Chapter Two
In this part we turn to poetry
itself after perceiving the conditions hostile to its value peculiar to this
age in
Our present consciousness cannot
perceive that poetry offers us life which is vital to the mind. There can never be a finer life without the
impact of poetry. Poetry may not reach each mind, but its power to enrich us is
there in the Mind in the civilization.
We don’t judge a value like poetry or music or philosophy by deciding whether
or not the majority of mind want it. On
the other hand, we judge the value by its being essential for the Mind. There is no civilization without the Mind and
the vice-versa. The individual minds are
related to the Mind and to the civilization; they cannot survive without this relation. Life is directed by the Mind, which is the
energy of intelligence, perception and thought within a given
civilization. Only in pre-civilization
times and in degenerate times after the advent of civilization do minds act
without the force of the Mind acting on them.
No doubt, the mind is individual, but how is it a Mind? Where does it get its power and intelligence?
Surely it gets it from outside it – well from the Mind from which life and
energy for perception, intelligence and thought can be drawn. An individual mind, to achieve a finer life,
has to go on knowing more and more and feeling deeper and deeper by receiving
fresh energy every time from the Mind.
There is no Mind in any race which cannot boast of great achievements,
and the Mind, embodying great achievements, is creative of intelligence and the
power to feel and think. By its
generative principle, the Mind transforms the individual minds. Poetry belongs to the Mind, but commerce
doesn’t. Science, up to the end of the
Nineteenth century, belonged to The Mind, but not in this century. What belongs and what doesn’t belong to the
Mind is determined by testing if it fosters a vital relation between the Mind
and the minds. Today, look at any one,
you will find something inhuman in his face, well, anyone like the educated
Indian; it is because he doesn’t belong to the Mind, and is not in a vital
relation to it. He cannot even conceive
of experiences, which link each one with the other; and cannot even understand
that living means learning, knowing, and feeling, which are possible for the
mind drawing its nourishments from the Mind.
Learning, knowing and feeling which are essential for living, cannot be
possible except in a vital relation to the Mind; to understand the point here,
let them be emphasized and identified as such.
In and through them, human life expresses itself by contrast, it doesn’t
express itself in and through the knowledge of commerce, medicine and
engineering, which aren’t inessential by any means, but which do not engender
power for the mind, strengthening it in its learning, knowing and feeling. Certainly, poetry belonging to the Mind does
generate this power, which raises the level of living, and vitalizes the
humanity of man. Poetry isn’t knowledge
like the subjects, which mentioned above; but their use is so much in evidence
that poetry without any use like theirs, appears to the Indian philistines
little more than a trifle. The Indian
philistine, who is the real and major problem in
Poetry is not a question of
knowledge like medicine, engineering, and commerce. It is a power, essential for living. As long as we don’t desire finer life, we can
do without it, as in fact we do now. By
preparation we must have access to this power, and the most important thing we
have gained for preparation is the position in which we place ourselves after
learning about the conditions following the Western impact which have brought
about the growth of the Indian philistinism.
We need not read poetry any longer as philistines, and we aren't
unconscious of the conditions that make us false. But still we have to acquire the discipline
for reading poetry, as in our education there is no provision for it. What we have mainly learnt so far is about
the conditions outside poetry hostile to it and about poetry as a value to the
mind. We have also observed the place of
poetry within the civilization, while touching on what poetry offers to
us. We have to learn a good deal more
and by practice in reading poetry, we might be equal to assessing it. To think that it is easy to read and judge
poetry would be self-deceiving. That
poetry is difficult to read is natural.
If we drop the idea that poetry
is knowledge and consider that it is a power with its effect which is valuable
to us, we have made only some advance, and there are still many confusions to
be cleared. There are confusions because
there are one-sided or far-fetched or false ideas on poetry, which are mistaken
to be true. Conceiving of poetry rightly
is a challenging task for one has to do hard work to achieve it. We have to conceive of it rightly to be
influenced by it. In considering and
appraising the nature and importance of poetry which we hold to be a power in helping us to know and feel more
deeply, and in estimating the worth of the knowledge of any subject, our point
of departure is the mind in vital relation to the values of its civilization. Our consciousness is often a false
consciousness because for one thing it lacks a true of point of view from which
it can learn about a matter and make a point on it, and for another it
satisfies itself with ideas, refusing to go further to perceptions and
thought. It is mainly false, because it
does not take the trouble to lean that truth cannot be seen but must be thought
about. Learning is very important for
living, particularly learning related to thinking and feeling; and it must be
distinguished from many crude forms of knowledge. What we have at our disposal through modern
education is essentially a crude form of knowledge, as what is claimed to be
knowledge is hardly ever stated in a form in which it can be a value. Learning is knowledge which has become a
value. Knowledge must be restricted to
that which is stated so as to become a value.
We very much suffer from false identification in recognizing and
approving of knowledge. Here, two
distinctions must be carefully kept in view.
Real knowledge must be distinguished from pseudo-knowledge, and the
power of poetry from real knowledge.
From real knowledge you can sense the power of poetry. In argument you cannot establish a clear-cut
distinction between real knowledge and pseudo-knowledge but one’s mind must be
so trained as to sense the distinction unmistakably. Here, an example that comes to my mind now
might be helpful. Compare
There is another point of
discipline on which I insist. It is
this: when one talks, for instance, on Hamlet,
one forgets the poetry in which one reads his character, and expresses
opinions as if there is no difference between Hamlet in poetry and Hamlet
in prose. Hamlet in prose is worth nothing to us. The poetry of Hamlet is far more important than Hamlet the character. We agree that both are inseparable – as an
idea – but when we consider the character, the poetry fades away from our
mind. Here we meet with one danger,
namely, the danger of reading ideas into the poetry of the character, and still
worse, of applying theories. What the
character intimates in poetry is what concerns us; in this sense, the word
‘character’ is misleading, since it evokes in us certain references, the range
of which is so wide that the richness of character is to lost to us as we, in a
scholarly fashion, consider Hamlet in many irrelevant ways. Then, the spirit that sends us to Hamlet is
not the spirit of life, we read Hamlet as pseudo-scholars. Judge Hamlet by his life in poetry. Academic interpretation kills the life of the
character. Hamlet is a problem – not a
literary problem for us because he means so much. A sense of Hamlet’s life in its puzzling
richness is the priceless gift Shakespeare has left to us. It must affect the organizing principle of
our mind. Mastering Hamlet’s poetry is
necessary not only to have a standard for poetry itself, but also for
conceiving of life. Its power is greater
than you can possess by any other means.
It is not an isolating but integrating power, which is contrary to the
effect of the knowledge of other subjects.
Not the broad tendency, but the subtle points in a character, are what
make the art rich. If you don’t master Shakespeare’s
poetry, Hamlet gets out of control, and you find him fitting many ideas and
theories in your head. It is very
difficult to read Hamlet meaningfully
without a hard-earned discipline. To be
disciplined in reading and interpreting Hamlet
is to be disciplined in living. The mind
which acquires this discipline is a human mind in vital relation to the Mind,
but when the mind is without this discipline and outside any positive relation
to the Mind, it is psychological, individualistic, and inhuman – it is the
modern mind which has no use for the power of poetry, that makes it feel and
know more deeply. It is the mind of
practical affairs in commercial industrialism between which and values of human
achievement there is an inevitable break-up.
As great human achievement poetry yield power, essential for life, but
no knowledge of any subject on which we place so much premium because of its
application in practical affairs can do that for us. Since we do not have a
sense of life in which we perceive the role of poetry, we are not convinced of
the claims here made for it. To have a
sense of living that the more refined and vitalized a mind is, the finer the
life it can lead, will alone convince us of the importance of poetry. Once must have a consciousness of the
necessity of values to be sensible in any argument on poetry. The human mind cannot be human unless it is
grown up and organized on the basis of human achievements. Consider the human mind, to be found
everywhere now, that has nothing other than modern education, science or
commerce subjects, and later a job in commercial industrialism; consider it
carefully in its character of modernism absolutely estranged from the past and
its achievements, doesn’t it appear hideous! You might never have considered it
in this light before, you yourself being possessed of the progressive spirit
and the progressive ideas of the Indian philistine. Poetry, when it is read with the right
discipline, can recover us from the modernism of the philistine mind. You may not read Hamlet; but if you read it as a philistine, you will only know
Hamlet’s story and some ideas, perhaps.
You must read it while liberating yourself from philistinism; here lies
the secret of the discipline for pursuing literature. The organization of such poetry as we have in
Hamlet is bound up with the growth
and organization of our mind.
Describing, then, Hamlet, in
academically established terms or in literary jargon, could be very misleading,
and it may never allow you to get involved with the play. Reading an achievement like Hamlet is fighting for life and opposing
what must be opposed in the interests of life.
Reading it is an even of incalculable importance. Reading it is living differently, and more
fully than before, and its mastery is one of the great values of human
life. Here, there are two things to be
gained from an awareness of an academic discussion on Hamlet; we will see its degree of relevance and we will learn the
details of the play more sharply.
What we must guard against is the
usual practice of getting a surface sense of a poem and a few ideas in
addition, which could be very distorting or very inadequate to the content of
the poem. I talked earlier of
hard-earned discipline; it alone helps us.
But we must give up our accustomed idea of discipline being identified
with obedient behaviour, or with the prudent spirit, or with the superficial
manners one gets in a missionary school.
The discipline I think of is quite opposed to the philistine idea of
discipline. It is a preparation and a
force of energy for living, for perception and thought in the interests of
life; by this discipline you can have access to the power of poetry. The reading of Culture and Anarchy is infinitely far better preparation and a
force of energy for getting access to the power of poetry than all the ideas
and theories bandied about in the American academic discourse. The preparation one has for a career in
commercial industrialism in the modern Indian circumstances sends one away from
poetry as well as from other achievements.
It is very much akin to the training that circus animals receive. There is no mistaking here; we must be firm
on Indian philistinism, which is ruinous to the Indian life and the Indian
mind. Reading poetry is the point (so
also listening to classical music) at which today we face the problem of losing
the values of civilization by the threat of the modern spirit of the modern lifestyle. Poetry, like Music, is the sustenance for the
human mind to keep its human character. To
be roused against the Indian philistinism is to be sane and the spirit so
roused will draw its strength from the values ignored by philistinism.
We said that poetry is a human
achievement, that it is a power essential for living, and that it is one of the
values of civilization. This is praise
enough for poetry, but it can be objected that it lacks content, being tainted
by abstractness and an insufficient basis.
Surely, it is difficult to convince any one that they are the remarks
that apply to poetry in general. But
that they are the remarks that apply to the best poetry could be shown to
anyone who has sensed the real connection between value and living. It may here be noted unambiguously that
anyone with a false spirit would not take poetry seriously or heed any argument
in its favour which contradicts common place or fashionable or academic ideas
of poetry. One who wants validity for my
statements at the level of unquestionable data with supporting references will
be so disappointed that he may find himself to be right as well as relieved by
accusing me of having made facile or sweeping generalizations. If one is guilty of being false in spirit my
statements put such a one on the defensive, and one behaves strategically
side-stepping the issue and inciting attitudes rather than arguing the case. There is a great scope for misunderstanding
in the discussion of poetry, and a number of bad points for justifying any
stand one pleases to take for any reason are readily available. The possibility of making statements which
are neither generalizations nor logical inferences does not strike us at all,
for we are accustomed to easy-to-follow statements. Moreover, it seems to be our habit to be
pleased with statements when they have an appeal for us or when we can dispute
them by clutching at their weak point.
The point of discipline for reading poetry is to liberate oneself from
the false spirit one naturally comes to be possessed of in this age, and the
knowledge of this false spirit that dominates one is a knowledge which is
discipline itself. Knowing the spirit
here means changing and disciplining oneself.
By this spirit we don’t at all learn enough to talk sense, since we get
ideas easily and believe in them, being denied the ability to question them. Here, the effect of our ideas on our use of language
is disastrous. Because of these ideas we
couldn’t be relevant in our discourse, that is, instead of getting the relevant
categories to advance in argument, we up in the circularity of the argument;
and again, because of them we cannot use words with definite references, and
our terms are vaguely relevant but even then in appeals only. In a way we are bound to misuse language
though unconsciously. The condition of
our ideas and of our misuse of language evidently cannot make us good readers
of poetry. A nation with commercial
industrialism and its spirit, with newspapers, with cinema, with the
progressive views attracting every mind, and with its mind attracted towards
Westernization, cannot produce a good reader of poetry. One has to be a man to be a good reader. Now we have to be men through the discipline
required for poetry. We don’t care for poetry,
being philistines. And we are too bad,
as men, to be good readers, to be frank about our modern condition. But
desiring to be men, we must care for it, and learn things patiently to be good
readers of poetry. To know the value of
poetry and desire a change by its power is no less than to save our
civilization.
I must make a point here. But our philistines’ use of language is a
great hindrance which we must overcome if we wish to read poetry and benefit by
reading it. It distances us from the
creative use of language. Our lack of
respect for language and our lack of concern for it go to show that poetry is
far from being a serious matter for us. Take,
for example, this philistine idea of language (you meet it everywhere in India)
that “after all it is only for the communication of ideas” – meaning that up to
whatever degree we know it, it is good enough for such a communication and that
no special effort is needed to learn it.
Not the dismissal of the value of language by ‘after all’. “For the communication of ideas” is one of
the many phrases used in India for their impressiveness and for inciting an
attitude so that a disturbing argument can be clinched. It is a phrase, however impressive and
sufficient in its apparent meaning in common parlance, that ignores the
richness or achievements in language and their claim for our attention. It originates from our false spirit
preferring science, technology and commerce.
If Shakespeare is ignored, nothing may happen; but it is being cretin to
say that we learn a language for “the communication of ideas” and so, can
exclude Shakespeare (or any great achievement) since learning him doesn’t make
any difference to this purpose of language.
Our hold on language is proportionate to our hold on past
achievements. We cannot be interested in
either without having the interest of life at heart. But we only seek our philistine interests
with scant respect for language and without any sense of the past
achievements. At the most our words have
only the communicable sense very much related to practical affairs but they
have not the energy of perception, thought, and feeling. Our discourse has been so little vitalized by
the potential creativity of the spoken idiom that when we speak, we are not
sane and vigorous speakers, but we are affected or stilted, or official, or
formal, or more often crankish. There
has been no standard for our speech, for there has been no standard-setting
centre of intelligence. Some people have
such wild emotions as to storm like mad dogs or to indulge in sentimental
palaver; some other are only strategic and not forward; however, like the
earlier, these also have only a false spirit in expression. But rarely do we meet with a subtle
distinction or delicate feeling or compelling perception or forceful thought in
our expression. Both in our modern
living and in our modern discourse we have nothing but habits hostile to
poetry. From creative achievements if we
set out mind on getting what they can offer, our living as well as our
discourse will be changed. The emotions
related to practical affairs have so great a sway over us that our mind
presently has no linking objectives with feeling, thought and perception. Our
sentences with their ideas look like links in an iron chain, because they don’t
have the marrow of real spirit and intelligence. Our modern style of living and modern
discourse betray the cretinism of the so-called progressive views or ideas; we
are by this too many levels below that of reaching poetry and sensing its
power. We have to get the strength of
the past achievements for our mind and we have to get the spirit of living in
vital human relations in order to be good readers of poetry. Another way of putting it is that we must be
real men placing ourselves in a vital relation to our civilization, since we
have been displaced from that relation by the Western impact. You cannot read poetry with your mind as it is
now and with your spirit as it is now.
You must undergo some vital change, and you must see the necessity of
it, coming to the awareness of what has happened to you – to the awareness that
instead of being Indians with the spirit and vitality of the Indian
civilization, you have been de-indianised by the
great historical event of the Western impact and that you have been self-blind
and unable to see how much life you have lost and how you are without the force
of identity, being fascinated by modernism and absorbed in practical
affairs. Historically speaking, there
has been a willful, arrogant denial of the Indian values by the Indians. Unless this historical change is changed,
there is no possibility of becoming sane.
The condition of sanity is the first and foremost condition for reading
and understanding poetry.