Agnostic

why do i write I do not ask this question to myself now, because if I had to ask, I should have asked at least thirty years ago. And it is even less likely that someone else will suddenly ask me this question. Yet, somewhere deep within the mind, every writer must have an answer; And every now and then it is good to check whether that answer is still satisfactory.

The honest answer—and the answer that can be given—is only one. Or that there are two, but the second is just an interpretation of the first.

The first answer is: 'I don't know why.' and second :

'Perhaps because I am mad.'

Because the writer is mad. This is not a very fundamental thing. But originality is probably the name of this eternal invention that nothing really new happens in the field of art. Even that which gives the appearance of newness is not established as new unless we find in it, or through it, the basis of a new evaluation of what had preceded it, and establish a meaningful relation to it. Take it - in other words until we recognize in it that which is 'not new'.

But if I write because I must be mad, and furthermore it is necessary to find somewhere deep within myself the answer to the question why I write, does that not mean that I know why I write? ?

Yes, it happened. But there is a difference between knowing and knowing and that is why it becomes necessary to differentiate between the answer found and the answer that can be given.

In fact, the tension between these two answers is what inspires me to write. Perhaps the power that inspires creation in art alone is this tension – the tension between the answers that are known and the answers that can be given. Writing is a solution to this tension or an attempt to solve it. Of course, this solution cannot be final, because if there is perception, new experience creates new tensions – with the expansion of the field of knowledge, new distances arise between the answers that are known and the answers that can be given.

From this we get the symbol of the eternal traveler for the writer or the artist only. In his journey towards that other beyond himself, he keeps on erasing the distance in between. In his journey towards that other, in whom he knows that he also has his own image. It is this innate knowledge that gives him the belief that the other can be reached and contact can be established – that dialogue is possible, that there is definitely a language of communication, if only the right words are found.

across the yard

door open

courtyard across the gate

side of building

All met

The building got lost somewhere in them.

by which

Don't know who is at the door, but to the guard of the door

the god within

Kiya baar paa-lagan. (gate across the courtyard)

'If only I could find the right words' As a writer, and even more so as a poet, I feel that this is the root of the problem. My search is not a search for language, but only a search for words. I use language, of course: but what I say as a poet is not through language, but only through words. This distinction is of great importance to me.

I use the language. I use it as a writer, as a poet, and as a simple social human being, for the simple behavior of other social human beings. In this way, as a writer, I use the most vulnerable medium among the mediums of art-creation - such a medium which is constantly being polluted and demoralized. Or I want to use it in such a way that it glows with new life. How do I do or can I do this? By focusing your attention on the word always on the word.

Undoubtedly other arts are also vulnerable. All these can be made commercial, worldly, popular and are made continuously. But one can be social without painting, without singing, without carving stone or wood; One cannot be social without speaking. Language also has this worrying specialty that it has to become a victim of continuous and inevitable inferior culture.

Perhaps some explanation is necessary for the way I am using 'inferior' culture. There is no false elitism or snobbery about language in me. But I want to stress that there is a qualitative difference between the different processes that are at work. To use any art-medium to say less than what it is capable of is to give it bad culture, to corrupt it, it is vulgarization. The aim of the poet is not only to make full use of the inherent power of the word but to expand it beyond its known possibilities. For example, when we say that we are grateful or infatuated when we meet a new person in ordinary behavior, we mean only that we hope that this new contact will be pleasant or pleasant; Or that when we call that which is only simply beautiful, touching or enchanting, then we use these connotative words to convey a very simple meaning. On the other hand, anyone who has read good poetry must have noticed that the poet not only makes full use of words, but sometimes adds to the meaning by not using words or characters at all—i.e., not making meaningful use of words at all. , also uses the pregnant silence. I have always felt that this is the best artistic use of language - making full use not only of the inherent and possible meanings of words, but also of the meanings that can be filled in the wordless gaps between words. That's what I meant when I said 'only find the right words'. The right words are those that make the most of the gap between them - through that silence of the gap can convey the full richness of meaning. Why so much, as the inheritor of an earlier tradition, I can even say that poetry is not in language, it is not even in words; Poetry is in the silences between the words. And the poet knows intuitively that through it one can reach the other, through it a state of dialogue can be found, because he knows that communication can happen through silence as well.

I need three or two words so that I can call it a poem.

a word that

Which should never be brought on the tongue.

and second :

Whom I can say but pain from me

The one who falls short and the third: pure metal

but whom I ask after getting

Will it work without it too?

and remain silent

give me three words

That I can say poetry.

There was a time when I was a member of a revolutionary organization and was fighting against British imperialism; In that war, I used all means – even words. During the last great war I was on the frontiers of India as a member of the Indian Army; The Indian Army was once the British Army. Even at that time, I used many means, including the skills acquired in revolutionary life. Had the opportunity come, I would have used other means. Today I am editing a political news-weekly from Delhi. I have no remorse or remorse for any of these actions. None of this is an essential part of the artist's life; But on the other hand, if there is any contradiction between these works and poetry, then I can without any hesitation take the help of a quote of Walter Whitman in my clarification:

I refute my point. Well then, I contradict myself. I am Viraat: In Me the diverse groups merge.

But the opposition is only an appearance, it is not real. In fact, all those experiences have made me who I am and given me the courage to speak up – to admit my mistakes and to declare my beliefs, even though they may prove to be unfounded, and to change them. , may have to be researched or abandoned. As a writer, I have not sought any special place or comfort in the society. As a member of society I have considered it my duty to plead for liberty, for social justice and for the dignity of the human personality, for striving for the accomplishment of larger common objectives, as a poet I have never shied away from that duty. Wanted. Rather, as a poet contrary to this, I have considered it necessary to insist on some values. And I do not consider any right of the society to impose any restriction or control on my efforts for these values. These values ​​and these efforts are my continuous efforts for the purity and culture of my art medium and all art mediums; Value of permanent moral values ​​above practicality or generated profit – (assuming that moral values ​​can change automatically with the expansion of knowledge field), authenticity of feeling, thinking, believing, expressing, choosing and being i.e. The freedom of a person to exist.... The dispute of commitment has been happening in my country like other countries and is still going on. It is probably still needed because probably many people have yet to clearly formulate the questions contained in it. But as for me, although I still listen to everyone and sometimes participate in the debate, I feel that experience has led me out of the noise and smoke of conflict and into a place where From where I can also see the surroundings, and make more purposeful use of tools and equipment. Not only is the writer not detached, but the same attachment is double-he constantly fights on two fronts. It is possible that he may sometimes gather strength on one front and sometimes on the other; But he will be taking a huge risk in giving up any one front.

It may seem to say that the situation of the writer is very dangerous and unpleasant. not actually. In fact his situation is very interesting and interesting. I am reminded of a mythological parable which also has contemporary meaning but which is a more true reflection of 'Kandisyo Yumen' - human destiny than its modern western existentialist formulation.

To escape from a tiger, a man climbs a tree and reaches its farthest branch. The branch bends with its burden and hangs it in a blind well. Above are two rats chopping the branch, below are many snakes hissing in the well waiting for it to fall. In this most perilous situation he sees that a blade of grass from the world of the well is bent towards him and a drop of honey is trembling at its tip. Extending his tongue, he licks the honey, and how delicious that honey is…

What a delicious, indescribably delicious honey... We all, each in our own different way, have tasted the honey that is our life. But I think that those who have tasted their position along with the honey have gained a deeper experience of existence, because for them the taste of the position has also become a part of the taste of the honey. And for them, attachment to Madhu necessarily involves commitment along with the location. And the essence of the parable is that this (of the existential idiom) 'extreme situation' is not such an extreme situation, because it is universal, ordinary. The important thing is to be conscious of it: once identified, the individual's position becomes one with the wider universal position, and our immediate concerns are reduced to a single ultimate thought, which for the modern individual is faith, belief, religion, or And it is synonymous with whatever name it may be given - the solid foundation upon which he builds the edifice of values ​​- with the hope that they will prove to be durable.

in the crowd

Whenever the eyes meet, it suddenly appears.

Man :

Agar-like-God-like

Lonely.

and all our ethos

There are layers of ashes for ages.