Discussions in the September meeting - Thanks Ila for your notes

The meeting was held at Empress Garden on 12th Sep 2009. We had great pleasure in meeting a new member who has recently moved to Pune –Shri Nariman Nallaseth. There were two topics up for discussion & each member indicated which of the topics [s]he wished to speak on.

The first topic was ‘Is it necessary to experience something to be able to write about it?’

Dr Poonawalla: Described his own experience with a debt-ridden enterprise and how much tension was being caused by that. Then one day he decided to cut costs & determinedly repay all his loans within a stipulated period. He succeeded; not only was the relief great but his idea of Holistic Turnaround was born. Subsequently he was able to write & talk about it to many others spread all over the globe-so he felt that it is necessary to experience something before you can write about it.

Mr. Rajagopalan was next. He thought any person with a good imagination can write about something without having necessarily to undergo the experience. He quoted the example of Harsha who even though he was born into splendour, was able to give a very convincing portrait of extreme poverty in “Kadambari”.

Mr. Nallaseth: Was of the opinion that there are two kinds of writers with differing requirements. On the one hand there are the writers who write about external & practical things –they need to experience something before they can write about it. On the other there are the writers who are more ‘internal’ & imaginative who do not have to go through an experience but can write from their imagination.

Ms. Kusum Gokarn: She felt that what matters in a writer is his power over imagery & words. Everyone can & does have experiences; but only some have the power to talk about these in a worthwhile manner & this is the distinguishing mark of a good writer. It is not necessary for a man to be a criminal to write about rape or murder. She quoted Premchand & Tagore as examples of writers who being men could write so sensitively about women’s lives/experiences.

Dr. Mehra, who came next, fully agreed. She has just published her book which is full of bizarre experiences even if she has never had such an experience herself.

Ms. Zulekha :She started by telling us she has been re-reading Enid Blyton lately & has been struck by the author’s easy ability to go into a child’s mind; it needs facility & power of imagination. A good author can make everything in the book come alive for her readers.

Dr. Vinitha: With Vinita we got an opinion that its not ‘experience’ which is so necessary [though one cannot write when one is too young for experiences] as ‘awareness’. No writing is possible without such deep awareness of our world & experience without such awareness would amount to nothing.

Brig. Inamdar: Felt that you can talk/write about certain things only after experiencing them; e.g. war. For a factual account of it you have no other possibility but to go through it.
Ms. Ila: She made a distinction between ‘good’ literature & ‘great’ literature. For good literature imagination is sufficient but for great literature you have to have at least a ‘seed’ from the author’s own experience. She quoted the example of Rudyard Kipling’s story called “Baa Baa Black Sheep” in which the author writes about a small child sent “home” to U.K. to study & how miserable he is in the alien place with relatives who mean nothing to him & to whom he means nothing. Kipling could write about it only because he could recall the misery from his own childhood.

Ms. Renuka: She told us how she likes to first read an author and then read about him to get the full pleasure of his work. She pointed out that it has happened that some writers have imagined something till then unknown which has subsequently actually happened! She quoted the example of ’Laser’ which was shown in a James Bond movie before it was invented.

Mr. Vasu: Finally the discussion was summed up by him. He said that good literature is only possible when we get a summation of the following; imagination, empathy, imagery & expression.

The second topic was ‘Morality is no concern of the artist’.

Mr Kaushik : Opened the discussion with talking about the rights of artists –pointed out that there would hardly have been any among the destroyers of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute who would have themselves read James Lang –they simply got led by a politically motivated leader. The Renaissance gave Europe compete freedom of expression & the best art became possible. One cannot impose any one uniform code of conduct because then the question comes up about whose?

Mr Rajagopalan read out excerpts from an article in Tamil written by himself as a literary critic.

Ms. Renuka: She began by pointing out that literature is no fun without spice-it is how much that is the important part. Then again norms change -e.g. ‘in its time ‘The Mayor of Casterbridge’ was considered shocking but today we do not find it so. It is intrusion into someone’s life that causes mischief –like the disclosures about Clinton. But as long as the intention of the author is okay it is acceptable. Basic human nature does not change; what distinguishes great literature is when it is acceptable to the ordinary reader as much as to the scholarly one. Ethical self-restraint is the artist’s responsibility but the standards should be set by the public –there is no reason to take the tantrums of the artist!

Ms. Kusum: Would prefer that the artist sets his own standards –only then can he prevent it from deteriorating into pornography. ’Poetic justice’ is very attractive to the reader-it is possibly only in Literature that the Good always triumphs.

Ms. Vinita: Said that morality is both personal & dynamic. Everybody has their own concept of what is acceptable & what is beyond. And that also changes over time & every period sets its own standards of what is acceptable & that the artist must keep within.

Mr Vasu: He summed up the discussion. By & large morality should not be the concern of the artist. Yet he must have some restraint; he reiterated the beautiful image (given by one of the earlier speakers) of a river which would not make it to the sea which is its destination unless it was bounded by its banks! Restraint & discipline have their own place in the scheme of things which cannot be ignored.