VOICE FROM THE PAST
A poet's perceptions
Though NOORUL HASAN had never met NISSIM EZEKIEL, in the mid-1990s he thought he had some questions about the burgeoning tribe of "Indo-English" poets, the interface between English and the "vernacular" literatures of India and the theory and practice of translation, that Ezekiel would be the best person to answer. Ezekiel sent in his answers with cheerful alacrity. Excerpts from his answers:
WOULD you like to talk about the "tradition" of "Indo-Anglian poetry" as appreciably different from poetry in English of other literary cultures and traditions?
I prefer the word "Indo-English" to "Indo-Anglian", because Anglian is associated with Anglo-Indian, which has a specific meaning. It refers to those who belong to a community created by marriages between English and Indian citizens.
The tradition of Indo-English poetry is closely related to the English but not to the American one. Its weakness is its failure to recognise the fact that English is a changing language, from the pre-Chaucerian to the present day. Using the language of the Romantics or the Victorian poets, as so many Indo-English poets have done and still do, is disastrous. We are entitled to rely on simple English, but it has to be contemporary. Words and phrases of an earlier time create a dated ethos. A modern or even post-modern vocabulary need not imitate the style of English poets. Every poet in India has to create his own voice, even if he or she cannot avoid the influence of those English poets he or she admires most in a personal way.
What about the ambience of "India", which has been a sort of obsession with you as a poet?
I don't think India has been an obsession for me as a poet. It is often the natural, unavoidable context of certain poems by me, but definitely not all of them. The critical question is whether those poems have some value as perceptions of India; or are those perceptions marginal, even worthless?
You have translated a good deal of Marathi poetry into English. Do you consider translation a legitimate literary activity? What is your opinion about P. Lal's concept of "transcreation"?
I certainly consider translation a legitimate literary activity. It is necessary, ought to be encouraged, but I don't like the word "transcreation" as used by P. Lal. I believe translation has to be faithful to the original language of the poem to the extent possible. When such faithfulness is virtually impossible, the language of the translation should still remain close to the literal meaning and to the spirit of the original. The voice of the poem translated remains the voice of the poet who wrote it in his language, not the voice of the translator. The word "transcreation" may encourage taking liberties with the text.
I have not translated much Marathi poetry into English, because I don't really know Marathi. It is my mother tongue, and yet I cannot write a poem or an essay in Marathi, deliver a lecture in it, express any serious idea in it, even conversationally. That is why my translations have always needed a collaborator.
Do you think there is, or can be, a common ground between poets writing in regional languages and those writing in English?
There is a common ground between poets writing in our regional languages and those who write in English — but it cannot easily be described or identified. Only those who take a special and persistent interest in that common ground are likely to understand it. The tradition of Indian culture and India today in all its variety provide it.
To what extent, in your opinion, has Indo-Anglian poetry in general and your own in particular come under the influence of "modernism" and its concomitants e.g., Imagism, Dadaism, Surrealism, medium-as-message, Concretism etc.?
The influence of modernism is unavoidable in Indian life as a whole, except where it is cut off, for economic reasons, from the world. On the other hand, the concomitants you mention are not all equally part of that influence. Dadaism and Surrealism, for example have not been taken seriously by more than a very few Indo-English poets, certainly not by me. My poetry, when it may be regarded as "modernist" is not in any way related to such distinctive movements, much as I enjoy them in other poets.
Are your "very Indian poems in Indian English" mere lampoons or is there an undercurrent of derision in those poems?
My poems in Indian English are rightly described as Very Indian Poems. So they should not be considered as "mere lampoons". The characters and the situations projected are intended to be genuinely Indian, and the humour is in the English language as it is widely spoken by Indians, to whom it is not funny at all.
Who are your three most favourite poets in English and for what reasons?
It is impossible for me to claim that I have "three most favourite poets" in English. I tend to have favourite poems rather than poets, which means hundreds of them, old and new, written in English or translated from Indian and world languages. I believe in re-reading them, finding new aspects of their form and content. Many of such poems do not conform to the prevailing critical canons; so they may not be in anthologies but in journals.
What advice would you give to the younger generation of practising Indo-Anglian poets?
There is no general advice I would give to a whole new generation of Indo-English poets. If they show me their poems and ask for advice, I relate my criticism and advice to their relevant weaknesses. Only if advice is ideological can it be showered on a whole generation.
Lastly, what is the touchstone of a successful poem per se?
I don't believe there is a single "touchstone" for "a successful poem per se". What succeeds in a certain kind of poem may be a weakness in another of a very different kind. Even form and content may not always provide a reliable "touchstone". A mad poem is sometimes more effective than a sane one. A serious reader of poetry must have an open mind, to avoid dismissing a poem for not possessing some of his "favourite" qualities. It may have other qualities which function successfully in an entirely different kind of poem.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Literary Review
