at this point that Comparative Literature in the country the 21st century engaged with two other related fields of study, one was Translation Studies and the other Cultural Studies.Translation Studies cover different areas of interliterary studies. Histories of translation may be used to map literary relations while analysis of acts of translation leads to the understanding of important characteristics of both the source and the target literary and cultural systems.As for Cultural Studies, Comparative Literature had always engaged with different aspects of Cultural Studies, the most prominent being literature and its relation with the different arts.

Cultural Studies may also be a key component in different kinds of interdisciplinary courses within the discipline. For instance, a course in Delhi University takes up the theme of city and village in Indian literature and goes into representations of human habitat systems and ecology in literature. looks for concepts and terms for such settlements, goes into archaeological evidences and the accounts of travellers from Greece, China, Persia and Portugal to demonstrate the differences that exist at levels of perception and ideological positions.

It is evident that Comparative Literature in the country today has multifaceted goals and visions in accordance with historical needs, both local and planetary,

As in the case of humanities and literary studies, the discipline too is engaged with issues that would lead to the enhancement of civilizational gestures, against forces that are divisive and that constantly reduce the potentials of human beings. In doing so it is engaged in discovering new links and lines of non-hierarchical connectivity, of what Kumkum Sangari in a recent article called "co-construction", a process anchored in "subtle and complex histories of translation, circulation and extraction (Sangari 50).

And comparatists work with the knowledge that a lot remains to be done and that the task of the construction of literary histories, in terms of literary relations among neighbouring regions, and of larger wholes, one of the primary tasks of Comparative Literature today has perhaps yet to begin. In all its endeavours, however, the primary aim of some of the early architects of the discipline nurture and foster creativity continues as a subterranean force.

3) Subha Chakraborty Dasgupta, “Comparative Literature in India: An Overview of its History”, Comparative Literature & World Literature, Volume 1 Number 1 Spring 2016

1) Abstract :-

Professed autonomy of national literatures, by shifting the theoretical focus towards plurality and dynamism. We imagine that the minimum requisite of a comparative study is to start with at least two literatures. But as Das has reminded us, Comparative Literature is a method, not an object of study - hence we are interested in how to study literature.In his article, "Comparative Literature in India," Amiya Dev bases his discussion on the fact that India has many languages and literatures thus representing an a priori situation and conditions of diversity.

2) Key Arguments :-

Richard Pierre mentioned that In studying comparative literature, you will consider literature from different genres,locations, and time periods simultaneously. Beyond that, comparative literature thinks across different disciplines, like literature and music on literature and anthropology. Finally, comparative literature is also the de facto home of literary theory; some consider the field to be concerned with the general makeup of literature itself, or literariness.

Choudhari said, “Our culture has taught us to ask questions and our literature is a compilation of all answers thus found. It is our culture to learn by asking questions as having discussions and arguments are part of upbringing.” (the times of india , February 15 , 2019)

3) Main Analysis :-

Is Indian literature, in the singular, a valid category, or are we rather to speak of Indian literatures in the plural Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Western  Indologists were not interested in this question, for Indian literature to them was mainly Sanskrit, extended at most to Pâli and Prakrit. For example, with all his admiration for Sakuntala, William Jones was oblivious of literatures in modern Indian languages. Non-Indian Indianists today, too,  are more often than not uninterested in the question. Although they do not consider Sanskrit-Pâli- Prakrit as "the" only literature of India, these scholars are still single literature specialists. Similarly, literary histories written in India by Indian scholars also focused and still focus on a single literature.

Gurbhagat Singh who has  been discussing the notion of "differential multilogue" . He does not accept the idea of  Indian literature as such but opts for the designation of literatures produced in India. Further, he rejects the notion of Indian literature because the notion as such includes and promotes a nationalist identity

Aijaz Ahmad's In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Ahmad describes the construct of a "syndicated" Indian literature that suggests an aggregate and  unsatisfactory categorization of Indian literature . Ahmad also rules out the often argued analogy of Indian literature with that of European literature by arguing that the notion of "European literature" is at best an umbrella designation and at worst a pedagogical imposition while Indian literature is classifiable and categorizable.

4) Conclusion :-

Amiya Dev suggests that we should first look at ourselves and try to understand our own situations as thoroughly as possible. Let us first give full shape to our own comparative literatures and then we will formulate a comparative literature of diversity in general.

Assignment :- African Literature

 Q-1 Wole Soyinka depicts a dystopian past as well as a dystopian present and future. Explain?

Ans:-

Introduction:-

Although very few critics have ventured to analyze Wole Soyinka's A Dance of the Forests owing to its apparent difficulty, those who have attempted simply see it as a metaphorical commentary of the sociopolitical situation in Nigeria. While their observations might be valid, taking into cognizance that the play was written in 1960 as part of the celebration of Nigeria's independence, the problem with such readings is that it does not take into account the structure of the play in which Soyinka traces the past to the present to forecast a dystopian future. While a utopic past and a dystopic present are often enacted as a narrative gesture that concomitantly leads to a utopian future, the reverse is the case in this play. What Wole Soyinka depicts is a dystopian past as well as a dystopian present and future. Therefore, my proposition in this paper is that more than being a work of post-independence disillusionment, Soyinka's A Dance of the Forests links the hopeless past with the fruitless present to project a bleak future. In this way, my point of departure in this essay is that while the writing of the play has been motivated by the betrayal of the common trust and hope as it relates to the Nigerian socio-political climate, the message of the play has a universal underpinning. In this respect, Soyinka insists that the atrocities that have so often characterized human interactions generally are unavoidable. Yet, by portraying the unavoidability of these human atrocities, Soyinka invariably quests for futurity that is utopian. My conclusion, therefore, is that within the aesthetic trajectory of Soyinka, the boundary between dystopian and utopian visions is not clear-cut: they are one and the same.

Wole Soyinka:-

Wole Soyinka, in full Akinwande Olu Wole Soyinka, was born on July 13, 1934, in Abeokuta, Nigeria. A member of the Yoruba people, Soyinka attended Government College and University College in Ibadan before graduating in 1958 with a degree in English from the University of Leeds in England. Upon his return to Nigeria, he founded an acting company and wrote his first important play, A Dance of the Forests, for the Nigerian independence celebrations. The play satirizes the fledgling nation by stripping it of romantic legend and by showing that the present is no more a golden age than was the past.

He wrote several plays in a lighter vein, making fun of pompous, westernized schoolteachers in The Lion and the Jewel and mocking the clever preachers of upstart prayer-churches who grow fat on the credulity of their parishioners in The Trials of Brother Jero and Jero’s Metamorphosis. But his more serious plays, such as The Strong Breed, Kongi’s Harvest, and even the parody KingBaabu, reveal his disregard for African authoritarian leadership and his disillusionment with Nigerian society as a whole. Other notable plays include Madmen and Specialists, Death and the King’s Horseman, and The Beatification of Area Boy. In these and Soyinka’s other dramas, western elements are skillfully fused with the subject matter and dramatic techniques deeply rooted in Yoruba folklore and religion. Symbolism, flashback, and ingenious plotting contribute to a rich dramatic structure. His best works exhibit humor and fine poetic style as well as a gift for irony and satire and for accurately matching the language of his complex characters to their social position and moral qualities.

From 1960 to 1964, Soyinka was co-editor of Black Orpheus, an important literary journal. From 1960 onward, he taught literature and drama and headed theatre groups at various Nigerian universities, including those of Ibadan, Ife, and Lagos. Soyinka was the first black African to be awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1986. After winning the Nobel Prize, Soyinka also was sought after as a lecturer, and many of his lectures were published notably the Reith Lectures of 2004, as Climate of Fear. Though he considered himself primarily a playwright, Soyinka also wrote novels The Interpreters and Season of Anomy and several volumes of poetry. The latter include Idanre, and Other Poems and Poems from Prison, published together as Early Poems; Mandela’s Earth and Other Poems and Samarkand and Other Markets I Have Known.

Wole Soyinka’s A Dance of the Forests is a complex play in which there is a “gathering of the tribes” in a festivity in which the living asks their gods to invite some of their illustrious ancestors. But instead of legendary ancestors, Forest Father/Head the supreme divinity in Soyinka’s fictionalized world, sends the living “two spirits of the restless dead” referred to in the play as Dead Man and Dead Woman. Owing to the apparent difficulty of the play, very few critics have ventured to analyze it. Derek Wright points to the difficulty and elusiveness of the play when he states that it is “the most uncentered of works, there is no discernible main character or plotline, and critics have been at a loss to say what kind of play it is or if it is a play at all and not a pageant, carnival or festival” . Similarly, Mathew Wilson describes the play as a “baffled incomprehension” and “a resistant text that resists assimilation”

Soyinka stretches the expressionistic mode of dramaturgy beyond its normative form in this play, most critics have avoided it in their hermeneutic exercises. A Dance of the Forests denounces different forms of pollution such as deforestation, earth erosion due to trees cut, topsoil, air and water contamination by petrol fumes and other waste Consequently, forest inhabitants are not happy; they send the living two restless dead instead of glorious ancestors for the gathering of the tribes. This situational irony poisons the feast where different nations ought to celebrate their achievements. Since the forest may stand for nature, its rebuke to humans may stand for climate change that affects both humans and non-humans.

The issue even becomes more complicated because those who have attempted to analyze it simply regard it as a metaphorical commentary of the socio-political situation in Nigeria. One such critic is James Gibbs, who is a book review of the play, opines that “Nigeria up to and during 1960  the immediate context of the play”. Also, Benedict Mobayode Ibitokun describes the play as “a clean record of and report on the country’s behavioral patterns”. Whereas he applied some concepts in existential psychoanalysis in his reading of the play, he nevertheless concentrated on what he termed “the endemic slur”  of the socio-political situation in Nigeria. In the case of Biodun Jeyifo, though he concentrates on what he terms the “ritual problematic” of the play, he still regards it as an “appropriate response to the dilemmas of post-independence, postcolonial Africa”. Similarly, in consonance with the suggestion of Eldred Jones, most critics have interpreted “the struggle of Esuhoro and Ogun for the half-child” at the end of the play as “a struggle for the life, the soul of the then newly independent nation of Nigeria” 

Whilst their interpretations of the play being one of post-independence disillusionment might be valid, taking into cognizance that the play was written in 1960 as part of the celebration of Nigeria’s independence, the problem with such readings is that it does not take into account the structure of the play in which Soyinka traces the past to the present to forecast a dystopian future. According to Simon Gikandi, creative works of the African post-independence disillusionment are not works “of how colonialism ruined Africa, but of how African leaders aborted the great hopes and expectations of indigenous rule. This was literature bristling with indignation and dripping with venom and vitriol”. Similarly, Nair Supriya appears to suggest that “the phrase ‘Great Expectations and the Mourning After’ aptly sums up the narrative trajectory of post-independence malaise”. While Soyinka’s play under consideration can then be described as a work of post-independence disillusionment since it is concerned with the configuration of things in Nigeria when it was written in 1960, it also transcends such categorization with its foundational structure which compares the present with the past to telescope the future. In other words, it is reductive to see Soyinka’s play as just a work of post-independence disillusionment because it is not just concerned with criticizing the status quo, but also concerned with the criticism of the past. In this context, Soyinka’s characters are not so many victims of the present configuration of their society as they are of their past actions.

Wole Soyinka’s dystopian/utopian vision in A Dance of the Forests:-

The structure of a play is an important ingredient in the determination of the artistic vision of a playwright. But the structure to which I refer in this paper is not the conventional dramatic structure of exposition, complication, climax, anti-climax, and denouement that is the paraphernalia of plays in general; but the plot structure that is distinctive to individual plays or artistic visions. Booker identifies this distinctive plot structure, especially as it pertains to dystopian/utopian artistic vision when he avers that “Utopia and dystopia are very much part of the same project in that both describe the other world, spatially and/or temporally removed from that of the author and/or intended readership”. Therefore, using faraway imagined places is a feature of utopic and dystopic imagination. The only difference perhaps is that whereas in a dystopian landscape the faraway imagined place is in the past, in a utopian poetic space it is in the past as well as in the future. Michelle Erica Green describes Butler’s works as “dystopian because she insists on confronting problems that have occurred so often in human communities”. Those dystopian works confronting “problems that have occurred so often in human communities” imply that it is a work that is not just concerned with human atrocities in the present but also in the past. It is this that figures in Soyinka’s play under consideration. The play takes its readers to “another world” that is far removed and unfamiliar. Arguably, among Soyinka’s plays, it is A Dance of the Forests that takes its readers/or audience to a distant past to the Court of Mata Kharibu about eight centuries earlier. While Biodun Jeyifo sees the structure of the play as being “formalistically extravagant” and as not being controlled as well as polished, the point to be noted is the geographical elusiveness of Soyinka’s setting of a distant past in this play hints at its vision of utopianism or dystopian.

However, while a utopian past and dystopian present are often enacted as a narrative gesture that concomitantly leads to futurity that is utopian, the reverse is the case in this play. What Wole Soyinka depicts is a dystopian past as well as a dystopian present and future. In this way, Soyinka rejects négritude’s glorification and idealization of the African past. Based on this negative reconstruction of the African past, which is antithetical to its glorification in the works of négritude writers, Soyinka insists, to borrow the words of Wendy Brown, that there is no “lost way of life and a lost course of pursuits”. That Soyinka rejects négritude’s idealization of the African past is significant within the aesthetics of utopianism. This is so because in a work that quest for a utopian future, the past must be reconstructed in such a way that the living seeks to recapture the past in the future. But as Anyokwu observes “Soyinka” in this play “dramatizes man’s proclivity to selectively ‘edit’ his past, turn a blind eye to warts and welts of his ignoble past and choose to highlight the halcyon days instead”.

Likewise, according to Glenn A. Odom, what is revealed in this play of Soyinka is that the future will continue to repeat the present”, and one might add “and the past.” So while the “Jews thirsted for the lost kingdom of Isreal; the English, for the Saxon Golden Age; and the Chinese, for the Taoist Age of Perfect Virtue”, what Soyinka posits with his poetic ruminations is that there is nothing glorious in the African past, and nothing euphoric about the present. For instance, the atrocities committed by the actors in the Court of Mata Kharibu eight centuries earlier are repeated by their reincarnated selves under different circumstances in the present world.

Adenebi in his prior existence, eight hundred years ago, was the Court Historian to Mata Kharibu, and he argues that “War is the only consistency that past ages afford us”, thereby facilitating the death of many soldiers in a “senseless war” that he encouraged; and at present, he is the corrupt Council Orator responsible for the death of 65 passengers on a lorry he had licensed to carry passengers beyond its stipulated capacity. Another major character is Rola/Madam Tortoise who in her previous world was a whore, and Mata Kharibu’s wife responsible for the death of Dead Man and Dead Woman. She is in fact likened to Helen of Troy since it is her prostitution that caused the war, which Adenebi described as “divine carnage”. And in her present world, she is still a prostitute responsible for the demise of her two lovers. Also, there is Demoke, the carver who at present killed his apprentice out of envy; and who in his former existence as Court poet to Mata Kharibu tacitly supported bloodshed by not speaking against the waging of a senseless war.

Likewise, Wiegman sees the apocalyptic or dystopic work “which writes the present as the failure of the future”. This is what obtains in A Dance of the Forests in which Soyinka stretches Wiegman’s an explanation/or observation by writing the past and the present as the failure of the future. This is evident, as already noted, from the past and present violent actions of Soyinka’s major characters. This is a play therefore in which the past and the present conflate in a metonymic reenactment of violence and bloodshed. Soyinka traces the history of a hopeless past and compares it with a defective present to forecast a bleak future. It is exactly as noted by Jane Wilkinson that the play invites its audience “to face past and future without any romantic illusions”. In this regard, my argument in this paper is that more than being a work of post-independence disillusionment, Soyinka’s A Dance of the Forests enacts a dystopian vision of humanity in general and the African continent in particular. Sunday O. Anozie says as much when he observes that as much as the play is African, “it is also universal in its application”

The dystopian landscape of the play is further made definite and unambiguous by the storyline in which there is a “gathering of the tribes” in a festivity in which the living asks their gods to invite some of their illustrious ancestors. These illustrious ancestors are supposed to be reminders of a magnificent past, which concomitantly is a telescoping of a glorious future. But instead of legendary ancestors, Forest Father Head the supreme divinity in Soyinka’s fictionalized world, sends the living “two spirits of the restless dead” referred to in the play as Dead Man and Dead Woman. As an all-knowing god in Soyinka’s aesthetic universe, it is significant that Forest Father chooses to send lackeys instead of great forebears. A logical interpretation then is that there are no great ancestors of this community of humans. As hinted in the play, the supposed glory of the empires of Mali, Songhai, Lisa, and Zimbabwe is all a mirage. For instance, the historical Mata Kharibu who Obi Maduakor describes as a “great African warlord”  is anything but great as portrayed in this play.

By creating a situation in which Demoke strikes down his apprentice out of spite and jealousy, Soyinka parodies the festivity of this human community. The supposed symbol of unity of this human community is in fact a symbol of conflict and rancor. Moreover, although the totem was meant to reach the sky, Demoke diminishes its height. This is nothing, but dystopian. That the symbol of this community that is supposed to reach the sky is diminished is a metaphorical manifestation that this community of humans cannot grow beyond their imperfection, nor can they escape it.

It is also significant that the Dead Man and Dead Woman have come not to celebrate with the living, but to judge them. Their repeated imploration “Will you take my case?”, which is also the opening statement of the play is an indication that they have come to right the wrong against them in their previous existence, eight centuries ago. Accordingly, instead of the festivity being characterized by social harmony, what is witnessed is acrimony between citizens, between the living and the dead, and between the divinities of the tribe. For instance, the Dead Man and the Dead Woman have come in judgment against the living, whilst the living tries to get rid of them. In this respect, Soyinka insists that the atrocities that have so often characterized human interactions are unavoidable. Yet, the depiction of the unavoidability of these human atrocities is implicitly a desire for a better world. In other words, the dystopian images in Soyinka’s play are strongly tied to his utopian vision. Jeyifo says as much with his observation that Soyinka’s most ambitious plays, among which is A Dance of the Forests are “appropriate responses to the human and social crises and dilemmas of post-independence, postcolonial Africa and beyond these, the crises and malaise of the modern world”. This appropriate dramatic response takes the form of a corrective through condemnation in Soyinka’s artistic vision.

According to him, “Butler does not offer a full-blown utopian ‘blueprint’ in her work, but rather a post-apocalyptic hoping informed by the lessons of the past”. It is within this frame of reference that Soyinka’s dystopian setting of the past, present, and future is concomitantly a desire for a utopian future. G. G. Darah notes that “the satirist discerns beneath the world of vice, wickedness, and failure, a kind of ideal world attainable only if people heed the satirist’s prescription for uprightness implied in his condemnation of individuals”. Similarly, James T. Presley sees utopias as works “which satirize the manners, customs, pursuits, and follies of the age or nation in which the writer lives” . Even though Soyinka’s work is not categorically a satire, yet it condemns the past and present follies of his characters. Giving this context, the Dead Woman’s observation that “A hundred generations have made no difference” is in itself a wish or desire for a better future. Also, the play’s criticism of Adenebi, the corrupt Council Orator responsible for the death of 65 passengers on a lorry he had licensed to carry passengers beyond its stipulated capacity can be read as a warning that such should not repeat itself in the future. In effect, Soyinka uses his play to warn his readers about the essence of learning from the lessons of the past.

As Miller rightly observes, “dystopias motivated out of a utopian pessimism in that they force us to confront the dystopian elements so that we can work through them and begin again”. In this sense, Dead Woman’s observation that nothing has changed after eight centuries is in itself a call for a new beginning that would guarantee a promising future. The past is gone, the present is here, but the future is yet to come. By painting a dystopian past and present, and forecasting a gloomy future, Soyinka warns that the mistakes of the past and the present should be avoided for a better future. It is perhaps in this vein that Sunday O. Anozie remarks that “A Dance of the Forests gave warning of disaster in 1960”. Soyinka’s wish, therefore, is not so much that the disaster or doom he predicts would come to pass, but that it should be avoided.

In an essay entitled “Feminism’s Apocalyptic Futures” in which Robyn Wiegman interrogates the question “Is There Life After Identity Politics?”, she seems to suggest that the import of the question lies not in its predictive element, but in its warning about the need for social transformation in the field of feminist studies, Therefore, the anxiety implicated in the question is not so much that the future of feministic studies is doomed, but the need to revive and re-engineer it. In this wise, artistic predictions are uttered not so much for them to be fulfilled as to avert their fulfillment. This is pointedly the case with Soyinka’s play. Abiola Irele concurs with this argument when he states that “For all the gloom that traverses work, and which is a reflection of our objective condition is in its primary nature a call to an active process of regeneration”. The interpretative burden of Anozie’s and Irele’s remarks as well as Wiegman’s argument is that Soyinka’s play is more of a warning rather than a prophecy.

Despite the dystopian images that populate Soyinka’s play, he still hints at the regeneration of the human world. For instance, the plot which is in itself dystopian still has a utopian element implicated in it. As already stated, the plot of this play is one in which there is a “gathering of the tribes” in a festivity in which the living ask their gods to invite some of their illustrious ancestors. These illustrious ancestors are supposed to be reminders of a magnificent past. But instead of legendary ancestors, Forest Father/Head, the supreme divinity of the play sends the living “two spirits of the restless dead”. It is this action of Forest Father that sets in motion the conflict of the play between the dead and the living, and between humans and the gods. But beyond these conflicts is the new world envisaged by Soyinka: a world in which, to borrow the words of Miller, all that is presently separated are united.

In his comment on Butler’s fictitious world in which humans and aliens inhabit the same space, Miller states that what is explored is “the possibilities for alternative and non-hierarchical definitions of gender and identity within which the difference of aliens and others can be accommodated rather than repressed”. He then adds that “any form of literature that seeks to help us see things anew is driven by a utopian impulse even if the work in question is dystopian”. Similarly, Ulrich Bach in his “Sacher-Masoch’s Utopian Peripheries” maintains that work with a utopian vision must “transcend the status quo”. Also, Karl Mannheim remarks that utopias “evoke images transcending those of the present reality”. This is exactly what obtains in Soyinka’s poetic universe, despite its dystopic and apocalyptic elements. By creating an aesthetic universe in which the living and the dead, and humans and divinities interact freely with one another, Soyinka transcends the status quo and helps his audience to see things anew.

Soyinka’s play under consideration is not an enactment of “what is” but “what could be.” It is not the way the world is, but his perception of how the world should be configured. It is noteworthy that this play is entitled A Dance of the Forests and not Forest. Taking into cognizance the major characters of this play, it can be extrapolated that there are three forests in the play: the forest of the gods, the forest of the dead, and that of the living; and as portrayed in the play, the three forests are in close proximity to one another. The Dirge-Man in this play, for instance, tells the living to “Leave the dead some room to dance”. It then means that in this play Soyinka breaks down the boundaries between life and death, and between humans and the divinities as a way of enacting a new world that is different from the present world. Thus, in contrast to Odom’s argument that the ending envisaged by Soyinka in this play “remains obscure”, it can be seen that he envisages a future utopian world in which all stratificational privileges, divisions, and boundaries would be eradicated.

But what difference does it make if divisions and boundaries are eradicated and there are still conflicts as depicted in Soyinka’s imaginative universe? It is worthy to note that a utopian world is not a perfect world. It is as Green rightly maintains that “a utopia does not have to be a ‘perfect’ society”. And commenting on this, Miller argues that “if this is the case, then utopian fiction has more to do with social/cultural/economic critique than with imagining perfection”. The argument of Green and Miller is that in a dystopian/utopian work; the socioeconomic, sociopolitical, and socio-cultural dynamics are critiqued not so much with the aim of achieving a perfect society, as that of achieving a better community. What is, therefore, significant in a utopian vision is not so much a perfect world as it is a better world or new beginnings in which there is a change in the status quo: what Jim Miller describes as “a post-apocalyptic hoping informed by the lessons of the past”.

This is what Soyinka expects of his readers/audience. More than participating in the making of meaning, he wants his readers/audience, in the same dramatic strategy of Bertolt Brecht in the Good Woman of Setzuan, to write the end to Forest Father’s statement. In the epilogue to Brecht’s play, the playwright acknowledges that the ending is not satisfactory, and he implores the readers/audience to write their own ending. However, in contrast to Brecht’s dramatic strategy of alienation or distancing effect, which impresses on the audience that what they are watching on stage is not real life, Soyinka’s ellipsis forces his readers to be engaged in the consequences of their action based on the play’s warning. Therefore, the end Soyinka’s audience is going to write would be predicated on whether they have heeded his artistic warning or not. Accordingly, despite the acknowledgment of his ineffectuality in the affairs of the human community, Forest Father still hints at a “post-apocalyptic hoping” that is informed by the lessons of the past. As he himself suggests, his fundamental reason for wanting to torture awareness from the souls of the living is that, perhaps, in new beginnings, they are going to have a change of heart, which obviously will lead to a better community.

Thus, while Darko Suvin sees Utopian fiction as “the verbal construction of a particular quasi-human community where sociopolitical institutions, norms, and individual relationships are organized according to a more perfect principle than in the author’s community”, what Soyinka enacts is a reversal of such “quasi-human community” in which the inhabitants have reached perfection.

Conclusion:-

In effect, Soyinka’s imaginative intervention/or contribution to the anthology of Utopian literary genre is that a writer does not necessarily have to create an imaginary future setting in which the inhabitants have attained perfection as in Thomas More’s Utopia and Chancellor Bacon’s New Atlantis as a demonstration of his/her utopian vision. Utopia does not necessarily have to be about a place. Sargisson says as much in her explanation that utopia is “the good place which is no place”. It can, therefore, be about an idea or a change in the status quo. In this respect, Soyinka rearticulates the critical yardstick for measuring and identifying utopian vision in imaginative works.

Furthermore, it can be argued within the framework of this essay that Soyinka’s artistic rumination within the ambit of utopian literary genre is that the past must not be constructed in such a way that it is idealized and romanticized as a projection of a blissful future. For him, the past and the present must be criticized for the future to be hopeful. As can already be deciphered, he critiques the past and the present and forecasts a dystopian future as a means to orient action that would avert its fulfillment. Therefore, Soyinka’s dystopian landscape is strongly tied with his utopian vision. He condemns and criticizes the past and the present actions of his major characters, and predicts a bleak future so that humans in general and Africans, in particular, would avoid the mistakes of the past and the present in the future. It is in this sense that his dystopian vision is concomitantly a desire for a utopian future.

Work Cited:-

(1)  Azumurana, Solomon Omatsola. "Wole Soyinka's Dystopian/Utopian Vision In A Dance Of The Forests". Scielo.Org.Za, 2014, http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0041-476X2014000200006. Accessed 18 Mar 2022.

(2) Wole Soyinka – Facts. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2022. Thu. 17 Mar 2022. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/1986/soyinka/facts/>

(3) Soyinka, Wole. "A Dance Of The Forests: Soyinka, Wole, 1934-: Free Download, Borrow, And Streaming: Internet Archive". Internet Archive, 1963, https://archive.org/details/danceofforests00soyi/mode/2up. Accessed 17 Mar 2022.

Unit 4 :- Translation studies

Hello Readers,

I am Asari Bhavyang from the Department of English and recently we have completed  Articles. It was very wonderful and we all enjoyed it. Dilip Barad sir has tried his best to explain to us. we have got thinking Activity task so, let's begin...

8) Tejaswini Niranjana. “Introduction: History in Translation” Siting Translation: History, Poststructuralism, and the Colonial Context, 1992 

1) Abstract:-

For a while now, some of the most urgent debates in contemporary cultural and literary studies have emerged out of the troubled interface of poststructuralist theory and historical studies. In its most basic formulation, the problem is that of articulating radical political agendas within a deconstructive framework. For a discipline like literary studies, the raison d'être of which is the analysis of representation, the critique of representation coming from within has engendered profoundly self-reflexive anxieties. 

It is in the context of this crisis that Tejaswini Niranjana's examination of translation as critical practice is made possible. Her analysis seems to amplify and elaborate the possibilities of the claim made by other postcolonial theorists like Gayatri Spivak and Homi Bhabha, as well as feminists such as Jane Gallop and Nancy K. Miller, that deconstruction can be used in politically enabling ways. Insisting that a questioning of humanist or Enlightenment models of representation and translation "can underwrite a new practice of translation . . . reinscribing its potential as a strategy of resistance" (6), Niranjana persuasively shows that a critique of presence can be taken to its limits and yet not incapacitate the interventionist critic.

She begins by addressing what she sees as deconstructive criticism's failure to address the problem of colonialism, as well as the neglect by translation studies to ask questions about its own historicity. Contemporary critiques of representation have not extended themselves to the point of questioning the idea of translation, of re-presenting linguistic meaning in interlinguistic transfers. Translation is made possible by the belief in mimesis, which in turn assumes the purity of the original. Niranjana cites powerful examples from the post-colonial context to show how translation was "a significant technology of colonial domination" (21); the use of translation to codify Hindu law, for instance, is revealed as imperialist cathexis, "to create a subject position for the colonised" (19) which would "discipline and regulate the lives of" Hindu subjects (18). In other words, the notion of "original" text was itself used to fashion the native's essence-an instance of colonialism's attempt to erase heterogeneity.

2) Key Arguments:-

In the colonial context, a certain conceptual economy is created by the set of related questions that is the problematic of translation. Conventionally, translation depends on the Western philosophical notions of reality, representation, and knowledge. 

Translation functions as a transparent presentation of something that already exists, although the "original" is actually brought into being through translation. Paradoxically, translation also provides a place in "history" for the colonized.

She was, therefore, discuss the pertinence of the critique of historicism to a world undergoing decolonization, given the enduring nature of Hegelian presentation of the non-West and the model of teleological history that authorizes them, a questioning of the model could underwrite a new practice of translation.

In the final chapter, with the help of a translation from Kannada, a South Indian language, into English, I discuss the "uses" of post-structuralism in post-colonial space. Throughout the book, my discussion functions in all the registers philosophical, linguistic, and political-in which translation "works" under colonialism. If at any point I seem to dwell on only one of these, it is for a purely strategic purpose.

3) Main Analysis:-

Another aspect of post-structuralism that is significant for a rethinking of translation is its critique of historicism, which shows the genetic (searching for an origin) and teleological (positing a certain end) nature of traditional historiography.

A critique of historicism might show us a way of deconstructing the "pusillanimous" and "deceitful" Hindus of Mill and Hegel. Her concern here is not, of course, with the alleged misrepresentation of the "Hindus." Rather, I am trying to question the with holding of reciprocity and the essentializing of “difference” (what Johannes Fabian calls a denial of co evalness) that permits a stereotypical construction of the other.

This kind of deployment of translation, I argue, colludes with or enables the construction of a teleological and hierarchical model of cultures that places Europe at I the pinnacle of civilization, and thus also provides a position ,for the colonized. 

This work belongs to the larger context of the “crisis” in "English" that is a consequence of the impact of structuralism and post-structuralism on literary studies in a rapidly decolonized world.

4) Conclusion :-

My central concern here is not to elaborate on the battle for “History" now being staged in Euro-American theory but to ask a series of questions from a strategically "partial“ perspective- that of an  emergent post-colonial practice willing to profit from the insights of post-structuralism, while at the same time demanding ways of writing history in order to make sense of how subjectification operates. 

Since it is part of her argument that the problematics of translation and the writing of history are inextricably bound together, She should briefly go over Spivak's main points regarding the "Subaltern historians. Their strategic use of post-structuralist ideas may help us see more clearly how the notions of history and translation she wish to reinscribe are not only enabled by the post-colonial critique of historiography but might also further strengthen that critique.

9) E.V. Ramakrishnan, “ Shifting Centres and Emerging Margins: Translation and the Shaping of the Modernist Poetic Discourse in Indian Poetry”, in Indigenous Imaginaries: Literature, Region, Modernity, 2017

1) Abstract :-

This article examines the role played by translation in shaping a modernist poetic sensibility in some of the major literary traditions of India in the twentieth century, between 1950 and 1970.The chapter will study examples from Bengali, Malayalam and Marathi, to understand how such translation of modern Western poets were used to breach the hegemony of prevailing literary sensibilities and poetics modes. Many Indian poets such as Buddhadeb Bose, Agyeya,Gopalakrishna Adiga, Dilip Chitre and Ayyappa Paniker were also translators. Translation from Africa and Latin America poetry played a significant role in this phase of modernism. Neruda and Parra were widely translated into India languages during this phase.

In this context, translation enacted a critical act of evaluation, a creative act of intervention, and performative act of legitimation,in evolving a new poetic during the modernist phase of Indian poetry. The term ‘translation ‘ to suggest a range of cultural practices, from critical commentary to creation of intertextual text. Andre Lefevere’s concept of translation as reflections/ rewriting , the chapter argues that ‘rewritings’ and ‘reflections’ found in the ‘less obvious form of criticism…,commentary, historiography , teaching, the collection of works in anthologies, the production of playshare also instance of translation. 

 An essay on T.S. Eliot in Bengali by Sudhindranayh Dutt, or scathing critique in Malayalam on the poetic practices of Vallathol Narayana Menon by Ayyappa Paniker, can also described as ‘ translational’ writing as they have elements of translation embedded in them.

2) Key Arguments :-

It has been argued that the Idea of a ‘Self-reflection or Self-validating’ literary text, which is central to modernist poetic, is rooted in an ideology of the aesthetic that was complicated with colonialism. 

• D.R.Nagaraj has pointed out that as nationalism became the ideology of the nation state. 

• How are we to evaluate the modernisms that emerged in the postcolonial phase in India? Critics such as Simon Gikandi,Susan Friedman, Laura Doyle and Laura Winkiel, and Aparna Dharwadker have argued that Non-Western modernism are not mere derivate versions of European hegemonic practice. 

• In the context of Bengali, as Amiya Dev has observed, ‘It was not because they imbibed modernism that the adbunik Bengali writers turned away from Rabindranath Tagore.In ‘The Necessity of poetry’, Dutta argues that the persistence of poetry through the ages in all societies ,particularly among the unsophisticated and the primitive, attest to its necessity. 

• Mardhekar points to their blind search for survival in a hostile world. The surreal image in the line, 'sadness has poisonous eyes made of glass, sums up the opaqueness of their vision and the toxic nature of their condemned existence unrelieved by any sense of benign order of life.

3) Main Analysis :-

The relation between ‘Modernity’ and ‘Modernism’ in Indian context , the purpose of discussion it may be broadly stated that Modernity designates an epochal period of wide-ranging transformations brought about by the advent of colonialism, capitalist economy, industrial mode of production. 

● The colonial Modernity informed literary and cultural movements, beginning from the reformist movement of the nineteenth century to the modernist movement of the mid-twentieth century. 

● The term ‘Modernism’ implies a literary/artistic movement that was characterised by experimentation, conscious rejection of the nationalist/ Romantic as well as popular. 

● The pistcolonial context adds a complex political dimension to the aesthetic of Indian Modernism.

The reception of Western modernist discourses in India was mediated by the dynamics of socio-political upheavals related to the formation of the nation state and the realignment of power structures in society. 

• Translation enables us to delineate the complex artistic and ideological undercurrents that shaped the course of modernism in Indian literature. 

• The three representative modernist authors from three separate Indian literary traditions Sudhindranath Dutta(1901-60) from Bengali, ,B.S.Mardhekar(1909-56) from marathi,and Ayyappa Paniker(1936-2004) from Malayalam. These three authors was bilingual and wrote essay in English as well as their own languages. Bengali emerged in 1930s and continued into the 40s and 50s, Marathi from 1950s to the 60s.

• Dutta's discussion of Aristotle, Plato, Voltaire, Byron, Mallarmé and Yeats prove his mastery over Western thought. As a modernist poem, "The Camel-Bird' moves beyond the personal by embodying the condition of inertia that a colonised community is condemned to. 

● B. S. Mardhekar transformed Marathi poetry and its dire dynamics in terms of its vision, form and content. Mardhekar intervened in Marathi literary tradition as an insider who had mastered the insights given by an alien tradition.

● In 'Mice in the Wet Barrel Died', which became the iconic modernist poem of Marathi. The metaphor of the mice is meant to evoke the morbid and the malevolent in modern life. When this poem was originally published in Marathi, in Abhiruchi, it was met with several disapproving comments, leading to long discussions and even parodies of the poem in Marathi.

Ayyappa Paniker was a poet, critic and translator, who, apart from introducing world poetry to Malayalam readers

• The title, 'Kurukshetram', signifies the place where the epic battle that forms the central theme of the Mahabharata took place. The poem progresses through broken images from contemporary life, but there are also redemptive memories of forgotten harmonies that recur through the metaphor of the dream. The evocative rhythms of the poem provoke a profound disquiet that cannot be particularised. The self is seen as a site of struggle and conflict, but the modern men and women are denied the tragic dignity of epic heroes. 

• It is important to understand the indigenous roots/routes of modernity and modernism in all the three writers discussed above. They partake of the logic of a postcolonial society which had already developed internal critiques of Western modernity.

4) Conclusion :-

Thus, language became, for the modernists, the only reality that they could relate to. Their moment of recognition. enabled by the discourses of 'Western' modernism, was postcolonial in its essence. The self-reflexive mo(ve)ment was also made possible by the carrying across of not content or form, but an interior mode of being that questioned the prevailing limits of freedom.

Unit 3 :- Translation theory

Hello Readers,

I am Asari Bhavyang from the Department of English and recently we have completed  Articles. It was very wonderful and we all enjoyed it. Dilip Barad sir has tried his best to explain to us. we have got thinking Activity task so, let's begin...

6) GN Devy, “Translation Theory: An Indian Perspective”, In Another Tongue: Essays on Indian English Literature. 1993 

1) Abstract:-

This article is about the role of translation in communicating literary movements across linguistic borders. According to J. Hillis Miller ‘Translation is the wandering existence of a text in a perpetual exile.’Chaucer, Dryden, and the Pope used the tool of translation to recover a sense of order. The tradition of Anglo-Irish literature branched out of translating Irish works into English.No critic has taken a well-defined position on the place of translations in literary history. Origins of literary movements and literary traditions inhabit various acts of translation. Translations are popularly perceived as unoriginal, not much thought has been devoted to the aesthetics of translation.

2) Key Arguments:-

Roman Jakobson in his essay on the linguistics of translation proposed a threefold classification of translations: 

(a) those from one verbal order to another verbal order within the same language system

(b) those from one language system to another language system, and

(c) those from a verbal order to another system of signs (Jakobson, 1959, pp. 232– 9).

In Chomsky’s linguistics, the concept of semantic universals plays an important role. However, his level of abstraction marks the farthest limits to which the monolingual Saussurean linguistic materialism can be stretched. In actual practice, even in Europe, the translating consciousness treats the SL and TL as parts of a larger and continuous spectrum of various intersecting systems of verbal signs

J.C. Catford presents a comprehensive statement of theoretical formulation about the linguistics of translation in A Linguistic Theory of Translation, in which he seeks to isolate various linguistic levels of translation. His basic premise is that since translation is a linguistic act any theory of translation must emerge from linguistics: ‘Translation is an operation performed on languages: a process of substituting a text in one language for a text in another; clearly, then, any theory of translation must draw upon a theory of language – a general linguistic theory’ (Catford, 1965, p. vii).

During the nineteenth century, Europe had distributed various fields of humanistic knowledge into a threefold hierarchy:

•  comparative studies for Europe, 
• Orientalism for the Orient, and
• anthropology for the rest of the world

After the ‘discovery’ of Sanskrit by Sir William Jones, historical linguistics in Europe depended heavily on Orientalism. And after Saussure and Lévi-Strauss, linguistics started treating language with an anthropological curiosity.

3) Main Analysis:-

The Problems in Translation Study

The translation problem is not just a linguistic problem. It is an aesthetic and ideological problem with an important bearing on the question of literary history.

 Literary translation is not just a replication of a text in another verbal system of signs. It is a replication of an ordered sub-system of signs within a given language in another corresponding ordered sub-system of signs within a related language.

The Problems in Translation Study

The translation is not a transposition of significance or signs. After the act of translation is over, the original work still remains in its original position. The translation is rather an attempted revitalization of the original in another verbal order and temporal space. Like literary texts that continue to belong to their original periods and styles and also exist through successive chronological periods, translation at once approximates the original and transcends it.

problems of the relationship between origins and sequentiality

the very foundation of modern Indian literature was laid through acts of translation, whether by Jayadeva, Hemcandra, Michael Madhusudan Dutta, H.N. Apte, or Bankim Chandra Chatterjee.

4) Conclusion :-

Comparative literature implies that between two related languages there are areas of significance that are shared, just as there may be areas of significance that can never be shared.

 When the soul passes from one body to another, it does not lose any of its essential significance. Indian philosophies of the relationship between form and essence, structure and significance are guided by this metaphysics.

The true test is the writer’s capacity to transform, to translate, to restate, to revitalize the original. And in that sense Indian literary traditions are essentially traditions of translation.

7) A.K. Ramanujan, “On Translating a Tamil Poem”, Collected Essays of A.K. Ramanujan, ed Vinay Dharwadkar. Oxford University Press, 1999

1) Abstract:-

'How does one translate a poem from another time, another culture,another language? Ramanujan translated poems from Tamil were written two thousand years ago in a comer of south India, in a Dravidian language relatively untouched by the other classical language of India, Sanskrit. The subject of this paper is not the fascinating external history of this literature, but translation, the transport of poems from classical Tamil to modem English; the hazards, the damages in transit, the secret paths, and the lucky by passes.The chief difficulty of translation is its impossibility. Frost once even identified poetry as that which is lost in translation.

We know now that no translation can be 'literal,' or 'word for word'. That is where the impossibility lies. The only possible translation is a 'free' one. What is everyday in one language must be translated by what is everyday in the 'target' language also, and what is eccentric must find equally eccentric equivalents. In this article Ramanujan took various examples of Tamil poems that he translated into English and he described difficulties that he faced during translation.

2) Key Arguments :-

Evans-Pritchard, the anthropologist, used to say: If you translate all the European arguments for atheism into Azande, they would come out as arguments for God in. Azande. Such observations certainly disabuseus of the commonly-held notion of 'literal' translation.

Woollcott suggests that English does not have left branching possibilities, but they are a bit abnormal.

Hopkins and Dylan Thomas used those possibilities stunningly, as we see in Thomas's 'A Refusal to Moum the Death, by Fire, of a Child in London; both were Welshmen, and Welsh is a left-branching language.

Hopkins's and Thomas's poetry the leftward syntax is employed for special poetic effects-it alternates with other, more 'normal', types of English sentences. In Tamil poetry the leftward syntax is not eccentric, literary or offbeat. but part of everyday 'natural' speech.

One could not use Dylanese to translate Tamil, even though many of the above phrases from Thomas can be translated comfortably with the same word order in Tamil.

3) Main Analysis :-

The collocations and paradigms make for metonymies and metaphors, multiple contextual meanings clusters special to each language, quile untranslatable into another language like Tamil. Even when the elements of a system may be similar in two languages, like father, mother, brother, mother-in-law, etc., in kinShip, the system of relations and the feelings traditionally encouraged each relative are ali culturally sensitive and therefore part of the expressive repertoire of poets and novelists.

Ramanujan took two different poems about love (What She Said) and war (A Young Warrior) and made point that, when we move from one to the other we are struck by the associations across them forming a web not only of the akam and puram genres. But also of the five landscape.; with all their contents signifying moods. And the themes and motifs of love and war.

 Love and war become metaphors for one another. In the poem "A Leaf In Love And War" we see entwines the two themes of love and war - in an ironic juxtaposition. A wreath of nocci is worn by warrior in war poems a nocci leafskirt is given by a lover to his woman in love poem.

Example God Krishna: both lovers and warriors

Ramanujan take a closer look at the original of Kapilar's poem Ainkurunuru 203. And he point out that The word annay (in spoken Tamil, ammo), literally 'mother', is a familiar term of address for any woman, here a 'girl friend'. So I have translated it as 'friend', to make clear that the poem is not addressed to a mother (as some other poems are) but to a girl friend.

To translate is to 'metaphor', to 'carry across'. Translations are trans-positions, re enactments, interpretations. Some elements of the original cannot be transposed at all. One can often convey a sense of the original rhythm. but not the language-bound metre: one can mimic levels of diction, but not the actual sound of the original words.

4) Conclusion :-

the translation must not only represent,, but re present, the original. one walks a tightrope between the to-language and the from-language, in a double loyalty.a translator is an 'artist on oath'.

sometimes one may succeed only in re-presenting a poem, not in closely representing it. at such times one draws consolation from parables like the following. 

if the representation in another language is not close enough, but still succeed in 'carrying' the poem in some sense, we will have two poems instead of one.

Unit 2: Comparative Literature

Hello Readers,

I am Asari Bhavyang from the Department of English and recently we have completed  Articles. It was very wonderful and we all enjoyed it. Dilip Barad sir has tried his best to explain to us. we have got thinking Activity task so, let's begin...

4) Susan Bassnett, “What is Comparative Literature Today?” Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction. 1993. 

1) Abstract:-

Sooner or later, anyone who claims to be working in comparative literature has to try and answer the inevitable question: What is it? The simplest answer is that comparative literature involves the study of texts across cultures, that it is interdisciplinary and that it is concerned with patterns of connection in literature across both time and space.

Susan Bassnett gives a critical understanding of Comparative literature. She says that there is no particular object for studying comparative literature. Another thing is, we cannot give a definite term for comparative literature.

 Different authors of literature give various perspectives about comparative literature. The popular understanding of comparative literature means different cultures across the world.

2) Key Arguments:-

Critics at the end of the twentieth century, in the age of postmodernism, still wrestle with the same questions that were posed more than a century ago:

"What is the object of the study in comparative literature? How can a comparison be the objective of anything? If individual literature have a canon, what might a comparative canon be? How can be comparatist select what to compare? Is comparative literature a discipline? Or is it simply a field of study?"

→ Susan Bassnett argues that there are different terms used by different scholars for comparative literature studies. Therefore, we cannot put in a single compartment for comparative literature.

→ The second thing she argues is that the west students of 1960 claimed that comparative literature could be put in single boundaries for comparative literature study, but she says that there is no particular method used for claiming.

3) Main Analysis:-

The comparative literature has been developed through the progress of the world and through various cultures of different continents.

 Different cultures of the continents have played a vital role in comparative literature studies, be it European, African, American and Eastern so on.

Matthew Arnold in his Inaugural lecture at Oxford in 1857 when said:

"Everywhere there is a connection, everywhere there is an illustration. No single event, no single literature is adequately comprehended except in relation to other events, to other literature."

→ Goethe termed Weltliteratur.Goethe noted that he liked to "keep informed about foreign productions and advised anyone else to do the same. It is becoming more and more obvious to me," he remarked, "that poetry is the common property of all mankind."

→ Benedetto Croce argued that comparative literature was a non-subject, contemptuously dismissing the suggestion that it might be seen as a separate discipline.

→ Wellek and Warren in their Theory of Literature, a book that was enormously significant in comparative literature when it first appeared in 1949, suggest that:

"Comparative Literature ...will make high demands on the linguistic proficiencies of our scholars. It asks for a widening of perspectives, suppression of local and provincial sentiments, not easy to achieve."

4) Conclusion:-

The comparative literature could not be brought under one umbrella unless it becomes a particular branch of the discipline of literature. There are a lot of efforts are being taken to study comparative literature through a common language that is done in translation, which is understood by all people.

→ Comparative Literature has traditionally claimed translation as a sub-category, but this assumption is now being questioned. The work of scholars such as Toury, Lefevere, Hermans, Lembert, and many others has shown that translation is especially at moments of great cultural change.

→ Evan Zohar argued that extensive translation activity takes place when a culture is in a period of translation: when it is expanding, when it needs renewal, when it is in a pre-revolutionary phase, then translation plays a vital part.

→ Comparative Literature has always claimed that translation is a subcategory, but as translation studies establish themselves firmly as a subject-based in the inter-cultural study and offer a methodology of some rigor, both in terms of theoretical and descriptive work, so comparative literature appears less like a discipline and more like a branch of something else.

Seen in this way, the problem of the crisis could then be put into perspective and the long, unresolved debate on whether comparative literature is or is not a discipline in its own right could finally and definitely be shelved.

5) Todd Presner, ‘Comparative Literature in the Age of Digital Humanities: On Possible Futures for a Discipline’ in Ali Behdad and Thomas eds. A Companion to Comparative Literature’ 2011, 193- 207

1) Abstract:-

After five hundred years of print and the massive transformations in society and culture that it unleashed, we are in the midst of another watershed moment in human history that is on par with the invention of the printing press or perhaps the discovery of the New World.

This article focuses on the questions like it is essential that humanists assert and insert themselves into the twenty-first-century cultural wars, which are largely being defined, fought, and won by corporate interests.

After five hundred years of print and the massive transformations in society and culture that it unleashed, we are in the midst of another watershed moment in human history that is on par with the invention of the printing press or perhaps the discovery of the New World.

This article focuses on the questions like it is essential that humanists assert and insert themselves into the twenty-first-century cultural wars, which are largely being defined, fought, and won by corporate interests.

2) Key Arguments:-

Nicholas Negroponte once asserted in his wildly optimistic book Being  Digital (Negroponte, 1995 ), for they always have an underbelly: mobile phones, social  networking technologies, and perhaps even the hundred-dollar computer, will not  only be used to enhance education, spread democracy, and enable global communication but will likely be used to perpetrate violence and even orchestrate genocide in  much the same way that the radio and the railway did in the last century (despite the  belief that both would somehow liberate humanity and join us all together in a happy,  interconnected world that never existed before)

Paul Gilroy analyzed in his study of “ the fatal junction of the concept of nationality with the concept of culture ” along the “ Black Atlantic, ” voyages of discovery, enlightenment,  and progress also meant, at every moment, voyages of conquest, enslavement, and destruction. Indeed, this is why many discussions of technology cannot be separated from a discussion about formations of power and instrumentalized authority.

N. Katherine Hayles, I find myself wondering – as we ponder various possible futures for Comparative Literature in the second decade of the twenty-first century – how to rouse ourselves from the “ somnolence [of] five hundred years of print ” (Hayles, 2002: p. 29). Of course, there is nothing neutral, objective,  or necessary about the medium of print; rather it is a medium that has a long and complex history connected to the formation of academic disciplines, institutions, epistemologies, and ideologies, not to mention conceptions of authorship and scholarly research.

Darnton’s assessment seriously that we are now in the fifth decade of the fourth information age in the history of humankind, it seems to me that we ought to try to understand not only the contours of the discipline of Comparative Literature  – and for that matter, the Humanities as a whole – from the perspective of information - and media-specific analysis, but that we also ought to come to terms with the epistemic disjunction between our digital age and everything that came before it.

Walter Benjamin did in  The Arcades Project (1928 – 40; 1999), it is necessary, I believe, to interrogate both the media and methodologies for the study of literature, culture, and society. 

The “ problem ” of Comparative Literature is to figure out how to take seriously the range of new authoring, annotation, and sharing platforms that have transformed global cultural production.

3) Main Analysis:-

• Comparative Media Studies:-

For Nelson, hypertext is a:-
Body of written or pictorial material interconnected in such a complex way that it could not conveniently be presented or represented on paper [ … ] Such a system could grow indefinitely, gradually including more and more of the world’s written knowledge.
Lev Manovich and Noah  Wardrip - Fruin, the field of “ cultural analytics ” has emerged over the past five years to bring the tools of high - end computational analysis and data visualization to dissect large-scale cultural datasets.
Lev Manovich and Noah  Wardrip - Fruin, the field of “ cultural analytics ” has emerged over the past five years to bring the tools of high - end computational analysis and data visualization to dissect large-scale cultural datasets.

Jerome McGann argues with regard to the first in his elegant analysis of “ radiant textuality, ” the differences between the codex and the electronic versions of the Oxford English Dictionary.

• Comparative Data Studies:-

Lev Manovich and Noah  Wardrip - Fruin, the field of “ cultural analytics ” has emerged over the past five years to bring the tools of high - end computational analysis and data visualization to dissect large-scale cultural datasets.

Jerome McGann argues with regard to the first in his elegant analysis of “ radiant textuality, ” the differences between the codex and the electronic versions of the Oxford English Dictionary.

• Comparative Authorship and Platform Studies:-

James Boyle points out, there are many corporate entities eager to regulate the public domain and control the “ commons of the mind. ” 10 For Boyle, the real danger is not unauthorized file-sharing but “ failed sharing ” due to enclosures and strictures placed upon the world of the creative commons (Boyle, 2008: p. 182).

Scholars such as McKenzie Wark and  Kathleen Fitzpatrick have even “ published ” early versions of their entire books on  Commentpress.

4) Conclusion:-

This article mainly focuses on this twenty-first century in terms of digital humanities how we are doing comparative studies. After discussing various arguments, we come to know that to date, it has more than three million content pages, more than three hundred million edits, over ten million registered users, and articles in forty - seven languages  (Wikipedia Statistics). This is a massive achievement for eight years of work. Wikipedia represents a dynamic, flexible, and open-ended network for knowledge creation and  distribution that underscores process, collaboration, access, interactivity, and creativity, with an editing model and versioning system that documents every contingent decision made by every contributing author. At this moment in its short life, Wikipedia is already the most comprehensive, representative, and pervasive participatory platform for knowledge production ever created by humankind. In my opinion, that is worth some pause and reflection, perhaps even by scholars in a future disciplinary incarnation of Comparative Literature.