| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 26-Apr-01 01:52 AM
Shankar Lamichanay, who died about 25 years ago, has long
been called the greatest essayist in Nepali language since
Devkota.
Recently, for a Martin Chautari discussion with Khagendra Sangraula (who unfortunately became ill on that day), I
read and gave a presentation on SL's collection of essays, "Abstract Chintan: Pyaz".
Having read 100s of 'New Yorker' and New Yorker-type
essays in English and having thus developed an idea as to
what an essay 'should' be like, I was far from impressed
by SL's work.
His essays, from this particular collection anyway, were too short, too under-developed (to put forth a philoshical view) and too 'steam of conscious' to add up to a coherent anything.
Sure, his language is enticing; but if you don't have anything
substantial to say, you can't hide your lack of substance by
using seductive language. Essays, unlike fiction, are about truth and ideas (howsoever defined).
And so, I ended my presentation -- with a typical confidence of a first-time reader :-) -- giving the book a C+.
Madan Mani Dixit, the former head of the Royal Nepal Academy,
then weighed in with his memories of Lamichanay, and declared
that brilliant though SL was, he was a disorganized thinker,
who had also been accused of being a plagiarist. Dixit
appeared sympatehtic to SL, but seemed puzzled by all this
sky-rocketng respect for SL.
C K Lal then disagreed with us all and argued that the 'Pyaz; book is NOT really the collection of SL's best works, and urged us to read his other essays.
C K Lal then gave a complex picture of SL's life: SL's upbringing, his inter-caste marriage, his prodigious love for learning, his quick smile and his ability to make friends easily,
his famlous preface for Parijaat's "sirish ko phool", his early essays and stories that STILL stand as masterpieces, and his later descent into despair, self-doubts, alocoholism, second marriage and rapid death.
Pratoush Onta and others too argued that SL's essays such as "ardha mudit nayan ra dubna lagay.ko ghaam" stand out
as stunning achievments, and went on to say that flawed
though some parts of SL's life were, he was nontheless a
great writer. Their argument was: You can't take some
negative parts of a person's life, and drape that over
the whole person and use that discredit his writings.
Pratyoush also went on to argue that the EARLY
Shanker Lamichanay was a DIFFERNT person and a better
writer in all senses from the Shanker Lamichanay that
he was as a person and a writer after BS 2027.
Prakash A Raj then gave me Roop Rekha magazine (1976)
that had carried a special "SL Bisey.sanka", which I
read that night.
I was impressed and moved to read memories of Shanker
Lamichanay by his wife Ratna, daughter Shikha and
many other friends and fellow-writers.
The portrait that emerged for me, long after
the MC discussion had ended, was that of a brilliant,
intellectually playful, socially adept writer
haunted by the demons of his own making.
oohi
ashu
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 26-Apr-01 03:16 AM
Two comments:
1. You said his writing was too stream-of-consciousness type, and
thus not really good.Taking,as example, 'Abstract Chintan Pyaz'
and 'Ullyses'(arguably the best novel of the last century which
was written by James Joyce, the originator of s-o-c writing), my
point is s-o-c writings are not connected in all their contents,
but they are connected by only a tenuous theme, and emphasis
should be given to 'instances' and the description of 'instances
within the whole article' not the message or structure of the
whole work (in the way other works are evaluated). They slowly and
very naturally connect to each other.
I don't claim to understand Ullyses. I read A-C-P long ago, so I
don't remember what exactly my opinion was then. I think I was
impressed by him, and rather than evaluating, I started reading
the book as a great book, and blamed myself for not properly
understanding the book. Whenever I understood, I understood
the work to be a great one. And , in case of Ullyses, I liked
several parts of it, and I think that was the greatness of the
book.
2. You said he was accused of plagiarizing. If I remember
correctly, he not only accepted the plagiarization, but then
he replied to the person who accused him as "Dear Mr..., I
greatly appreciate your comments. People like you are very
necessary to make our Nepali literature field rich and aware. I
regret my guilt, and I decide not to write any more article here
after." I have heard he didn't write anything after that.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 26-Apr-01 03:45 AM
Biswo wrote:
>1. You said his writing was too stream-of-
>consciousness type, and
>thus not really good.Taking,as example, '
>Abstract Chintan Pyaz'
>and 'Ullyses'(arguably the best novel of the
>last century which
Biswo,
I am aware of s-o-c, as it is used
in fiction. Joyce, of course, remains
the originator and the master of the
form.
But SOC in non-fiction (i.e. essays)
is a little too hard to take, though,
for some reason, s-o-c seems to work fine
for Web postings :-)
Take for example: If Rushdie wrote his essays
the way he writes his fiction (i.e.
magic realism and all that), then I'd imagine
that his essays would be intolerably hard to read
and understand.
In fact, if you read Rushdie's
essays (Imaginary Homeland, etc), Rushdie
presents an obviously organized, sustained
efforts. Ditto for Marquez and his essays.
Lamichanay's essays RAMBLE beautifully
and seductively without making a point.
A clear case is his essay: "Samjhana ko laya
maa beeleen hundhai" -- which is, as far as I can
understand, is about two lovers having
sex (orgasms and all that) and carrying
on a very interesting conversation.
Sure, the whole things is heartbreakingly
beautifully written.
But is it an essay?
I think not.
That "essay" reads more like a story, that too an incomplete
one. In fact, in a Roop Rekha piece, I found Lamichanay
himself admitting as much.
Of course, one could argue that SL was successful precisely
because he was a such a good writer that he was able to blur
the distinctions between what was fiction and what was
non-fiction. I don't know about that; to me, such a
practice appears to be a deceptive one.
>2. You said he was accused of plagiarizing.
>If I remember
>correctly, he not only accepted the
>plagiarization, but then
>he replied to the person who accused him as "
>Dear Mr..., I
>greatly appreciate your comments. People
>like you are very
>necessary to make our Nepali literature
>field rich and aware. I
>regret my guilt, and I decide not to write
>any more article here
>after." I have heard he didn't write
>anything after that.
Correct.
At the Chautari presentation, I asked Madan Mani Dixit
who was that writer who had presented evidence
against SL's works.
Dixit replied that as far as he could remember the name
used was 'Kumudini' and that it belonged to some government
bureaucrat called Krishna Prasad [Sharma] of Pakanajole.
At the Chautari presentation, CK Lal and Pratyoush argued
that by the time the plagiarism charges had surfaced, Shankar Lamichanay was a defeated, despondent man -- personally, professionally and emotionally, and argued that he deserved our symapathy (for the last few years of his life) and respect (for his stunning, brilliant early achievements).
Jolted by the Roop Rekha pieces, I have decided NOT
to base my opinions of SL on the basis of trhe book
"ACP" alone. I am now eager to read more EARLY works
of Shankar Lamichanay.
Incidentally, I also discovered that SL's daughter Shikha
was in the Boston area as a student at the Harvard
Divinity School in the mid'80s.
Wonder if she's still in the area (she certainly is in the US) and is quietly reading this.
oohi
ashu
|
| Gokul |
Posted
on 26-Apr-01 08:53 AM
Thanks Ashu for bringing this subject and thanks Biswo for your comments. I am always impressed with your knowledge.
1. Virginia Woolf is credited with soc writings and her novel "The Lighthouse" best illustrates this.
2. Although SL may get C+ while compared with New York writers, I think he deserves A within the periphery of Nepali literature.
3. The greatest contribution of SL lies in giving the new outlook and possibility to Nepali essay writing which was previously loaded with pedantic, classical pretensions - targeted more at showing off than creating the work of art. This was possible because he was well read in western literature, which obviously opened new vistas to him. It will be unfair to judge him by comparing his writings (written in Nepal 25 years ago by an IA graduate living a life of chaos, frustration and deprivation)with that of sophisticated New Yorkers living in modern times.
SL should be judged solely on his contribution to the then Nepali literature. In this sense, he was really a great pioneer in this field. His story "Ardha mudit Nayan ra dubna lageko gham" is really a great masterpiece and still has withstood the test of time.
4. I agree that he was not a coherent thinker. But I never considered him a philosopher. He was an extremely sensitive writer- sensitive to everything that surrounded him and that was his greatest asset. His philosophical masquarades, musings and meanderings are one of the profoundest truth, I have ever experienced.
Shankar Lamichhanay - a toad
Jumped on a pond.
chhatlyanga !!!
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 26-Apr-01 12:33 PM
Hi Gokul,
I was not comparing SL to writers in New York.
All I was saying was that: I, as a reader,
have long been tremendously influenced by essays
that have appeared in The New Yorker magazine.
I worship writers such as E. B. White, Mark
Singer, John McPhee and many others who write or
wrote long, long essays (15+ page-long) essays
with style, grace, wit and honesty.
Coming from that sort of 'reading' background,
reading Nepali essays is a different experience
altogether:
Nepali essays, to start with, are too short (3 pages or so and you are done!), too ill-developed (you wonder: this is all nice,
but what is the point?), too rambling (you
like the verbal journey you are on, except that
you have no idea what the destination is), and
on an on. It can be a bit of disconcering
experience.
As a first-time reader, I had those experiences
reading SL's "ACP". By no means, I was comparing
SL with English writers!!
I just finished reading the essay: "Shankar
Lamichanay: Shankar Lamichanay ko Dristi Maa,
BS 2032". In this, SL presents a poignantly
beautiful self-portrait.
oohi
ashu
|
| Gokul |
Posted
on 26-Apr-01 02:27 PM
Ashu,
I see your point and I agree with you when you say that Nepali essays are short, ill-developed and incoherent.
The reasons for all this is that most of the Nepali writers do not make the excruciatingly painful attempt to update themselves by reading the contemporary world literature. Our literatteurs are always busy in praising the greatness of Devkota and Sama - but they can not make any objective analysis as to what exactly are the elements found in their writing that deserve so much praise. Our whole society is lost in the labyrinth of utter subjectivity.
Another reason is that Nepali writers do not/can not make writing their sole profession to earn their livelihood. They must engage in other activities to make their both ends meet and this obviously leaves little time for them to ponder what in the world is going.
"Despite your all follies, I love thee still."
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 26-Apr-01 05:54 PM
Hi :
I don't think that the brevity of an essay affects its quality.
Nepali literary journals are not very big, and are forced to
accomodate more writers from different genre in their 12issue/year
routine.Essay collections published individually are yet to get
market. Except , of course, Laxmi Nibandha Sangraha type classics.
If people think they can write pithy essay and convey their
message powerfully, short essays should be as welcome as long
essay.The government funded literary magazines have to publish
every thing, from play to story, from fiction to interview,in
their less than 100 page world.So, short essays are our necessity
to some extent.
As for book sale, it is also responsibility of writers themselves
to make them salable. A lot of our writers are neither salable,
nor artistic enough to draw international prize/attention.I have
heard Diamond Shamsher makes a good living by his novels. Those
novels are thrilling to read, and salable. I don't know if anybody
ever charged them of being substandard literary works.They are
indubitably great classics.
I think when we write, it is very necessary to be truthful to
ourselves. We have to mirror what we think, and what we see in our
writings, and we need to mix them with existing knowledge of
current civilization. In this way, we will be furthering
civilization with the medium of literature. That's what a
literature is all about. Mirror of society and documentation of
civility. Unfortunately, a substantial chunk of our literature
is stil a falsification and fabrication of perception, a
repeatation of past,and the tenor of such literature are mainly of
condescension and lecturing.Literature is somekind of reporting,
but its reports should be more subtle, and truthful.This is
the reason why (later) Modnath Prashrit flunks(prevarication),and
where BP Koirala stands out(imagination), or where Khagendra Sangrula excels(subtle reasoned truthfulness).
***** ------ ***** ----- ****** ----- ****** -----
I wanted to talk about Nepali literature of Terai since long. I
think we have been very ignorant about life in Terai, and probably
it is the reason why we are alienating ourselves from some of
our fellow Nepalese in political and social spectrum.
One story that I never forgot was written by Bhaupanthi, and
published in Ashwin,2051(Garima).(may be 2050 or 2052, but I
am sure about the month) Bhaupanthi is one of those underestimated
writers who writes one of the best literature of Nepal. His
writings are sometimes published in Kantipur also.The story was
very long, unusual even for Garima, but that was a really good
story, a venture about hunting a deer illegally in Terai.The
protagonists are three poor Teraibasi.Please, read the work
whenever you have time.
There was one novel by Daulat Bikram Bista, "Ek paluwa anekau
yaam". This novel is also one of the most-read novels about Terai.
Those of us who wants to identify ourselves with fellow citizens
of our country, and who loves Terai and teraibasi will surely love
this novel.
|
