IGNOU FREE MEG-007 Indian English Literature Solved Guess Paper 2025

1. What is indian prose writers

Indian Writing in English: An Anthology of Prose and Poetry Selections introduces the reader to a selection of poetry and short stories written in English by Indians over the last 200 years. The creative writers, who embarked on the challenging task of narrating the Indian nation in prose and verse, both before and after Independence, were faced with many challenges. The key words were ‘exile’, ‘alienation’, ‘authenticity’ and ‘Indianness’, while the hidden agenda was nationhood and citizenship and the search for an essentially Indian mode of perception and thought, in whatever language it was expressed. Satchidanandan (1999) points out that in this writing, paradigms are tried and given up; communities are imagined and dissolved; traditions are constructed and deconstructed; the principle of unity and of difference are alternately tried out; and the West’s presence is acknowledge and negated; radical European concepts and models are alternated with a return to indigenous roots. Our creativity, he adds, has thus been dialogic, and our literary discourse marked by a negotiation of a necessary heterogeneity, by a conception of identity that lives through difference and hybridity.

An added dimension is given to the negotiations by the creative writers, by expatriate writing which introduces the idea of the nation that is not contingent upon domicile or constricted by the demands of geographical territory. Diaspora epistemology locates itself, as Mishra (1996) points out, in the realm of the hybrid, in the domains of the cross- cultural, and in contaminated social and cultural regimes. In a progressively multi-ethnic conception of the nation-state, it is ‘diaspora theory’ that bears testimony to the fact that nation within the minds of writers are as real as those on the map. Vijayasree (1966) identifies expatriation as operating in a space permeated by perpetually shifting ‘alternativities’. She also addresses the question of self-definition as an urgent imperative in expatriate consciousness and sees the issue of identity at the heart of creative expressions by expatriate writers. There is a continuous attempt, she believes, to turn one’s liminality into strength, to question notions of belonging, to celebrate unbelonging and above all, to prove oneself. These writers oppose concepts of centrality, and their dominant discourse is one of difference. Rushdie (1991), while talking about Indian writers, both those who live away from India and those who live in India but write in English, mentions that they inhabit separate spaces in life and in literature, both in geographical and literary terms. He says that these writers create, ‘not actual cities and villages, but invisible ones, imaginary homelands, Indias of the mind. This kind of writing also questions the premise that ‘a people must have a land [or a specific language] in order to be a people. He then suggests that the writer who is ‘out-of-country’ and even ‘out-of-language’ may experience alienation in an intensified form. What some critics see as a fallout of the expatriate condition, can also be understood as a central predicament of the Indian English writer who, while writing about the state of the nation, is actually endeavouring to write him/herself into being.

We will begin with an introduction to Indian English poetry and narrate a brief history of the critical paradigms that have been used to critique it. We will then go on to discuss the life and writings of the four poets included in this anthology, to provide their writing a context and a framework.

Indian English Poetry

An important site of the criticism of Indian English poetry is its perceived ‘inauthenticity’ by critics who question whether this poetry can claim to be called Indian at all, since it does not conform to their notion of what constitutes Indianness. An early response to Indian English poetry had come from Buddhadev Bose who called it ‘a blind alley, lined with curio shops, leading nowhere’ (quoted in Lall, 1983), and Mukherjee (1971) wrote that Indian English poetry can lay claim to an independence from English poetry only when it is firmly rooted in the social and cultural ethos of India. In his introduction to an anthology of Indian English poetry, Sarang (1989, 1994), attempts to understand why it has been difficult to accept this literary genre as legitimate and ‘authentic’. He locates the problems of Indian poetry in English in its allegedly derivative nature; its restricted focus on a particular social stratum; and its lack of a homogeneous geographically compact literary culture. For Sarang, Indian English poetry needs the dynamic play of forces and counter- forces, groups and movements, the fuel of rebellion and a return to tradition. He suggests that Indianness is exploited by these writers for its exotic appeal to the non-Indian reader and denies that this commonly invoked criterion of merit can be a true measure of aesthetic value. Finally, for Sarang, it is only by being himself that the poet can contribute to a definition of Indianness, for Indianness can only be defined, after all, in terms of who Indians are.

While its detractors are legion, Indian English poetry also has its share of champions who interrogate the idea of a monolithic notion of Indianness as a legitimate stick with which to beat the poets. Narasimhaiah (1968, 1999) argues that it is the operative sensibility that makes a writer an Indian and not the language s/he uses. An early advocate of Indian English poetry, Narasimhaiah uses inwardness with the English language and the expression of a distinct identifiable sensibility as the yardsticks to judge such writing. In a spirited defence of its belonging within the larger family of Indian literature, Gokak (1970, 1998) calls Indian English poetry Indian first and everything else afterwards. His defence is based on his belief that it has voiced the aspirations, the joys and sorrows of the Indian people and been sensitive to the changes it the national climate and striven increasingly to express the soul of India. On the question of identity, Char (1988) suggests that Indian English poetry can lay claim to being part of Indian literature by virtue of its rootedness in the Indian cultural milieu. He locates the ironic keenness of the writing of Indian English poets in the simultaneous exercise of their individual talents trained in and tempered by the study of English poets, along with their awareness of indigenous traditions.

Buy IGNOU Solved Guess Paper With Important Questions  :-

2. Explain the post-independence prose

Prose in Post-Independence Assamese Literature shows a strong tradition of novel and short story writing. Most writers in the contemporary period have produced works in both genres. The novel in Assamese came in the wake of the western system of education that was introduced by the British Administration, and it drew its inspiration from the literature of the west. Contemporary prose fiction is extremely conscious of its social function and political responsibility and takes as its subjects events surrounding the last stages of the independence struggle and the shifting social and economic conditions of modern India.

Two writers who started writing and established reputations quite early are Said Abdul Malik and Birendra Kumar Bhattacharya. As with his earlier short stories, Malik’s novels concentrate on the relationships between men and women, on ordinary events that touch and change the lives of ordinary people, and on the universal relevance such relationships and events have. Some of these novels are Adharsheela (1966), Rajanigandhar Sokulu (1972), and Dr. Arunabhar Asampurna Jivani (1975). Certain of his novels, such as Prasin am Kankaal (1968) and Sonali Sutare Bondha (1972), look at unnatural manifestations of love and intense passion. However, his novels are not restricted to romance alone. Two novels that examine social conditions are Surujmukhir Sapna (1960) and Oghori Atmar Kahini (1969). Surujmukhir Sapna is primarily about the life of a Muslim village by the river. Through his descriptions of a simple rural people, their joys, sorrows, and hopes, Malik brings the village to life. Oghori Atmar Kahini, on the other hand, is placed in an urban setting and looks at middle-class life and problems associated with it. Malik’s prose writings include two well-known biographies: Jyoti Prasad Agarwala’s life, Rupotirtha Jatri, and the Assamese Vaishnava saint and reformer Sankardev’s life, Dhanya Nara Tonu Bhala (1987). Among Malik’s many works are Rothor Sokori Ghure (1950), Bonjui (1956),

Sobighar (1958), Matir Saki (1959), and Anya Akash, Anya Tora (1962).

Birendra Kumar Bhattacharya’s novels, too, display the same political concerns that his short stories exhibited. In technique, his novels are more experimental and modern than Malik’s. His first novel, Rajpothe Ringiyai (1955), employs stream-of-consciousness narrative to some extent. The novel moves over the course of one day in the life of the protagonist, an important day for IndiaAugust 15, 1947, Independence Day. One can see the limitedness of Independence through the hero’s eyes and ultimately the false claims of independence as the day ends with the hero’s being attacked by the police. His second novel, Iyaruingom (1960), is set in the Naga Hills of the Independence era and narrates the divisions that arise out of ideological differences. One group within Naga society believes in Subash Chandra Bose’s message of active, armed resistance to the British in India with the help of the Japanese army; the other group has faith in Gandhi’s non-violent methods. This division echoes the kind of division seen in the rest of India. In the end, even though the first group is victorious and attempts to form an independent state in the Naga Hills, it is clear that the larger nationalistic forces will ultimately take over. Bhattacharya’s novels consistently question and reveal the false assumptions on which society’s definitions of freedom, nationalism, faith, and religion are based. His Mritunjoy (1970), which again is set in pre-independent India during the Quit India Movement of 1942, focuses on a Vaishnavite and a Gandhian who must turn to violence. His Pratipod (1970) uses the workers’ strike of 1940 in the Britishowned Assam Oil Company at Digboi as its subject and the unity displayed by the workers and the ultimate political intervention as its theme. Two recent novels that again turn to democracy and nationalism are Munisunir Pohor (1979) and Kalor Humunia (1982). Bhattacharya’s novels, such as Sataghni (1968) and Kobor am Phool (1972), examine the effects of war on humanity. Other novels, such as Nastachandra (1968), Sinaki Shuti (1971), and Daini (1976), are studies of the human condition.

3. Explain the life of Mahatma Gandhi

Mahatma Gandhi, byname of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, (born October 2, 1869, Porbandar, India—died January 30, 1948, Delhi), Indian lawyer, politician, social activist, and writer who became the leader of the nationalist movement against the British rule of India. As such, he came to be considered the father of his country. Gandhi is internationally esteemed for his doctrine of nonviolent protest (satyagraha) to achieve political and social progress. In the eyes of millions of his fellow Indians, Gandhi was the Mahatma (“Great Soul”). The unthinking adoration of the huge crowds that gathered to see him all along the route of his tours made them a severe ordeal; he could hardly work during the day or rest at night. “The woes of the Mahatmas,” he wrote, “are known only to the Mahatmas.”

His fame spread worldwide during his lifetime and only increased after his death. The name Mahatma Gandhi is now one of the most universally recognized on earth. Youth Gandhi was the youngest child of his father’s fourth wife. His father—Karamchand Gandhi, who was the dewan (chief minister) of Porbandar, the capital of a small principality in western India (in what is now Gujarat state) under British suzerainty—did not have much in the way of a formal education. He was, however, an able administrator who knew how to steer his way between the capricious princes, their long-suffering subjects, and the headstrong British political officers in power.

Gandhi’s mother, Putlibai, was completely absorbed in religion, did not care much for finery or jewelry, divided her time between her home and the temple, fasted frequently, and wore herself out in days and nights of nursing whenever there was sickness in the family. Mohandas grew up in a home steeped in Vaishnavism—worship of the Hindu god Vishnu—with a strong tinge of Jainism, a morally rigorous Indian religion whose chief tenets are nonviolence and the belief that everything in the universe is eternal. Thus, he took for granted ahimsa (noninjury to all living beings), vegetarianism, fasting for self-purification, and mutual tolerance between adherents of various creeds and sects.

The educational facilities at Porbandar were rudimentary; in the primary school that Mohandas attended, the children wrote the alphabet in the dust with their fingers. Luckily for him, his father became dewan of Rajkot, another princely state. Though Mohandas occasionally won prizes and scholarships at the local schools, his record was on the whole mediocre. One of the terminal reports rated him as “good at English, fair in Arithmetic and weak in Geography; conduct very good, bad handwriting.” He was married at the age of 13 and thus lost a year at school. A diffident child, he shone neither in the classroom nor on the playing field. He loved to go out on long solitary walks when he was not nursing his by then ailing father (who died soon thereafter) or helping his mother with her household chores.

Buy IGNOU Solved Guess Paper With Important Questions  :-

4. What is hind swaraj?

Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule is a small tract written by Gandhi in 1908. Gandhi had been living in South Africa for some years, had been to India on a visit, and on the voyage back to South Africa from London he penned this work in less than ten days, writing with his left hand when his right hand started giving him some pain. Hind Swaraj appeared first in installments in the pages of Indian Opinion, a newspaper founded and edited by Gandhi, and in 1909 was published as a book, though it was proscribed at once by the Government of Bombay. Less than 100 pages long, and comprised of twenty short chapters, Hind Swaraj is cast in the form of a dialogue between Gandhi, who is called “The Editor”, and his interlocutor, known as “The Reader.” Some readers might be reminded of the Socratic dialogues, where Socrates has by far the greater number of lines; his interlocutors appear as sophists. Others will think, perhaps, of the Upanishadic dialogues, while yet others might think of Hind Swaraj as a Sunday school catechism, where matters of ‘truth’ and ‘doctrine’ are put in the form of questions and answers.

As Gandhi was to observe in a foreword which he called “A Word of Explanation”, he had in London come into contact with Indian “anarchists” or, in the language of the Indian government, “extremists”, and had encountered these people in India as well. While struck by their “bravery”, Gandhi thought the “zeal” of these extremists, who sought to procure India’s independence through the use of violence and techniques of terror, including political assassination and bombing campaigns, “misguided”. For over a decade, Gandhi had been experimenting with non-violent resistance in South Africa, and he held firmly to the view that India was especially equipped to show the way out of violence through the higher law of non-violent resistance. Gandhi thought of Hind Swaraj as a book that could be “put into the hands of a child. It teaches the gospel of love in place of that of hate. It replaces violence with self-sacrifice.

It pits soul force against brute force”.

However, it is not for this reason alone that Gandhi wrote Hind Swaraj, and indeed its afterlife suggests that it is seldom read as a treatise on non-violence. Over the remaining forty years of his life, Gandhi would continue to write on non-violence, and his later writings have eclipsed Hind Swaraj in this respect. But if Hind Swaraj occupies a seminal place in Gandhi’s oeuvre, and can even reasonably be described as one of the most critical documents of the twentiethcentury, it is because in this work he initiated what he himself described as “a severe condemnation of ‘modern civilization”.

Gandhi inaugurated the most far-reaching critique of modernity that one can imagine, and though it must have struck the preponderant number of his contemporaries as an absurd treatise, Hind Swaraj strikes the reader of late modernity as a work of extraordinary prescience and insight. All too often Hind Swaraj has been read as a denunciation of the West (qua West), but this reading is nowhere substantiated by the text. Throughout, Gandhi remains clear that the replacement of white rulers by brown rulers would be of little consequence to the people if the new set of rulers governed by the same principles, with the same objectives, and with a similar commitment to principles of modern civilization.

5. Why was india lost?

You have said much about civilization – enough to make me ponder over it. I do not now know what I should adopt and what I should avoid from the nations of Europe, but one question comes to my lips immediately. If Civilization is a disease and if it has attacked England, why has she been able to take India, and why is she able to retain it?

Editor : Your question is not very difficult to answer, and we shall presently be able to examine the true nature of Swaraj; for I am aware that I have still to answer that question. I will, however, take up your previous question. The English have not taken India; we have given it to them. They are not in India because of their strength, but because we keep them. Let us now see whether these propositions can be sustained. They came to our country originally for purposes of trade. Recall the Company Bahadur. Who made it Bahadur? They had not the slightest intention at the time of establishing a kingdom. Who assisted the Company’s officers? Who was tempted at the sight of their silver?

Who bought their goods? History testifies that we did all this. In order to become rich all at once we welcomed the Company’s officers with open arms. We assisted them. If I am in the habit of drinking bhang and a seller thereof sells it to me, am I to blame him or myself? By blaming the seller shall I be able to avoid the habit? And, if a particular retailer is driven away will not another take his place? A true servant of India will have to go to the root of the matter. If an excess of food has caused me indigestion, I shall certainly not avoid it by blaming water. He is a true physician who probes the cause of disease, and if you pose as a physician for the disease of India, you will have to find out its true cause.

Reader : You are right. Now I think you will not have to argue much with me to drive your conclusions home. I am impatient to know your further views. We are now on a most interesting topic. I shall, therefore, endeavour to follow your thought, and stop you when I am in doubt.

Editor : I am afraid that, in spite of your enthusiasm, as we proceed further, we shall have differences of opinion. Nevertheless, I shall argue only when you- stop me. We have already seen that the English merchants were able to get a footing in India because we encouraged them. When our Princes fought among themselves, they sought the assistance of Company Bahadur. That corporation was versed alike in commerce and war. It was unhampered by questions of morality. Its object was to increase its commerce and to make money. It accepted our assistance, and increased the number of its warehouses. To protect the latter it employed an army which was utilized by us also. Is it not then useless to blame the English for what we did at that time? The Hindus and the Mahomedans were at daggers drawn. This, too, gave the Company its opportunity and thus we created the circumstances that gave the Company its control over India. Hence it is truer to say that we gave India to the English than that India was lost.

Buy IGNOU Solved Guess Paper With Important Questions  :-

6. Write your personal reaction to nehru’s autobiography

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was born on 14th November, 1889. He was born in Allahabad. Moti Lai Nehru his father was a great lawyer. His mother’s name was Swarup Rani. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

At the age of 15 he went to England. There he studied at Harrow School. Then he joined Cambridge University. Later he studied Law and became a lawyer. He began his practice at Allahabad High Court.

He gave up his flourishing practice and joined the freedom movement under Mahatma Gandhi. He was sent to jail several times. He became very popular. He was made President of the Congress Party many times. In 1947, when India became free, he was elected the First Prime Minister. He was a successful Prime Minister.

India progressed by leaps and bounds under his leadership. He was a great statesman, an idealist and a dreamer. He has written many books. He worked hard to serve his country.

Pandit Nehru loved children. And the children called him Chacha Nehru with love. He always liked and enjoyed the company of children. His birthday is now celebrated as Children’s Day.

He was one of the builders of modern India. He always wore a rose in his dress. He was a great lover of beauty and a true lover of peace and freedom. He propagated the principles of Panchsheel.

7. Make an assessment of nehru’s prose style in his autobiography.

Before Jawahar Lal Nehru, English prose was not a powerful genre of IndoAnglican literature. There was hardly any standard prose in existence. It was Nehru who enhanced the popularity of English prose by writing the above mentioned books. His writings are marked with a unique style. It is lucid, spontaneous and suggestive. It has poetic richness.

Nehru was a great journalist. He was always in favour of the freedom of press. He always stood in favour of a free and fearless press. He condemned yellow journalism. Though Nehru worked as a journalist for a long time his prose became very sublime and penetrating. Even his extempore remarks are worthy of attention . At the same time Nehru was a great orator. He always spoke in a cultured tone. In this context he is compared with Churchill.

Nehru was a great letter writer too. One can find much freshness and charm in his letters. In these letters Nehru used the conversational style. Here we do not come across a pedant but a great conversationalist. His contribution to the making of Indian history is great. As an autobiographer Nehru earned wide acclaim. In short, Nehru used prose for various purposes.

In ‘The Relationship of Language’ Nehru takes a historical view of the development and diversification of languages. Language for his is a unifying factor. In Language, Writing and Numerals’ Nehru considers language as an important means of communication. Here again he discusses the gradual development of language. Therefore, these essays are marked by simplicity of language generates spontaneity of utterance and a conversational tone.

To conclude, Nehru’s prose was appropriate to the needs of the occasion. In his varied style he revealed his mastery of English prose. His literary works intertwines literature, history and science all together. He used words and phrases wisely and appropriately. His thoughts are embellished by the use of similes, metaphors and other figures of speech. In short, he was a great master of Indo-Anglican prose.

Buy IGNOU Solved Guess Paper With Important Questions  :-

8. Write a note on nirad c. Chaudhuri’s credo. Does it reveal him as an anglophile?

The recent Brexit vote revived the word in my memory. My mother still speaks of it now and then. She was, for a while, unconcerned with Brexit. But over the past few days, she read the newspapers and made a connection to this referendum and the one she witnessed, albeit as a child. The empire was changing, and with it, its people and literature.

I’m reminded of Nirad Chaudhuri (1897 – 1999), the well-known twentiethcentury Bengali author who remains a pillar of English writing in India. I remind her that my father and she have discussed his work and, as writing that is proimperialism, made it their pet peeve (“Your father never supported the glory of Britain, which Nirad-babu understood!”). She indeed, somehow, believed the empire was impeccable. Her ‘memsahib‘ upbringing – with its English speaking, skirt-suit wearing and expert embroidery teachers – is unquestionable in her mind. That she read a hyper-nationalistic Vivekananda or the liberal humanist Tagore and Nazrul has had no serious consequences for her love for the greatness of Britain.

“Nirad-babu” was mentioned in the household as frequently as the referendum. Not in connection with the latter, but as a body of literary ideas that, I believe, had troubled our ‘borderless’ parents. Borderless because they sometimes considered themselves strictly from Assam, and then also from what lies in Bangladesh today, some percentage from Meghalaya and the rest from a scattered northeastern geography. I figured that my mother regarded this fractured identity of theirs as similar to the UK’s, with the disparate countries it ruled, while for my father, having such an identity was a leftist method of uniting an impossible diversity. Hence, I imagine that for him, Chaudhuri would be, hypothetically, the perfect Brexit proponent today.

Compare and contrast the autobiographies of nehru and chaudhuri.

Autobiography is usually defined as a retrospective narrative written about one’s life, in the first person and in prose. Such writing has appeared with increasing frequency in Western Literature since the beginning of nineteenth century but after World War II, it gained considerable significance. Now autobiographies all over the world and especially in India are extensively read and enjoyed, but paradoxically enough, they have received very scant critical attention, let alone comparative treatment.

The comparative approach to literature enables us to widen our critical horizon and develop the concept of prevalent literary tendencies in the world as well as the different regions of a nation. The comparative study of authors belonging to the different nations should be preceded by that of authors belonging to the same country, preferably coming from two different parts of the country belonging to two different fields and professions. It is needless to say, that the comparative study aims at establishing the universality and oneness of human experience through the depiction of diverse peculiarities of it. Jawaharlal Nehru and M.K. Gandhi are incontrovertibly two significant Indian English writers.

A comparative study of autobiographies of two significant writers belonging to two different, in fact, diametrically opposed back grounds will, no doubt be as delightful as profitable. Both of them belonged to the freedom struggle of India and had an ambition to make the country independent. Both of them belonged to political arena of India during the British Rule, but Gandhi was not fully. As a writer both of them practiced the same genre, they sharply differ from each other in the manner of presentation and focus. A study of the similarity between the two will inevitably show their dissimilarity and establish their distinct identities. Both Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi are known as good autobiographers. It is a matter of pleasure for the reader or critic to notice that both Nehru and Gandhi have formulated their own theories about the art of autobiography. The theoretical differences between the two naturally create the presentation differences also. They throw light upon the two radically different personalities moulded by two different atmospheres.

9. Write a note on seth’s prose style.

Vikram Seth’s novels satirically and gravely look at the issue of national legislative issues, the separation of standing and class, scholastic issues and interfamily relations. Vikram Seth novels manage present social situation, social changes, and the social transformation. The socio-social foundation of the novels drives the perusers to break down genuine authentic foundation of the nation. Therefore, Edward Said attests, ―the creators are throughout the entire existence of their social orders, forming and molded by that history and their involvement with various measure.

Vikram Seth’s novels uncover worry towards society and he anticipates the indecency and criminal operations which had happened in the society. He is the genuine representative of the society so he never wavers to uncover the genuine reality about the society. Wole Soyinka composes, ―A writer records the experience of his society and is the voice of vision of his time. He needs to work as social inner voice . . . or something bad might happen, he should pull back to the position an after death specialist.

Vikram Seth is conceived on twentieth June 1952 in Calcutta and his family had a place with the upper white collar class society. They lived in numerous urban communities like Batanagar close to Kolkata, 11 Patna, close Danapur and London. Seth was destined to Prem Seth and Leila in Calcutta. His dad was an official in the Bata India Limited shoe organization. Prem Seth relocated to India from West Punjab in Pakistan. Leila, his mom was the main lady judge of the Delhi High Court as additionally the principal lady to become Chief Justice of a State High Court, at Simla. Shantum is the more youthful sibling of Vikram Seth, who sorted out Buddhist meditational visits and his more youthful sister, Aradhana, was a movie producer who had been hitched to an Austrian representative.

Vikram Seth lived in London for a long time however at present he lives close to Salisbury, England. He learned at St Michael’s High School in Patna, Welham Boys’ School and The Doon School in Dehra Dun. Seth finishes his A-levels at

Tonbridge School, a Public School in Kent, England, and afterward went to Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE) at Corpus Christi College, Oxford and he sought after his doctoral investigations at Stanford University. He was a famous polymath who had lived in three mainlands: Asia, Europe and Australia.

Buy IGNOU Solved Guess Paper With Important Questions  :-

10. Examine raja rao’s foreword to kanthapra and then formulate in your own

The beginning of Kanthapura lives up to this distinctiveness: “Our village—I don’t think you have ever heard of it—Kanthapura is its name, and it is in the province of Kara. High on the Ghats is it, high up the steep mountains that face the cool Arabian seas, up the Malabar coast is it, up Mangalore and Puttur and many a centre of cardamom and coffee, rice and sugarcane. Roads, narrow, dusty, rut-covered roads, wind through the forests of teak and of jack, of sandal and of sal, and hanging over bellowing gorges and leaping over elephanthaunted valleys, they turn now to the left and now to the right…”

The telling was not easy. “One has to convey in a language that is not one’s own the spirit that is one’s own…. English is not really an alien language to us. It is the language of our intellectual make-up…not our emotional make-up,” he says, choosing to write in English and not Kannada or French, two other languages he was fluent in

There’s no way to celebrate the Salman Rushdies and the Arundhati Roys who have earned such fame without going back to the originals: R.K. Narayan, G.V. Desani, Raja Rao.

In the preface of his classic Kanthapura , first published in 1938, Raja Rao writes, “We cannot write like the English. We should not. We cannot write only as Indians. Our method of expression… has to be a dialect which will some day prove to be as distinctive and colourful as the Irish and the American. Time alone will justify it.”

The beginning of Kanthapura lives up to this distinctiveness: “Our village—I don’t think you have ever heard of it—Kanthapura is its name, and it is in the province of Kara. High on the Ghats is it, high up the steep mountains that face the cool Arabian seas, up the Malabar coast is it, up Mangalore and Puttur and many a centre of cardamom and coffee, rice and sugarcane. Roads, narrow, dusty, rut-covered roads, wind through the forests of teak and of jack, of sandal and of sal, and hanging over bellowing gorges and leaping over elephanthaunted valleys, they turn now to the left and now to the right…”

The telling was not easy. “One has to convey in a language that is not one’s own the spirit that is one’s own…. English is not really an alien language to us. It is the language of our intellectual make-up…not our emotional make-up,” he says, choosing to write in English and not Kannada or French, two other languages he was fluent in.

The story is of an upheaval that will soon tell on the lives of a community. A disarray is caused by the arrival of a person influenced by Mahatma Gandhi’s teachings. “O, lift the flag high/ Lift the flag high/ This is the flag of the Revolution.”

As the grandmother-narrator Achakka puts it: “We said to ourselves, he is one of the Gandhi-men, who say there is neither caste nor clan nor family, and yet they pray like us and they live like us. Only they say, too, one should not marry early, one should allow widows to take husbands and a brahmin might marry a pariah and a pariah a brahmin. Well, how does it affect us? We shall be dead before the world is polluted.”

But her world will be upended too. Raja Rao, who lived in France for decades, and later taught philosophy at the university of Texas, was always in search of the best way to infuse the “tempo of Indian life” while writing in English.

“We, in India, think quickly, we talk quickly, and we move quickly. There must be something in the sun of India that makes us rush and tumble and run on… we tell one interminable tale. Episode follows episode, and when our thoughts stop our breath stops, and we move on to another thought. This was and still is the ordinary style of our storytelling.”

Buy IGNOU Solved Guess Paper With Important Questions  :-

 Follow For Updates: senrigbookhouse

Read Also :

• IGNOU FREE MEG-008 New Literatures in English Solved Guess Paper With Imp Questions 2025