| Gokul |
Posted
on 19-Feb-01 09:44 AM
I find this discussion interesting, thoughtful and useful and I see valid points in both Ashu's and Bishwo's arguments. Let me share my views.
We write for different purposes for different occasions and hence there are different ways of writing. Business writing needs complete simplicity, no doubt on that. What I am discussing below is about the literary or artistic (not necessarily flowery) writing.
The problem of hard vocabulary exists not only in English but also in Nepali. When we love a writer as a writer, we take holistic approach and love his/her overall artistic personality. We generally do not perform surgery of his/her writing and say "I like his/her vocabulary or I like his/her story etc." It is just like falling in love. The overall "Being" is what counts and matters. I have not read many English books so I like to base my arguments on my experience of Nepali literature. These are my favorite writers and the reasons of my liking them.
Prose (Fiction/Non fiction)
1. Shankar Lamichhane - Takes modern approach and gives contemporary perspectives. Illustrates a subtle philosophical point with clarity, simplicity and everyday-ness. I really do not care about his vocabulary. I am more enchanted with his writing's content and nostalgic vision. It is like when you are in love with somebody, you really do not care what that person is wearing although flasy dress may tend to raise your suspicion (depending upon who you are).
2. Parijat - Similar to Lamichhane. More artistic and tender and less philosophical than Lamichhane. Uses simple vocabulary.
3. Devkota - I consider Devkota's "Laxmi Nibandha Sangraha" a masterpiece in Nepali essay writing. Although he uses a difficult vocabulary, I read this book from time to time because of its great "poetryness" and the emphatic force which it exerts in reader's heart.
Poetry
1. Ishwar Ballav - Uses difficult vocabulary but I find "something" in his poetry that I can not find in Bhupi's poems.
2. Mohan Koirala - Difficult vocab but there is something eternal and poetic. Compare with T.S. Eliot
3. Bhupi sherchan - Uses very simple vocabulary and I find "something" in his poetry that I can not find in Ishwar Ballav's poems. His poems are "achaar" in Nepali literature.
4. Lekhnath- Difficult vocab but great art and rhythm.
This list can be extended further but my point is just to illustrate that a good literary writing goes beyond the worldly discussion of hard/simple vocabulary. You can not make Laxmi Nibandha Sangraha more beautiful by replacing those hard words with common, simple words. Similarly, you can not make Bhupi's poem more artistic and intellectual by replacing his words with bombastic, flowery words. Literary writing is a very complex process and no one can teach you this. Sometimes the writer becomes pretensous. Sometimes the writer becomes naiive. It is all a part of his/her big game called the writing. Nobody becomes Aldous Huxley by pouring his/her GRE vocabs and nobody can write "Old man and the sea or Siddhartha" by rejecting GRE vocabs. Simplicity and complexity are just means, not ends in themselves. They are pointing something much grandeur and eternal that really is the crux of real writing. Everything else is just scribbling.
|
