The discussion was taking place on criticism and poetry. Yet, don’t know what got into Yashrāj’s head that he shrieked and began thumping his fists on the table. He said, “Yes there is fraud in criticism, but so too in poetry¹. In fact fraud is intentionally committed, meaning that the perspective adopted by poets in poetry, is not due to their insight. A poet is an actor too. A successful act is also acting after all. It’s a copy (naqal) of the real (asal). It may smell of the ‘real’, but it is in fact not.”

I was not able to control my laughter at that. Yashrāj’s non-literary vocab of ‘real’ and ‘copy’ charmed me! What nice words! Another thing happened, which was perhaps even more important. It appeared to be Yashrāj’s position that the real nature of poetry is revealed where a poet ignores their insight and resorts to acting. That implies that Yashrāj too assents to the importance of insisting on expressing the mental response as it is, in the right proportion! Isn’t it? But, I did not dare to say that. I just kept listening to him. 

He said, “There’s another kind of fraud in poetry.”

I said, “Which one?”

Yashrāj answered back, “This fraud is committed where the writer is not even aware that he is committing a fraud. He believes in full earnest that what he is saying is right. That is, where the writer is an honest fool. A writer in that case not only believes that he is telling the truth, but what he is saying is beautiful and for the sake of the larger good as well. He is certain that he is being absolutely sincere. Yet his sincerity only leads to or can potentially lead to fraud being committed.” 

“….this means that a writer’s sincerity and self-confidence are not such forces which can prevent their literature from becoming a fraud…in other words, a writer, even with absolute sincerity and self-confidence is quite capable of committing a well-balanced fraud. Please note, this does not mean that sincerity and self-confidence are such forces, which inevitably and always make a literature fraud. But, just commitment to what you say and being self-confident does not make literature pure, deceit-free and fraud-less.”

Looking at Yashrāj’s agitated face, I actually burst into laughter. Chuckling, I said to him, “so what do you think? A writer should spy against one’s own self, against his subject, to play a CID against his own mental reactions? A writer is not such a fool!”

To which Yashrāj responded annoyingly, “Do not make fun, and face the reality!”

This tickled me even more. Yet, respecting Yashrāj’s words I said, “Okay, explain to me this other kind of fraud a bit more. I am all ears.”

Yashrāj was again at it, “that’s it, what fun it is to have an audience like you. These days there is a great dearth of an honest audience. ‘Honest’ speakers on the other hand are plenty in supply!”

Our chatter got drowned in a surge of laughter at that moment. 

Yashrāj went on saying, “a writer commits fraud in all sincerity when he is least aware that he is himself giving birth to it. In other words, when his thoughts and feelings are not based on an objective assessment of the matter at hand. Or, they are such that not being guided by the reality of life and tied instead to his subjectivist viewpoint, they become distorted. In that situation, the knowledge-base of a writer’s emotions itself is erroneous. As a result of distortion in the knowledge-base his emotional sense too becomes distorted. In other words, when a writer is merely subjective-even though he might continue giving an impression of objectivity-which means that when he imposes his so called insight on the subject-matter, or when he views it from the coloured lens of his so-called feelings, then there is no doubt that fraud emerges in his literature.”

Here I took Yashrāj’s reins in my hands. I said, “Mr., when we talk about the subject-matter of poetry, we imply by that the complex of emotions which is expressed through a poet’s voice”

Yashrāj got extremely agitated at this point. He burst out in rage, “I am not ready to accept your definition of poetry’s subject-matter! What gets expressed in poetry is a mental response or a series of mental responses. But, the Subject-matter is not a ‘mental response’, but that ‘element’ towards which and about which it is a ‘mental response’. That is, I am talking about the support of emotions. Understood, Hajrat!”

I said annoyingly, “Okay, okay, talk about the support of emotions. In the subject-matter of poetry, emotions and their support will automatically be included. Anyway, let’s move forward!”

Yashrāj said, “I will only speak in my formulations.”

I interrupted him midway to ask a question which had nothing to do with what he was saying. I said to him, “do you agree that such a fraud can also be very beautiful, very alluring and very attractive?”

Yashrāj immediately shot back, “that is in fact the problem with it! Because it is alluring and attractive, it influences the readers even more! But all that this proves is that fraud too is an art- a fine art. And that which is a fraud, even if it’s a fine art, is not to be understood as something driven by personal integrity.”

Exhausted, I asked him, “What do you want to say after all?”

He replied, “Up until the knowledge-base of a feeling is objectively pure, only till then it is not a fraud. But knowledge too continuously expands and develops. Since feelings move in the field of knowledge, that’s why the struggle to make knowledge more and more vital, rooted-in reality and evolved, is the true struggle waged by an artist. If a poet or an artist forgoes engaging in that struggle, then he is not honest in the true sense of the word. The truth is that within personal integrity lies a great struggle. To put it in other words, “in the field of art personal-integrity is not axiomatic, but achieved with effort!”

“So, does that mean that a writer who is not fully conscious about writing, that is to say a writer whose writing is spontaneous, and flows easily, with minimal effort, lacks personal integrity? Let us take an example. Shelley’s poetry is known for its spontaneous rendition of feelings. Since his poetry was not effort-bound, in fact it was spontaneous in a specific sense, implies that for you it was lacking in personal integrity!”

At this point a confusion engulfed Yashrāj. He found it difficult for quite some time to respond to me. But subsequently, he went onto contextualise his understanding of personal integrity, and raised some really engaging thoughts in process. 

He said, “That’s some difficulty you’ve put me in. But yes, that too has a solution. There are several such poems by Shelley, whose knowledge-base – given the limitations posed by the circumstances of his age – was more developed than the knowledge-base of earlier poets. Shelley’s romantic vision was far more transparent than the orthodox vision of the dogmatic classical poets. Further, the lofty humanistic dream placed in Shelley’s eyes by the rousing forces of the age, inspired him in his work. The self-dignity of the individual and the sublime-serene spiritual possibilities residing within him are richly manifested in Shelley’s poetry. Where there is fogginess in Shelley’s poetry, it is a proof of the limit of the thought-potential of the stirring forces of his age, and along with that also shows that where these forces were rich in emotional intensity, they were relatively lacking in thought-content. The knowledge-base of Shelley’s poetry was, of course, not only truer, more factual than that of the other poets, but also more clear, extensive and decisive. In other words, Shelley was a poet with massive awareness. His feelings wandered in the field created by knowledge-soaked awareness. Merely having a romantic vision is not reason enough for the weakening of the knowledge-base of feelings. Rather, the knowledge-base is weakened when the poet, neglecting the latest knowledge gained by society, moves away from the feelings inspired by this knowledge, and wanders wantonly in his solitary-closed world. Here knowledge doesn’t merely imply an understanding of scientific achievements, but also an awareness of the evolving as well as the declining forces of society. The beauty of Shelley’s poetry ensues from the mental framework which was formed by and in the inspirative intensities brewing in his age. Knowledge gave dreams to Shelley, and dreams nurtured his feelings. All his literature was steeped in the spirit animating this mental frame. I have already shared my opinion on the reasons behind the fogginess of Shelley’s poetry. The truth of the matter is that, comparatively speaking, Shelley was a very aware poet. He used to experience a spiritual connection with the ascending humanistic forces of his age. His awareness as an artist meant that he could express the beautiful quiverings of that era in his poetry using the propelling force of his dreams. But, let’s take other romantic writers and poets for a moment. Many of them, we’ll find, wear the masquerade of false-feelings. Their false psychology is the result of a specific kind of aptitude and in turn strengthens it. This aptitude is the root cause of the web of falsities they weave. 

“Along with the aptitude, several self-censoring mechanisms too are present. The author has to bear several types of self-imposed or internal censors, that is to say deep-seated inhibitions. Some inhibitions are such that they cut-off and outright reject even the affections of reality to which their poetry is allied with. The real element of poetry, due to which and through which beauty results, that only tells us whether the poet is dealing in false feelings or what!”

Yashrāj was in no mood to stop, “these inhibitions dry up the source of many of his good and sincere feelings. As a result, the poetry which ensues is nothing but fake. There’s an abundance of fake poems in Hindi. Sometimes such fake literature too manages to manifest some traditionally recognized qualities. For example, with continued practice on a poet’s part, virtues like refinement do emerge in poetry, owing to which some connoisseur’s even place it in the invaluable fund of great literature.”

Yashrāj continued to add, “due to their fakeness, feelings expressed in such poetry are often unnatural as well. It is the duty of the poet to be one with one’s own nature and with the nature of the objective correlate of poetry. It is a great demand of personal integrity that the writer boldly rectifies his inhibitions, confronts them. And along with that, enters his own nature and into the nature of objects. Whatever comes in the way of this entering of one’s own self, must be forcefully done away with. In other words, guided by the motive of entering the recesses of his own nature and that of object, he should even alter his Parnassian tastes – he must believe in the continuous reform and editing of his own, yes of his own self…!”

“O, here I agree with you!”, I promptly expressed my agreement on this. 

Yashrāj continued to be at it, “A writer who doesn’t submit his heart (in your words) to revision and editing, becomes stunted. This revision and editing, should be accomplished only through a poet’s outlook on life, and not in order to put up a pretense.” 

Yashrāj had spoken in excess. Sometimes this got me distracted too. Having said this, I was trying to listen to him as intently as possible. He carried on, “It is a poet’s duty that he examines with discretion the inhibitions and nagging doubts residing in his heart. One should not work on those inhibitions only under the influence of a special aptitude. Keep in mind, these inhibitions are developed by the writer himself in the process of writing. The process of their development is a separate subject in itself. What is of importance is that self-inhibitions should be developed with prudence. This is an exacting demand on personal integrity. If the poetic vision, which sums up the nature of the object of poetry as well as of the poet himself, is of significance for life, then undoubtedly his poetry will be succinct and impressive. On the other hand, if this significance is limited, then we may call that poetry beautiful, but it cannot have any substantial impact on our life. That means it will not be able to develop and strengthen our life’s conscience. Please keep in mind I am taking poetic-vision in the sense of life-vision only.”

By now, Yashrāj had exhausted his breath. His analytical-prowess had clearly cast an impression on me. Thoughts came rushing in my head. Seeing that Yashrāj was quiet now, I also wanted to add some of my own thoughts to what he had said. 

I began, “Yashrāj, listen. Now I also want to say something. Listen carefully! Even if composing poetry takes place on a table with a pen in one’s hand, the true mental-preparation of the same is constantly undergoing outside the moments of creation. I think that if in carrying out this mental preparation the poet truly acts with integrity, meaning that he attempts to keep his life-vision broad and deep, then such preparation (of the related poetic-creation) will also become more and more vivid and real. That is why I say writing poetry is a result of a prior and long drawn-out mental process, a process which has taken form across different times, picking up its elements along the way. The spontaneity that emerges in a piece of poetry is not only due to practicing meter and fine-tuning linguistic competence, but due to the richness of prior mental preparation. That is why personal integrity has more to do with the mental-prelude of poetry. If this mental-prefacing is both subjective and objective, meaning that it has been prepared with a life-oriented view combining both, then what to say of that poet! Such a mental-preparation always enriches. At this level the key question is that of vision. If the vision of the poet-of-humanity is one with the aims of the people of the world, that is when the knowledge-base of the feelings of a poet is extensive, comprehensive and up-to-date, then in that case the vision of that poet will itself create an ecosystem within his inner-self. A poetic mental-background will be formed. True poetry is not possible in absence of such mental preparation and cultivated disposition or inner-ecosystem. Truth of the matter is that poetic-praxis or art-praxis is not confined to the moments lasting the process of poetic-creation or art-making. A major part of seeking poetry or seeking art takes place much outside the moments of poetic-creation. That is why it is essential for an artist that he develops the knowledge-base as extensively as possible, can envision knowledge-dreams, and pour out feelings nurtured on the basis of these dreams. If the editing-revising of mental responses is caused by these dreams, tout court, then without an iota of doubt it is virtuous and for the good. Mind and heart will submit themselves to editing and revision as per that knowledge, and this process will continue unceasingly throughout a poet’s experiential lifetime.

“At the time when poetic-creation proceeds as a poetic-process, if revising-editing continues in an artificially-administered way, then the accusation-charge of acting-putting up a pretense on a poet will prove true. But, if the life-dream developed on the foundation of knowledge-base spontaneously and implicitly keeps sculpting the mental responses, through editing-modifying them, then undoubtedly it will come across as an absolutely innate feature of poetic creation.”  

Yashrāj intervened, “So personal integrity resides in what? In expanding more and more the knowledge-base, making it exceedingly comprehensive, and in nurturing life-dreams on its basis, to shape and direct mental responses in accordance with them, which means personal integrity will be aimed and reflected in modifying-editing one’s own inner-self. You too are right. Poetic praxis mostly takes place outside the exact playing field of poetic-creation. Yes, this is absolutely right.”

He looked at me and smiled. There was a peculiar satisfaction in his grin. Right you are that he is unemployed. He is poor. An outcast too. He has no respect in society. But he is also free of any resentment. Isn’t he like Socrates? My mother had once told me that God impersonates beggars, wanders around like cripples and silently tests everyone. I do not believe in God, but in man I do. I recalled in the meanwhile that knowledge-base must be defined. I asked Yashrāj, “do you mean anything more than scientific knowledge when you say knowledge-base or not?” 

He broke into a chuckle, and said, “The understanding of life-world, to be broadened, to be made precise, to assimilate the level of knowledge that is attained in the contemporary world, and to move beyond it, is absolutely necessary. Feelings get activated in the field which is actually charged with the intensity of knowledge. Feelings go only as far as the bounds achieved by knowledge, and not beyond them. That is why it is essential that the knowledge-basis of our life is extensive and developed. Knowledge is also a type of experience; either ours or someone else’s. It gives rise to conclusions; it enables the development of life’s conscience. The conscience gives rise to dreams. These dreams are of utmost importance. These are life-dreams; both spiritual and material.

I asked, “What is meant by material here?”

He said, “We tend to use a unique vocabulary in such instances. But, we should have a grasp on the vocabulary of the domain of life we are talking about. Isn’t it absolutely necessary for the writer to witness the upsurge of the people-of-the-world, and to become aware of the forces oppressing society, and to develop an active empathy towards forces of resistance? Aren’t these things included in the growth of the knowledge-base itself? Isn’t it?”

I only said this much, “don’t you know about me! I’ve held this perspective since long, and have been courting troubles on account of the same.”

At that moment we looked into each other’s eyes and it dawned on us that we are really-truly friends.  

***