| Author | Message | ||
     Preyas |
Most likely, only Gulzar fans will read this. Fortunately, that is not a small number. This piece is about Gulzar as a poet, a literary poet (as opposed to a film lyricist). At the very outset, I do not think Gulzar is the best poet of our times. I think Nida Fazli, Faiz Ahmed Faiz, Ali Sardar Jaffri, Firaq Gorakhpuri, are all among equal contenders in the last century (the list is restricted by my reading), and Gulzar is probably not. This notwithstanding, I am a Gulzar fan. He may not be the greatest of poets in literature, but that is not what I wish to contend, anyways. The piece is about 'groping' with Gulzar. Most remarks I have heard about Gulzar are extreme and unqualified (on both sides). I wish to qualify my belief that he is very much a poet, and one to be taken seriously and given his share of respect. It seems funny that one has to prove to be a poet, but such are the ways of the world. Aesthetics, like any other human endeavor, are subject to human frailties. This is something we ought to accept. Thus popularity is a boon and curse in aesthetics as much as it is in any 'earthly' endeavor (in business, for instance, all that anti Bill Gates jazz). Gulzar's popularity is his boon and his curse, probably his worst curse and greatest boon. There is a tendency amongst the 'intellectually refined' to condescend upon all that does not conform to their standards, and the easiest excuse is to take pots at what is popular. Our creativity stems from our greed for knowledge as much as our greed for wealth does (Lakshmi is as much a goddess as Saraswati). The point is that one of the main reasons Gulzar is 'looked down upon' is because he is 'popular' (I put 'popular' in quotes because Indians know that he is not exactly 'hot property' with Indian 'masses'). But let us assume that Gulzar's 'flaw' lies elsewhere, i.e., not in his popularity. Pick anything from his works at random, and I can think of a parallel in 'textbook' Urdu poetry. Let us see. A typical couplet, the 'matla' in Marasim: Haath chhuTey bhii to rishtey nahiiN choRaa kartey Waqt kii shaaKh se lamhey nahiiN toRaa kartey. To my mind, this is a reference to Pakistan and the partition. But poetry is about crystallizing the particular/personal into the universal (the 'haqiiqii maanii' should be as universal as possible, which is where part of the craft lies) and the reader's personal identification completes the cathartic circle. The second line in the couplet merits that interpretation because the partition was like plucking a leaf out of a branch of time/history ('textbook' metaphor, please note). Let us look for parallels. Faiz Ahmed goes: Hum ke Thahre ajnabee itnee madaaraatoN* ke baad Hum baneNgey aashnaa kitnee mulaaqaatoN ke baad (*chakkar, orbit). I am not sure that Faiz said this in the Indo-Pak context, but like I said particulars become universals, and more likely than not he did (and more importantly, he is quoted in that context.) Ahmed Faraz: Awwal awwal kii dostii hai abhii Ek Gazal kii sii ho rahii hai abhii Wonderful couplet, simple as it seems. Here the classical meaning of the word 'Gazal' is used beautifully, as to encourage 'GuFtaGu' between 'mehbuubs' (India-Pak context) and the fact that Gazal grows in couplets (ho rahii hai abhii). Coming back to the point, at least I fail to see how Gulzar's couplet is 'not in the league'. Few more examples just for the 'fun' of it: Mera kya tha tere hisaab meN mera saaNs saaNs udhaar tha Jo guzar gayaa wo to waqt tha, jo bachaa raha wo Gubaar tha This is from his latest album with Ghulam Ali (Visaal). 'tere' is of course a reference to God. The futility of human life (Gubaar) and Maya (theory of relativity in modern science), viz., (jo guzar gaya wo to waqt tha) both find echo in this couplet…I do not consider this 'not quite literature'. Interestingly, I am tempted to think that this his Gulzar's way of coming to terms with his poetry and the mixed reactions it has evoked. Let us now take lines from one of his 'popular and romantic/mushy' nazm.. teri aaNkheN, terii Thahrii huii GamgiiN sii aaNkheN terii aaNkhoN se hii taKhliiq huii hai, sacchhii, terii aaNkhoN se hii taKhliiq huii hai, yeh hayaat… terii aaNkhoN se hii khultey haiN saweroN ke ufaq terii aaNkhoN se hii band hotii hai yeh seep kii raat… terii aaNkheN haiN ya sajde meN hai maasuum namaazii… palkeiN uThatii haiN to yuuN guuNjataii hai nazar jaise maNdir se jaras kii chaley namnaak sadaa aur jhukatii haiN to bas jaise azaaN Khatm huii This is 'textbook' Sufism. But it also has the concept of Maya in the opening line 'Thahrii huii' suggests stillness and absolution, contrary to our perception that time passes. I am curious as to how Gulzar (and Nida Fazli, another poet I know) manage to conform so much to relativity  . Note how the dominant imagery is that of prayer (jaras, namaaz) and when the nazm ends he says (in clever deception) 'azaaN Khatm huii'. This nazm becomes (actually it culminates into, but that would be praising Gulzar, which I have tried to avoid) the poet's 'azaaN'. Faiz Ahmed says: …DaaliiN hain gardan-e-mahtaab meN baaheN… I wonder if anyone would label such oneness with nature in Faiz's poetry as 'mush.' Interestingly, Gulzar has admitted being influenced by the great Faiz. By now, I think I have made my point about Gulzar's writing being literary 'enough'. Then again, if his being popular or having 'mass appeal' is his fault, it is a different story. What surprises me is how people of a formidable caliber can ignore such craftwork. Again, I am not saying it is good craftwork. Aesthetics score over science because they allow subjectivity. Anyone can tell me he doesn't like Gulzar, and be damn well right. But if someone tells me Gulzar cannot be said to be literature, I beg to differ. I guess when one reaches heights of intellectual endeavor, it is as good as being at the bottom of ability to absorb (classic uncertainty principle), or in Gulzar's own words… BaRii neechii raaheN haiN ooNchaaiiyoN kii. Quote unquote. Preyas | ||
| Zafar |
Dear Preyas: Please accept my congratulations for your stunningly original discourse on Gulzar. Simply amazing! Now I'd like to make a few comments about Gulzar. "hai jis kee zabaaN Urdu kee tarah" Gulzar is a good poet, no doubt (and in the words of Shakeel Adil Zaada of Pakistan, a prominent magazine editor, he is the last Urdu poet in India). But the problem is that in order to promote from being good to great, he must produce more of the type of ah'aar you quoted. In fact, he must write hundreds of those to be eligible for claiming a spot in the "top 20" of the previous century. Currently, he lacks far behind in this regard: he has many good ash'aar but great ash'aar are scanty. I guess this is due to his various other commitments and preoccupations besides writing poetry. I reckon it'd better both for him and Urdu poetry in general, if he concentrates more on his poetry. aadaaz arz hai, Zafar PS. Your post contains a mistake: Hum ke Thahre ajnabee itnee madaaraatoN* ke baad Hum baneNgey aashnaa kitnee mulaaqaatoN ke baad (*chakkar, orbit). The actual sher is ham k Thehre ajnabee itnee madaaraatoN ke ba'ad phir baneN ge aashnaa kitnee mulaaqaatoN ke ba'ad "madaaraat" is not orbit (I guess you were mislead by the word "madaar") but the plural of "madaarat". It's used commonly as "Khaatir madaarat" and means hospitality (aao bhagat). This sher was written when Faiz was invited to Bangladesh, shortly after its cessation from Pakistan. Here Faiz says that even though we were very welcomed there, we still felt like strangers in a country that only a few months ago was our own. | ||
| Preyas |
Dear Zafar Sb, Thank you for taking time out to read this. I thought it would remain unnoticed forever, but it is a pleasure to have people like yourself who consider literature as serious business. Accept my thanks once again. And a million thanks for the clarification and context building of Faiz's couplet. My god! how long i thought that 'madaaraatoN' was plural for madaar ..thats what exposes a novice in Urdu. I cannot but agree with you that it would be well for him and Urdu poetry if he focussed on Urdu poetry alone. I have often wondered (upon hearing the aforementioned lines of his), why he ever chose to be multifarious than be great. But I am not sure he can be said to be the last Urdu poet in India, without the word 'known' being appended to 'last'. The above piece was inspired, in part by a remark 'kaifi' (one of my fvorite poets, to be sure) made a while ago. And, as you must have obviously understood, by your observations on the use of abstract symbolism I hope my difference of opinon (which is what makes learrning intersting) will not be misunderstood. Sincerely yours, Preyas | ||
| Irfan Abid |
Preyas Sb, I had seen your post soon after it was placed here and it surely prompted me to say something in response but as usual, time turned out to be the limiting factor. I didn’t know about the remarks of Kaifi Azmi Sb that you have referred to but I had a feeling that Zafar Sb’s comments a few days back must certainly be in the background. I don’t feel worthy enough to comment on an artist of Gulzar Sb’s stature but would like to add a few things to what you and Zafar Sb have said, anyway. First, let us talk about the language Gulzar Sb generally uses. There may be arguments about whether it may truly be called Urdu. The fact is that Urdu is originally a hybrid language and although it has already gone through the period that was really the time of its coming into being, the evolution continues. I think Gulzar Sb must be given the benefit of this fact and his poetry should be considered Urdu poetry even though it may have words and phrases that are not in the so-called traditional Urdu poetry. Second, let us look at the style. As everybody is aware, Gulzar Sb is known for his somewhat abstract style of poetry. This is one aspect of his art that has generated the maximum amount of debate. There are some who reject it as a difficult-to-comprehend quilt of words. Then there are those who see it as a unique way of making a statement. Interestingly enough, I haven’t seen many people who are willing to take a middle ground on this issue. In my humble opinion, Gulzar Sb is free to choose the style of his expression as an artist. Readers and listeners of his poetry, too, have the right to like or dislike his works but it should be done in a manner fit for discussing literature and there should be no misgivings among them on this account. The last thing to be noted is the content of the poetry. As far as I know, Gulzar Sb has tried to write on things that really matter to us as humans. He has addressed the topics of social harmony, inequality and injustice. He has also covered the tender side of poetry and written on love, devotion and affection. I don’t think anybody will disagree with the fact that his poetry displays a range as wide as can be expected of a man with a deep feeling for things around him. I don’t really know where Gulzar Sb stands in the honor roll of Urdu poets. I find myself utterly incapable of saying anything on this issue. However, I can certainly say that he is different, and if for nothing else, he deserves notice for his unique style. In fact, nobody needs say anything to support me on this note. The amount of discussion that has already taken place in this regard is proof enough that Gulzar Sb has something in him that is worth discussing. Our posts here only add to that endless debate. Sincerely, Irfan ‘Abid’ | ||
| Zafar |
Dear Preyas: Actually the Shakeel Adil Zada quote (Gulzar is the last Urdu poet in India) is not absolute: it only points to the general state (decline) of Urdu in India -- but that's something beyond the scope of this thread; so let's keep it for some other time. Gulzar: I have a website, eUrdubazaar, that contains (in my opinion) 100 most important Urdu books. Beside other genres, this site contains 30 poetry books also. When I was groping with the selection (which took many months), I initially included Gulzar's book "Chaand Pukhraaj Kaa" in the list. And I was surprised at the type of comments from people (I consulted almost all prominent literary figures that I could reach) about his inclusion: some congratulated me and others criticized his entry heavily. When the list was completed, I had to drop Gulzar's book out cuz otherwise I would have had to drop either Faraz or Parveen Shakir -- which I couldn't afford. But nevertheless, I plan to give the aforementioned book in the "Honorable Mentions" section. By the way, Mr. Preyas, have you read Noon Meem Rashid? I strongly recommend that you read his nazams, especially "safar naamah", "Hasan kooza gar" and some others (you can find a selection at my site). Take care, Zafar | ||
| Preyas |
Dear Abid Sb, It comes as a pleasant surprise to find your esteemed opinion in this discussion. Accept my humblest thanks for such a valuable contribution. You hit the nail on the head when you "exonerate" Gulzar of his style because of the innate 'dyanamic' nature of Urdu (deja vu? ). Then you hit it again whn you speak of his noticability. Once again thank you, Preyas | ||
| Preyas |
Dear Zafar Sb I shall surely visit your website. I would have done the same thing as you did (dropping 'chaaNd pukhraj ka'). My Urdu reading amidst my other nagging commitments, is as old as two years. I feel deeply pained by lack of knowledge in the language. I shall definitely visit your website and find valuable information about Urdu. Yes, the language is certainly on the decline in India, but I am a hopeless romantic Aameen. Preyas | ||
| anand |
just unbelievable .... truly amazing discussion to read ... Gulzar is someone ... i cannot even think to comment upon ... but this has really opened up an entirely different way of looking at his work. dhanyawad ... | ||
| gauhar |
hi wonderful discussion.i wish some more of this kind would follow for i think that is the true meaning of this whole bazm.thnx a lot Preyas sb,zafar sb and abid sb for the info .i shall look into the website too. in my humble and amateur opinion, i would like to say that language has to evolve and cannot be in a classical context forever.likewise thoughts and ideas have to evolve too, based on the contemprary atmosphere and influences.ie.if the rest of arts like visual arts,music,theatre etc.including poetry has gone abstract,why not urdu poetry? ofcource these are my personal comments, based on my very limited knowledge of poetry and a much lesser knowledge of urdu poerty. |