Delhi Literature Festival 2014: Experiences and Reflections

After a lazy and a late start, I decided to give the last Sunday a literary twist. I reached the venue of the second Delhi Literature festival at around 3 pm. It was a fairly warm afternoon—the jacket felt rather uncomfortable. I was just in time for the session on 'Erotica In Literature'. The panel comprised Rosalyn D'Mello, Sreemoyee Piu Kundu, Ira Trivedi, and was moderated by Girija Kumar. All three women writers have books lined up for releases. The discussion passed through familiar contours any discussion on the said subject is likely to pass through: tabooed nature of erotic writing, orthodox backlash faced by and belittling of writers of erotica—more so when they're women—etc. The discussion somehow sounded contrived, and sounded more like a manoeuver by the writers, especially Sreemoyee, to promote their respective upcoming books. The very chic Ira Trivedi commended the progress that our society has seen in whatever little measure insofar as that she was able to discuss "such issues" openly with a man her grandfather's age (the moderator, Mr Girija Kumar).  

The other major session was on the 'art of playwriting'. There were figures as tall as Mohan Maharishi from the world of theatre, among others such as Jaidev Taneja, Mariam Karim Ahlawat, Diwan Singh Bajeli and Bernardo Carvalho. Mr. Bajeli expressed categorical regret on the lack of any "great" work of drama in Hindi, post-independence. Mr Maharishi, however, disagreed squarely, and posited that there have been a considerable number of plays that are significant and that the definition of "greatness" is rather subjective. The panellists briefly touched upon subjects such as street-plays, importance of music in plays, and the state of Brazilian theatre (Bernardo is a Brazilian writer). Mariam, in her very demure voice, pointed out that a written play is the property of the writer so long as it is with him/her; the moment the written play is passed on to the other team members who collaborate in the process of stage-craft—production team, directors, actors etc.—the play ceases to be solely the property of the writer, and becomes an object of interpretation, more of an abstract entity. And, therefore, she insisted, that we must have more plays published, so that over the period of time a new set of people may interpret the same play in a totally different manner from what the writer had originally conceived.  Mr. Jaidev Taneja shared a few nuggets of his experience as a performer with the Jan-natya manch.

 The penultimate session was about the 'Craft of Poetry'. This was one session that I personally felt was enriching and entertaining at once. It had an eclectic mix of panellists, ranging from such stalwarts of contemporary Hindi and Malayalam poetry as Ashok Chakradhar and K. Satchidanadan respectively, to the likes of Dr. Bina Biswas, Rana Safvi, and Dr. Vanita from the realm of English, Urdu and Punjabi poetry respectively.

Mr. Satchidanandan who has translated several English poems including those of Pablo Neruda into his mother tongue Malayalam  so as to make the poetry of the west accessible to his Malayalam speaking brethren spoke with a flourish. He has also translated several ancient and contemporary Malayalam poems, including some of his own into English, too. He gave us a sample of his creative genius by reciting his poem titled ‘Stammer’, which likens the act of stammering to poesy.  He recited in Malayalam four lines from one of his poems. I must confess that till then I had thought Malayalam was a slightly harsh language in terms of its phonology, but his recitation forced me to reconsider my position. It sounded so enchanting, each word so crystalline, that Mr. Chakradhar also could not stop himself from applauding it, though he, like most of us, could not understand the meaning of those lines.

I shall describe the inputs of Mr Chakradhar in the following lines, but I choose to do so in Hindi—a small ode to the beautiful language.  

चक्रधरजी ने अपने काव्य-कौशल और अपनी वाक् पटुता से अनूठा समां बाँधा। उनके वक्तव्य को सुन मुझे  अपने एक मित्र कि  हिंदी भाषा के संदर्भ में  एक कही गई एक टिप्प्णी याद आ गई : " हिंदी एक बहुत ही कुरकुरी भाषा है"। आपने बतलाया कि कैसे एक कवि के ह्रदय में किसी एक क्षण में सौंदर्य एवं कल्पना कि कौंध  उठती है, जो उस कवि को उस सौंदर्य को, उस विचार को, उस परिकल्पना को शब्द-बद्ध  करने पर  उतारू कर देती है। किन्तु कभी कभी इस कल्पना का ज्वार इतना वेग-शाली होता है कि शब्दों के बाँध उसे रोकने में सक्षम नहीं होते। सच्चिदानंदनजी कि कविता (जिसका शीर्षक "stammer"  अर्थात "हक़लाना " था) को भी चक्रधजी ने इस ही असक्षमता से जोड़ा। आपने तो यहाँ तक कहा कि हक़लाना एक प्रकार से भाषा से अपना  हक़ लाना है, चूँकि बहुत से भाव हैं  जिनका भाषा के शब्दों में समावेश करना अति ही दुष्कर है।

आपने फिर कविता के पुस्तकीय स्वरुप एवं भाव स्वरुप कि भी विवेचना करी। उनका कहना था कि काव्य-सम्मेलनों में जो आम तौर पर कविता का स्वरूप  है उसमे गहराई कि कमी  होती  है। उस कविता को कवि उपस्थति श्रोताओं को प्रस्सन करने के हेतु से पढता है। कुछ वाह-वाही मिलने पर फिर दोबारा पढ़ देता है। परन्तु ऐसी कविता सीमित हो कर रह जाती है। ऐसी कविता को आपने "पुस्तक " कि कविता बतलाया। इसके विपरीत जो कविता कवि के ह्रदय से स्फुरित होती है, और जो प्रशंसा-प्राप्ति के उद्देश्य से नहीं लिखी जाती, वह "उस तक" कि कविता बन जाती है। चक्रधरजी के मुख से हिंदी भाषा के कुछ शब्दों को सुन कर ऐसा लगा मानो जैसे किसी पुराने संगी से मिलना हो गया हो। आम बोल-चाल में ये शब्द कहीं लुप्त से ही हो कर रह गए हैं। हिंदी भाषा के माधुर्य को हमने सरहाना ही छोड़ दिया है। ( यह कुछ पंक्तिया हिंदी में लिखने के पीछे का मेरा उद्देश्य यादों के उन्ही पुराने  तारों को छेड़ना था। कोई त्रुटि हो तो अनदेखा कर दें।)

Dr. Biswas commented upon the changing forms and nature of English poetry. She pointed out that since the advent of Modernism the focus has nearly completely shifted from form to content. As a matter of fact, she added, that formlessness has now become the new form, and that now economy is valued much more over volubility. She also talked about how poetry is engaging with newer media to engender avant-garde forms such as Video poetry. 

Rana Safvi attempted to briefly trace the genealogy of Urdu poetry. She remarked that at its nativity in around the 17^th century, Urdu poetry was a mixture of Arabic, Hindustani, and Dakhhini. She pointed how in the beginning the Urdu poets largely concerned themselves with the laments of a jilted and forlorn lover (quite similar to the Petrarchan modality of chivalrous appeasement of the mistress).

Next in turn was Dr. Vanita who was to speak on Punjabi poetry. But by the time she began speaking the audience was under the spell of a strange kind of anticipation. There were a lot of murmurs, and the auditorium had started feeling more and more stuffy. All I could gather was that she was speaking on how Punjabi poetry was also instrumental in the Freedom struggle or something to that effect. A lot of people had been queuing up in the gallery behind the last row of auditorium in which I was sitting. This commotion was due to the finale. The final session was to feature the Chief Minister of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal, and an eminent journalist, Barkha Dutt. An army of videographers and volunteers took over the stage and started setting up their equipments.

Amid the organisers of the event frantically running up and down the galleries of the auditorium procuring bouquets and mementos, everybody’s gaze suddenly shifted to the entry door. A puny man with his head wrapped in a navy blue muffler surrounded by a phalanx of people, who were apparently guarding him, made an entry. Who else? Mr. Arvind Kejriwal. Barkha was to speak to the Magsaysay award winner, CM about his book, Swaraj: Power to the people.

I was a bit upset about the fact that the literary forum was in some sense hijacked by a political deity. It appeared as if Lord Indra had suddenly descended from the heavens. While I was feeling sorry for Dr. Vanita whose voice was drowned in the entire adulatory brouhaha, I turned my head left to find a familiar face sitting next to me. No sooner I attempted to figure out where I had seen this gentleman, than a group of volunteers walked up to him looking as apologetic as they could asking the gentleman to move to the front most “reserved row”.  The gentleman humbly resisted saying that he was fine where he was. Nevertheless, he had to relent to the requests. The man was the Education minister of Delhi, Mr Manish Sisodhia.

The finale soon commenced. What followed next is for everyone to see on T.V. and elsewhere.

What I found worth remarking was the ease with which the CM handled all the questions. Not for a moment he seemed nervous or ill at ease. (Thankfully he had removed his signature style muffler before the conversation began.) He took every question smilingly and cracked a couple of jokes here and there.

I’ve always had a lot of apprehensions about the model of participatory democracy (“moholla sabha”) that he and his party espouse, for the fear of majority dictating terms to minority, in other words the fear of ‘mobocracy’. Barkha echoed my reservation when she asked the CM about a situation in which a group of people from the moholla sabha may decide against subletting property to people from North east, gay people, or Muslims. The CM clarified that any act or decision taken by the Moholla sabha that violates the right to equality or any other fundamental right granted by the constitution will be deemed null and void, and that the people participating in any such violation will be liable to be prosecuted under IPC.

He clarified that it will not be the place of the Moholla sabha to pass moral judgements or any extra-constitutional judgements; the sabhas will only be allowed to take decisions related to the maintenance and the basic amenities of the concerned locality. He admitted that we need to have a lot of checks and balances in place to remedy any social prejudices that are prevalent in our society in order for this model to be successful. He also argued that the menace of Khap will not be redressed by banning them, but by prosecuting the ones which indulge in unconstitutional acts. One tough precedent and they will all toe the line, he said.

Theoretically speaking, his answers did assuage my reservations to a great degree, but I am yet not very sure how effective this model would be when it comes to executing it. The audience in the hall seemed to cheer and applaud the CM at almost every answer he gave; I refuse to believe they were all AAP loyalists or “AAP-tards” as they’re called. The loophole, though, came to surface as soon as a woman (who was also cheering for him at his responses) from the audience stood up to (respectfully) criticise the CM’s move of sitting on the dharna. A handful of people started booing her. The check in this case came from the moderator, Ms Dutt, who insisted that the girl be allowed to complete her comment without having been shouted down.

From what I gather the success of this model of governance will greatly depend on the efficacy of the ombudsman and his/her officers to see that even the last and weakest voice is heard without the fear of being muted.