English

Project Work

Made by: Anshul Yadav

Roll No.: 11206
Class: XI-B
Biographical
Details Of Indian
writers

Arundhati Roy

R.K. Narayan
 Arundhati Roy
Suzanna Arundhati Roy (born 24 November 1959) is
an Indian author who is best known for her novel The God
of Small Things(1997), which won the Man Booker Prize for
Fiction in 1997. This novel became the biggest-selling
book by a nonexpatriate Indian author. She is also
a political activist involved in human
rights and environmental causes.

Arundhati Roy, full name Suzanna Arundhati

Roy (born Nov. 24, 1961, Shillong,
Meghalaya, India), Indian author, actress, and political
activist who was best known for the award-
winning novel The God of Small Things (1997) and for
her involvement in environmental and human rights
causes.
Roys father was a Bengali tea planter, and her mother
was a Christian of Syrian descent who challenged
Indias inheritance laws by successfully suing for the
right of Christian women to receive an equal share of
their fathers estates. Though trained as an architect,
Roy had little interest in design; she dreamed instead of
a writing career. After a series of odd jobs, including
artist and aerobics instructor, she wrote and costarred in
the film In Which Annie Gives It to Those Ones (1989)
and later penned scripts for the film Electric
Moon (1992) and several television dramas.
The films earned Roy a devoted following, but her
literary career was interrupted by controversy. In 1995
she wrote two newspaper articles claiming that Shekhar
Kapurs film Bandit Queen exploited Phoolan Devi, one
of Indias most wanted criminals in the early 1980s and
a heroine of the oppressed. The columns caused an
uproar, including a court case, and Roy retreated from
the public and returned to the novel she had begun to
write.
In 1997 Roy published her debut novel, The God of
Small Things to wide acclaim. The semiautobiographical
work departed from the conventional plots and light
prose that had been typical among best-sellers.
Composed in a lyrical language about South Asian
themes and characters in a narrative that wandered
through time, Roys novel became the biggest-selling
book by a nonexpatriate Indian author and won the
1998 Man Booker Prize for Fiction.
Roys subsequent literary output consisted mainly of
politically oriented nonfiction. She published a collection
of essays, The Algebra of Infinite Justice (2002), and
several books, including Power Politics(2001), War
Talk (2003), and Public Power in the Age of
Empire (2004). In recognition of her outspoken
advocacy of human rights, Roy was awarded the
Lannan Cultural Freedom Award in 2002, the Sydney
Peace Prize in 2004, and the Sahitya Akademi Award
from the Indian Academy of Letters in 2006.
In addition to her literary work, Roy was active in various
environmental and human rights causes. She led efforts
to prevent the construction of dams in Narmada, and her
work was chronicled in the documentary DAM/AGE
(2002). Roy later drew criticism for her vocal support
of Maoist-supported Naxalite insurgency groups.

Early life
Arundhati Roy was born in Shillong, Meghalaya, India, to Rajib
Roy, a Bengali Hindu tea plantation manager
from Calcutta and Mary Roy, a Malayali Syrian
Christian women's rights activist from Kerala. When she was
two, her parents divorced and she returned with her mother and
brother to Kerala. For a time, the family lived with Roy's
maternal grandfather in Ooty, Tamil Nadu. When she was 5,
the family moved back to Kerala, where her mother started a
school.
Roy attended school at Corpus Christi, Kottayam, followed by
the Lawrence School, Lovedale, in Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu. She
then studied architecture at the School of Planning and
Architecture, Delhi, where she met architect Gerard da Cunha.
The two lived together in Delhi, and then Goa, before they
broke up.

Personal life
Roy returned to Delhi, where she obtained a position with
the National Institute of Urban Affairs. In 1984 she met
independent filmmaker Pradip Krishen, who offered her a role
as a goatherd in his award-winning movie Massey Sahib. The
two later married. They collaborated on a television series on
India's independence movement and on two
films,Annie and Electric Moon. Disenchanted with the film
world, Roy worked various jobs, including running aerobics
classes. Roy and Krishen eventually split up. She became
financially secure by the success of her novel The God of Small
Things, published in 1997.
Roy is a cousin of prominent media personality Prannoy Roy,
the head of the leading Indian TV media group NDTV.] She
lives in Delhi.
 Arundhati Roy

Arundhati Roy in 2013

Born Suzanna Arundhati Roy

24 November 1959 (age 55)
Shillong, Assam (present-dayMeghalaya), India

Occupation Writer, essayist, activist

Nationality Indian

Period 1997present

Notable works The God of Small Things

Notable awards Man Booker Prize (1997)

Sydney Peace Prize (2004)

Signature
Career
Early career: screenplays
Early in her career, Roy worked for television and movies. She wrote
the screenplays for In Which Annie Gives It Those Ones (1989), a movie
based on her experiences as a student of architecture, in which she also
appeared as a performer, and Electric Moon (1992), both directed by her
then husband Pradip Krishen. Roy won the National Film Award for Best
Screenplay in 1988 for In Which Annie Gives It Those Ones. She
attracted attention in 1994, when she criticised Shekhar Kapur's
film Bandit Queen, based on the life of Phoolan Devi. In her film review
entitled, "The Great Indian Rape Trick", she questioned the right to
"restage the rape of a living woman without her permission", and
charged Kapur with exploiting Devi and misrepresenting both her life and
its meaning.

The God of Small Things

Roy began writing her first novel, The God of Small Things, in 1992,
completing it in 1996. The book is semi-autobiographical and a major
part captures her childhood experiences in Aymanam.
The publication of The God of Small Things catapulted Roy to
international fame. It received the 1997 Booker Prize for Fiction and was
listed as one of the New York TimesNotable Books of the Year for 1997.
It reached fourth position on the New York Times Bestsellers list for
Independent Fiction. From the beginning, the book was also a
commercial success: Roy received half a million pounds as an
advance; It was published in May, and the book had been sold to
eighteen countries by the end of June.
The God of Small Things received stellar reviews in major American
newspapers such as The New York Times (a "dazzling first
novel," "extraordinary", "at once so morally strenuous and so
imaginatively supple" ) and the Los Angeles Times ("a novel of
poignancy and considerable sweep" ), and in Canadian publications
such as the Toronto Star ("a lush, magical novel" ). By the end of the
year, it had become one of the five best books of 1997 by TIME. Critical
response in the United Kingdom was less positive, and that the novel
was awarded the Booker Prize caused controversy; Carmen Callil, a
1996 Booker Prize judge, called the novel "execrable", and The
Guardian called the contest "profoundly depressing". In India, the book
was criticised especially for its unrestrained description
of sexuality by E. K. Nayanar, then Chief Minister of Roy's home state
Kerala, where she had to answer charges of obscenity.

Later career
Since the success of her novel, Roy has written a television
serial, The Banyan Tree, and the documentary
DAM/AGE: A Film with Arundhati Roy (2002).
In early 2007, Roy stated that she was working on a second
novel.

Arundhati Roy, Man Booker Prize winner

She contributed to We Are One: A Celebration of Tribal
Peoples, a book released in 2009 that explores the culture of
peoples around the world, portraying their diversity and the
threats to their existence. The royalties from the sale of this
book go to the indigenous rights organisation Survival
International.
She has written numerous essays on contemporary politics and
culture. They have been collected by Penguin India in a five-
volume set.

Advocacy and
controversy
Since publishing The God of Small Things in 1997, Roy has
spent most of her time on political activism and nonfiction (like
collections of essays about social causes). She is a
spokesperson of the anti-globalization/alter-
globalization movement and a vehement critic of neo-
imperialism and U.S. foreign policy. She opposes India's
policies towards nuclear weapons as well
as industrialization and economic growth (which she describes
as "encrypted with genocidal potential" in Listening to
Grasshoppers: Field Notes on Democracy).[28]

Support for Kashmiri separatism

In an August 2008 interview with the Times of India, Arundhati
Roy expressed her support for the independence of
Kashmir from India after the massive demonstrations in 2008 in
favour of independence took placesome 500,000 separatists
rallied in Srinagar in the Kashmir part of Jammu and
Kashmir state of India for independence on 18 August 2008,
following the Amarnath land transfer controversy.[29] According
to her, the rallies were a sign that Kashmiris desire secession
from India, and not union with India.[30] She was criticised by
the Indian National Congress (INC) and Bharatiya Janata
Party (BJP) for her remarks.[31][32]
AICC member and senior Congress party leader Satya Prakash
Malaviya asked Roy to withdraw her "irresponsible" statement
saying it was "contrary to historical facts".[32]
"It would do better to brush up her knowledge of history and
know that the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir had
acceded to the Union of India after its erstwhile ruler Maharaja
Hari Singh duly signed the Instrument of Accession on October
26, 1947. And the state, consequently has become as much an
integral part of India as all the other erstwhile princely states
have."[32]

Sardar Sarovar Project

Roy has campaigned along with activist Medha Patkar against
the Narmada dam project, saying that the dam will displace half
a million people, with little or no compensation, and will not
provide the projected irrigation, drinking water, and other
benefits.[33] Roy donated her Booker prize money as well as
royalties from her books on the project to theNarmada Bachao
Andolan. Roy also appears in Franny Armstrong's Drowned
Out, a 2002 documentary about the project.[34] Roy's opposition
to the Narmada Dam project was criticised as "maligning
Gujarat" by Congress and BJP leaders in Gujarat.[35]
In 2002, Roy responded to a contempt notice issued against
her by the Indian Supreme Court with an affidavit saying the
court's decision to initiate the contempt proceedings based on
an unsubstantiated and flawed petition, while refusing to inquire
into allegations of corruption in military contracting
deals pleading an overload of cases, indicated a "disquieting
inclination" by the court to silence criticism and dissent using
the power of contempt.[36] The court found Roy's statement,
which she refused to disavow or apologise for, constituted
criminal contempt and sentenced her to a "symbolic" one day's
imprisonment and fined Roy Rs. 2500.[37] Roy served the jail
sentence for a single day and opted to pay the fine rather than
serve an additional three months' imprisonment for default.[38]
Environmental historian Ramachandra Guha has been critical
of Roy's Narmada dam activism. While acknowledging her
"courage and commitment" to the cause, Guha writes that her
advocacy is hyperbolic and self-indulgent,[39] "Ms. Roy's
tendency to exaggerate and simplify, her Manichaean view of
the world, and her shrill hectoring tone, have given a bad name
to environmental analysis".[40] He faulted Roy's criticism of
Supreme Court judges who were hearing a petition brought by
the Narmada Bachao Andolan as careless and irresponsible.
Roy counters that her writing is intentional in its passionate,
hysterical tone: "I am hysterical. I'm screaming from the bloody
rooftops. And he and his smug little club are going 'Shhhh...
you'll wake the neighbours!' I want to wake the neighbours,
that's my whole point. I want everybody to open their eyes".[41]
Gail Omvedt and Roy have had fierce yet constructive
discussions, in open letters, on Roy's strategy for the Narmada
Dam movement. The activists disagree on whether to demand
stopping the dam building altogether (Roy) or searching for
intermediate alternatives (Omvedt).[42]
United States foreign policy, the War in
Afghanistan

Arundhati Roy delivering a talk "Can We Leave the Bauxite in the

Mountain? Field Notes on Democracy" at theHarvard Kennedy
School on April 1, 2010.[43]
In a 2001 opinion piece in the British newspaper The Guardian,
Arundhati Roy responded to the U.S. military invasion of
Afghanistan, finding fault with the argument that this war would
be a retaliation for the September 11 attacks: "The bombing of
Afghanistan is not revenge for New York and Washington. It is
yet another act of terror against the people of the world."
According to her, U.S. PresidentGeorge W. Bush and British
Prime Minister Tony Blair were guilty of a Big Brother kind
of doublethink: "When he announced the air strikes, President
George Bush said: 'We're a peaceful nation.' America's
favourite ambassador, Tony Blair, (who also holds the portfolio
of prime minister of the UK), echoed him: 'We're a peaceful
people.' So now we know. Pigs are horses. Girls are boys. War
is peace."
She disputes U.S. claims of being a peaceful and freedom-
loving nation, listing China and nineteen 3rd World "countries
that America has been at war withand bombedsince
the second world war", as well as previous U.S. support for the
Taliban movement and support for the Northern
Alliance (whose "track record is not very different from the
Taliban's"). She does not spare the Taliban: "Now, as adults
and rulers, the Taliban beat, stone, rape and brutalise women,
they don't seem to know what else to do with them."
In the final analysis, Roy sees American-style capitalism as the
culprit: "In America, the arms industry, the oil industry,
the major media networks, and, indeed, U.S. foreign policy, are
all controlled by the same business combines". She puts the
attacks on the World Trade Center and on Afghanistan on the
same moral level, that of terrorism, and mourns the
impossibility of imagining beauty after 2001: "Will it be possible
ever again to watch the slow, amazed blink of a
newborn gecko in the sun, or whisper back to the marmot who
has just whispered in your earwithout thinking of the World
Trade Centre and Afghanistan?"[44]
In May 2003 she delivered a speech entitled "Instant-Mix
Imperial Democracy (Buy One, Get One Free)" at the Riverside
Church in New York City, in which she described the United
States as a global empire that reserves the right to bomb any of
its subjects at any time, deriving its legitimacy directly from
God. The speech was an indictment of the U.S. actions relating
to the Iraq War.[45][46] In June 2005 she took part in the World
Tribunal on Iraq, and in March 2006, Roy criticised U.S.
President George W. Bush's visit to India, calling him a "war
criminal".[47]
India's nuclear weaponisation
In response to India's testing of nuclear
weapons in Pokhran, Rajasthan, Roy wrote The End of
Imagination (1998), a critique of the Indian
government's nuclear policies. It was published in her
collection The Cost of Living (1999), in which she also
crusaded against India's massive hydroelectric dam projects in
the central and western states ofMaharashtra, Madhya
Pradesh, and Gujarat.
Criticism of Israel
In August 2006, Roy, along with Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn,
and others, signed a letter in The Guardian called the 2006
Lebanon War a "war crime" and accused Israel of "state
terror".[48] In 2007, Roy was one of more than 100 artists and
writers who signed an open letter initiated by Queers
Undermining Israeli Terrorism and the South West Asian, North
African Bay Area Queers and calling on the San Francisco
International LGBT Film Festival "to honor calls for
an international boycott of Israeli political and cultural
institutions, by discontinuing Israeli consulate sponsorship of
the LGBT film festival and not cosponsoring events with the
Israeli consulate".[49]

2001 Indian Parliament attack

Roy has raised questions about the investigation into the 2001
Indian Parliament attack and the trial of the accused. She had
called for the death sentence of Mohammad Afzal to be stayed
while a parliamentary enquiry into these questions are
conducted and denounced press coverage of the
trial.[50] The BJP spokesperson Prakash Javadekar criticised
Roy for calling convicted terrorist Mohammad Afzal a "prisoner-
of-war" and called Arundhati a "prisoner of her own dogma".[51]
He further said,
"No country has ever witnessed such kind of defense of a
terrorist. They have gone beyond an academic discussion on
capital punishment."[51]
Afzal was hanged in 2013.[52]
The Muthanga incident
In 2003, the Adivasi Gothra Maha Sabha, a social movement
for Adivasi land rights in Kerala, organised a major land
occupation of a piece of land of a former Eucalyptus plantation
in the Muthanga Wildlife Reserve, on the border of Kerala and
Karnataka. After 48 days, a police force was sent into the area
to evict the occupantsone participant of the movement and a
policeman were killed, and the leaders of the movement were
arrested. Arundhati Roy travelled to the area, visited the
movement's leaders in jail, and wrote an open letter to the
then Chief Minister of Kerala, A. K. Antony, saying "You have
blood on your hands."[53]

Comments on 2008 Mumbai attacks

In an opinion piece for The Guardian (13 December 2008), Roy
argued that the November 2008 Mumbai attacks cannot be
seen in isolation, but must be understood in the context of
wider issues in the region's history and society such as
widespread poverty, the Partition of India ("Britain's final,
parting kick to us"), the atrocities committed during the2002
Gujarat violence, and the ongoing Kashmir conflict. Despite this
call for context, Roy states clearly in the article that she
believes "nothing can justify terrorism" and calls terrorism "a
heartless ideology". Roy warns against war with Pakistan,
arguing that it is hard to "pin down the provenance of a terrorist
strike and isolate it within the borders of a single nation state",
and that war could lead to the "descent of the whole region into
chaos".[54] Her remarks were strongly criticised by Salman
Rushdie and others, who condemned her for linking
the Mumbai attacks with Kashmir and economic injustice
against Muslims in India;[55] Rushdie specifically criticised Roy
for attacking the iconic status of the Taj Mahal Palace &
Tower.[56] Indian writer Tavleen Singh called Roy's comments
"the latest of her series of hysterical diatribes against India and
all things Indian".[57]
Criticism of Sri Lankan government
In an opinion piece, once again in The Guardian (1 April 2009),
Roy made a plea for international attention to what she called a
possible government-sponsored genocide ofTamils in Sri
Lanka. She cited reports of camps into which Tamils were
being herded as part of what she described as "a brazen,
openly racist war".[58] She also mentioned that the "Government
of Sri Lanka is on the verge of committing what could end up
being genocide"[58] and described the Sri Lankan IDP
camps where Tamil civilians are being held as concentration
camps.[59] Ruvani Freeman, a Sri Lankan writer called Roy's
remarks "ill-informed and hypocritical" and criticised her for
"whitewashing the atrocities of theLTTE".[60] Roy has said of
such accusations: "I cannot admire those whose vision can only
accommodate justice for their own and not for everybody.
However I do believe that the LTTE and its fetish for violence
was cultured in the crucible of monstrous, racist, injustice that
the Sri Lankan government and to a great extent Sinhala
society visited on the Tamil people for decades".[61]

Views on the Naxalites

Roy has criticised the Indian government's armed
actions against the Naxalite-Maoist insurgency in India, calling
it "war on the poorest people in the country". According to her,
the Government has "abdicated its responsibility to the
people"[62] and launched the offensive against Naxals to aid the
corporations with whom it has signed Memoranda of
Understanding.[63] While she has received support from various
quarters for her views,[64] Roy's description of the Maoists as
"Gandhians" raised a controversy.[65][66] In other statements, she
has described Naxalites as "patriot of a kind"[67] who are
"fighting to implement the Constitution, (while) the government
is vandalising it".[62]

Sedition charges
In November 2010, Roy, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, and five
others were brought up on charges of sedition by the Delhi
Police. The filing of the First Information Report came following
a directive from a local court on a petition filed by Sushil Pandit
who alleged that Geelani and Roy made anti-India speeches at
a conference on "Azadi-the Only Way" on 21 October 2010. In
the words of Arundhati Roy "Kashmir has never been an
integral part of India. It is a historical fact. Even the Indian
government has accepted this".[68][69][70][71] A Delhi city court
directed the police to respond to the demand for a criminal case
after the central government declined to charge Roy, saying
that the charges were inappropriate.[72][73]

Criticism of Anna Hazare

On 21 August 2011, at the height of Anna Hazare's anti-
corruption campaign, Arundhati Roy criticised Hazare and his
movement in an opinion piece published in The Hindu.[74] In the
course of the article, she questioned Hazare's secular
credentials, pointing out the campaign's corporate backing, its
suspicious timing, Hazare's silence on private-sector corruption
and on other critical issues of the day, expressing her fear that
the Lokpal will only end up creating "two oligarchies, instead of
just one". She states that while "his means maybe Gandhian,
his demands are certainly not", and alleges that by "demonising
only the Government they" are preparing to call for
"more privatisation, more access topublic infrastructure and
India's natural resources", satirically adding that it "may not be
long before Corporate Corruption is made legal and renamed
a Lobbying Fee". Roy also accuses the electronic media of
blowing the campaign out of proportion. In an interview
with Kindle Magazine, Roy pointed out the role of media hype
and target audience in determining how well hunger
strikes work as a tool of political mobilization by noting the
disparity in the attention Hazares fast has received in contrast
to the decade-long fast ofIrom Sharmila to demand the
repealing of a law that allows non-commissioned officers to kill
on suspiciona law that has led to so much suffering.[75] Roy's
comparison of theJan Lokpal Bill with the Maoists: claiming
both sought "the overthrow of the Indian State" met with
resentment from members of Team Anna. Medha Patkar
reacted sharply calling Roy's comments "highly misplaced" and
chose to emphasise the "peaceful, non-violent" nature of the
movement.[76] Roy has also stated that an Anti-corruption
campaign is a catch-all campaign. It includes everybody from
the extreme left to the extreme right and also the extremely
corrupt. No ones going to say they are for corruption after
allIm not against a strong anti-corruption bill, but corruption
is just a manifestation of a problem, not the problem itself.[75]

Views on Narendra Modi

In 2013, Roy described Narendra Modi's nomination for
the prime ministerial candidate as a "tragedy". She further said
that the business houses are also supporting his candidature
because he is the "most militaristic and aggressive"
candidate.[77]

Awards
Arundhati Roy was awarded the 1997 Booker Prize for her
novel The God of Small Things. The award carried a prize
of about US$30,000[78] and a citation that noted, "The book
keeps all the promises that it makes".[79] Prior to this, she
won the National Film Award for Best Screenplay in 1989,
for the screenplay of In Which Annie Gives It Those Ones,
in which she captured the anguish among the students
prevailing in professional institutions.[9]

In 2002, she won the Lannan Foundation's Cultural

Freedom Award for her work "about civil societies that are
adversely affected by the world's most powerful
governments and corporations", in order "to celebrate her
life and her ongoing work in the struggle for freedom,
justice and cultural diversity".

In 2003, she was awarded "special recognition" as a

Woman of Peace at the Global Exchange Human Rights
 Awards in San Francisco with Bianca Jagger, Barbara
Lee, and Kathy Kelly.

Roy was awarded the Sydney Peace Prize in May 2004

for her work in social campaigns and her advocacy of non-
violence.

In January 2006, she was awarded the Sahitya Akademi

Award, a national award from India's Academy of Letters,
for her collection of essays on contemporary issues, The
Algebra of Infinite Justice, but she declined to accept it "in
protest against the Indian Government toeing the US line
by 'violently and ruthlessly pursuing policies of
brutalisation of industrial workers,
increasing militarisation and economic neo-liberalisation'".

In November 2011, she was awarded the Norman Mailer

Prize for Distinguished Writing.

Roy was featured in the 2014 list of Time 100, the 100
most influential people in the world.
R.K. Narayan

R.K. Narayan is one of the most famous and widely read Indian
novelists. His stories were grounded in a compassionate humanism and
celebrated the humour and energy of ordinary life.

R.K. Narayan was born on October 10, 1906 in Madras. His father was a
provincial head master. R.K. Narayan spent his early childhood with his
maternal grandmother, Parvathi in Madras and used to spend only a few
weeks each summer visiting his parents and siblings. R.K. Narayan
studied for eight years at Lutheran Mission School close to his
grandmother's house in Madras, also for a short time at the CRC High
School. When his father was appointed headmaster of the Maharaja's
High School in Mysore, R.K. Narayan moved back in with his parents.
He obtained his bachelor's degree from the University of Mysore.
R.K. Narayan began his writing career with Swami and Friends in 1935.
Most of his work including Swami and friends is set in the fictional town
of Malgudi which captures everything Indian while having a unique
identity of its own. R.K. Narayan's writing style was marked by simplicity
and subtle humour. He told stories of ordinary people trying to live their
simple lives in a changing world.

R.K. Narayan's famous works include The Bachelor of Arts (1937), The
Dark Room (1938), The English Teacher (1945), The Financial Expert
(1952), The Guide (1958), The Man-Eater of Malgudi (1961), The
Vendor of Sweets (1967), Malgudi Days (1982), and The Grandmother's
Tale (1993).

R.K. Narayan won numerous awards and honors for his works. These
include: Sahitya Akademi Award for The Guide in 1958; Padma
Bhushan in 1964; and AC Benson Medal by the Royal Society of
Literature in 1980; R.K. Narayan was elected an honorary member of
the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters in 1982. He was
nominated to the Rajya Sabha in 1989. Besides, he was also conferred
honorary doctorates by the University of Mysore, Delhi University and
the University of Leeds.

R. K. Narayan (10 October 1906 13 May 2001), full name Rasipuram

Krishnaswami Iyer Narayanaswami, was an Indian writer, best known
for his works set in the fictional South Indian town of Malgudi. He is one
of three leading figures of early Indian literature in
English (alongside Mulk Raj Anand and Raja Rao), and is credited with
bringing the genre to the rest of the world.
Narayan broke through with the help of his mentor and friend, Graham
Greene, who was instrumental in getting publishers for Narayans first
four books, including the semi-autobiographical trilogy of Swami and
Friends, The Bachelor of Arts and The English Teacher. Narayans
works also include The Financial Expert, hailed as one of the most
original works of 1951, and Sahitya Akademi Award winner The Guide,
which was adapted for film and for Broadway.
The setting for most of Narayan's stories is the fictional town of Malgudi,
first introduced in Swami and Friends. His narratives highlight social
context and provide a feel for his characters through everyday life. He
has been compared to William Faulkner, who also created a fictional
town that stood for reality, brought out the humour and energy of
ordinary life, and displayed compassionatehumanism in his writing.
Narayan's short story writing style has been compared to that of Guy de
Maupassant, as they both have an ability to compress the narrative
without losing out on elements of the story. Narayan has also come in
for criticism for being too simple in his prose and diction.
In a writing career that spanned over sixty years, Narayan received
many awards and honours. These include the AC Benson Medalfrom
the Royal Society of Literature, the Padma Bhushan and the Padma
Vibhushan, India's third and second highest civilian awards.[1] He was
also nominated to the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of India's
parliament.
 R. K. Narayan

Born Rasipuram Krishnaswami Iyer

Narayanaswami
10 October 1906
Madras, British India

Died 13 May 2001 (aged 94)

Chennai

Occupation Writer

Nationality Indian

Genre Fiction, mythology and non-fiction

Notable Padma Vibhushan, Sahitya Akademi

awards Award, AC Benson Medal

Relatives R. K. Laxman (brother)

Early days[edit]
R. K. Narayan was born in Madras (now
Chennai), British India.[2] His father was a school
headmaster, and Narayan did some of his studies
at his father's school. As his father's job entailed
frequent transfers, Narayan spent part of his
childhood under the care of his maternal
grandmother, Parvati.[3] During this time his best
friends and playmates were a peacock and a
mischievous monkey.[4][5][6]
His grandmother gave him the nickname
of Kunjappa, a name that stuck to him in family
circles.[7] She taught him arithmetic, mythology,
classical Indian music and Sanskrit.[8]According to
his youngest brother R. K. Laxman, the family
mostly conversed in English, and grammatical
errors on the part of Narayan and his siblings were
frowned upon.[9]While living with his grandmother,
Narayan studied at a succession of schools in
Madras, including the Lutheran Mission School
in Purasawalkam,[10] C.R.C. High School, and
theChristian College High School.[11] Narayan was
an avid reader, and his early literary diet
included Dickens, Wodehouse, Arthur Conan
Doyle and Thomas Hardy.[12] When he was twelve
years old, Narayan participated in a pro-
independence march, for which he was
reprimanded by his uncle; the family was apolitical
and considered all governments wicked.[13]
Narayan moved to Mysore to live with his family when
his father was transferred to the Maharajah's College
High School. The well-stocked library at the school, as
well as his father's own, fed his reading habit, and he
started writing as well. After completing high school,
Narayan failed the university entrance examination and
spent a year at home reading and writing; he
subsequently passed the examination in 1926 and
joined Maharaja College of Mysore. It took Narayan four
years to obtain his bachelor's degree, a year longer than
usual. After being persuaded by a friend that taking a
master's degree (M.A.) would kill his interest in
literature, he briefly held a job as a school teacher;
however, he quit in protest when the headmaster of the
school asked him to substitute for the physical training
master.[10] The experience made Narayan realise that the
only career for him was in writing, and he decided to
stay at home and write novels.[14][15] His first published
work was a book review of Development of Maritime
Laws of 17th-Century England.[16]Subsequently, he
started writing the occasional local interest story for
English newspapers and magazines. Although the
writing did not pay much (his income for the first year
was nine rupees and twelve annas), he had a regular life
and few needs, and his family and friends respected and
supported his unorthodox choice of career.[17] In 1930,
Narayan wrote his first novel, Swami and Friends,[16] an
effort ridiculed by his uncle[18] and rejected by a string of
publishers.[9] With this book, Narayan created Malgudi, a
town that creatively reproduced the social sphere of the
country; while it ignored the limits imposed by colonial
rule, it also grew with the various socio-political changes
of British and post-independence India.[19]
Turning point[edit]
While vacationing at his sister's house in Coimbatore, in
1933, Narayan met and fell in love with Rajam, a 15-
year-old girl who lived nearby. Despite many astrological
and financial obstacles, Narayan managed to gain
permission from the girl's father and married
her.[20] Following his marriage, Narayan became a
reporter for a Madras-based paper called The Justice,
dedicated to the rights of non-Brahmins. The publishers
were thrilled to have a Brahmin Iyer in Narayan
espousing their cause. The job brought him in contact
with a wide variety of people and issues.[21] Earlier,
Narayan had sent the manuscript of Swami and
Friends to a friend at Oxford, and about this time, the
friend showed the manuscript to Graham Greene.
Greene recommended the book to his publisher, and it
was finally published in 1935.[4] Greene also counseled
Narayan on shortening his name to become more
familiar to the English-speaking audience.[22] The book
was semi-autobiographical and built upon many
incidents from his own childhood.[23] Reviews were
favourable but sales were few. Narayan's next
novel The Bachelor of Arts (1937), was inspired in part
by his experiences at college,[24] and dealt with the theme
of a rebellious adolescent transitioning to a rather well-
adjusted adult;[25] it was published by a different
publisher, again at the recommendation of Greene. His
third novel, The Dark Room(1938) was about domestic
disharmony,[26] showcasing the man as the oppressor
and the woman as the victim within a marriage, and was
published by yet another publisher; this book also
received good reviews. In 1937, Narayan's father died,
and Narayan was forced to accept a commission from
the government of Mysore as he was not making any
money.[27]
In his first three books, Narayan highlights the problems
with certain socially accepted practices. The first book
has Narayan focusing on the plight of students,
punishments of caning in the classroom, and the
associated shame. The concept of horoscope-matching
in Hindu marriages and the emotional toll it levies on the
bride and groom is covered in the second book. In the
third book, Narayan addresses the concept of a wife
putting up with her husband's antics and attitudes.[28]
Rajam died of typhoid in 1939.[29] Her death affected
Narayan deeply and he remained depressed for a long
time; he was also concerned for their daughter Hema,
who was only three years old. The bereavement brought
about a significant change in his life and was the
inspiration behind his next novel, The English
Teacher.[16] This book, like his first two books, is
autobiographical, but more so, and completes an
unintentional thematic trilogy following Swami and
Friends and The Bachelor of Arts.[30][31] In subsequent
interviews, Narayan acknowledges that The English
Teacher was almost entirely an autobiography, albeit
with different names for the characters and the change
of setting in Malgudi; he also explains that the emotions
detailed in the book reflected his own at the time of
Rajam's death.[32]
Bolstered by some of his successes, in 1940 Narayan tried his
hand at a journal, Indian Thought.[33] With the help of his uncle,
a car salesman, Narayan managed to get more than a
thousand subscribers in Madras city alone. However, the
venture did not last long due to Narayan's inability to manage it,
and it ceased publication within a year.[34] His first collection of
short stories, Malgudi Days, was published in November 1942,
followed by The English Teacher in 1945. In between, being cut
off from England due to the war, Narayan started his own
publishing company, naming it (again) Indian Thought
Publications; the publishing company was a success and is still
active, now managed by his granddaughter.[14] Soon, with a
devoted readership stretching from New York to Moscow,
Narayan's books started selling well and in 1948 he started
building his own house on the outskirts of Mysore; the house
was completed in 1953.[35]
The busy years[edit]
After The English Teacher, Narayan's writings took a more
imaginative and creative external style compared to the semi-
autobiographical tone of the earlier novels. His next effort, Mr.
Sampath, was the first book exhibiting this modified approach.
However, it still draws from some of his own experiences,
particularly the aspect of starting his own journal; he also
makes a marked movement away from his earlier novels by
intermixing biographical events.[36] Soon after, he published The
Financial Expert, considered to be his masterpiece and hailed
as one of the most original works of fiction in 1951.[37][38] The
inspiration for the novel was a true story about a financial
genius, Margayya, related to him by his brother.[39] The next
novel, Waiting for the Mahatma, loosely based on a fictional
visit to Malgudi by Mahatma Gandhi, deals with the
protagonist's romantic feelings for a woman, when he attends
the discourses of the visiting Mahatma. The woman, named
Bharti, is a loose parody of Bharati, the personification of India
and the focus of Gandhi's discourses. While the novel includes
significant references to the Indian independence movement,
the focus is on the life of the ordinary individual, narrated with
Narayan's usual dose of irony.[40]
Lyle Blair of Michigan State University Press(Narayan's U.S. publisher),
Narayan and Anthony West of The New Yorker

In 1953, his works were published in the United States

for the first time, by Michigan State University Press,
who later (in 1958), relinquished the rights to Viking
Press.[41] While Narayan's writings often bring out the
anomalies in social structures and views, he was himself
a traditionalist; in February 1956, Narayan arranged his
daughter's wedding following all
orthodox Hindu rituals.[42] After the wedding, Narayan
began travelling occasionally, continuing to write at least
1500 words a day even while on the road.[35] The
Guide was written while he was visiting the United
States in 1956 on the Rockefeller Fellowship. While in
the U.S., Narayan maintained a daily journal that was to
later serve as the foundation for his book My Dateless
Diary.[43] Around this time, on a visit to England, Narayan
met his friend and mentor Graham Greene for the first
time.[29] On his return to India, The Guide was published;
the book is the most representative of Narayan's writing
skills and elements, ambivalent in expression, coupled
with a riddle-like conclusion.[44] The book won him
the Sahitya Akademi Award in 1958.[45]
Occasionally, Narayan was known to give form to his
thoughts by way of essays, some published in
newspapers and journals, others not. Next
Sunday (1960), was a collection of such conversational
essays, and his first work to be published as a
book.[46] Soon after that, My Dateless Diary, describing
experiences from his 1956 visit to the United States,
was published. Also included in this collection was an
essay about the writing of The Guide.[43][47]
Narayan's next novel, The Man-Eater of Malgudi, was
published in 1961. The book was reviewed as having a
narrative that is a classical art form of comedy, with
delicate control.[41] After the launch of this book, the
restless Narayan once again took to travelling, and
visited the U.S.[14] and Australia. He spent three weeks
in Adelaide, Sydney andMelbourne giving lectures on
Indian literature. The trip was funded by a fellowship
from the Australian Writers' Group.[48] By this time
Narayan had also achieved significant success, both
literary and financial. He had a large house in Mysore,
and wrote in a study with no fewer than eight windows;
he drove a new Mercedes-Benz, a luxury in India at that
time, to visit his daughter who had moved
to Coimbatore after her marriage. With his success, both
within India and abroad, Narayan started writing
columns for magazines and newspapers including The
Hindu and The Atlantic.[49]
In 1964, Narayan published his first mythological
work, Gods, Demons and Others, a collection of
rewritten and translated short stories from Hindu epics.
Like many of his other works, this book was illustrated
by his younger brother R. K. Laxman. The stories
included were a selective list, chosen on the basis of
powerful protagonists, so that the impact would be
lasting, irrespective of the reader's contextual
knowledge.[50] Once again, after the book launch,
Narayan took to travelling abroad. In an earlier essay,
he had written about the Americans wanting to
understand spirituality from him, and during this visit,
Swedish-American actress Greta Garbo accosted him
on the topic, despite his denial of any knowledge.[4]
Narayan's next published work was the 1967 novel, The
Vendor of Sweets. It was inspired in part by his
American visits and consists of extreme
characterizations of both the Indian and American
stereotypes, drawing on the many cultural differences.
However, while it displays his characteristic comedy and
narrative, the book was reviewed as lacking in
depth.[51] This year, Narayan travelled to England, where
he received the first of his honorary doctorates from
the University of Leeds.[52] The next few years were a
quiet period for him. He published his next book, a
collection of short stories, A Horse and Two Goats, in
1970.[53] Meanwhile, Narayan remembered a promise
made to his dying uncle in 1938, and started translating
the Kamba Ramayanam to English. The Ramayana was
published in 1973, after five years of work.[54] Almost
immediately after publishing The Ramayana, Narayan
started working on a condensed translation of the
Sanskrit epic, the Mahabharata. While he was
researching and writing the epic, he also published
another book, The Painter of Signs (1977). The Painter
of Signs is a bit longer than a novella and makes a
marked change from Narayan's other works, as he deals
with hitherto unaddressed subjects such as sex,
although the development of the protagonist's character
is very similar to his earlier creations. The
Mahabharata was published in 1978.
The later years[edit]
Narayan was commissioned by the government
of Karnataka to write a book to promote tourism in the
state. The work was published as part of a larger
government publication in the late 1970s.[56] He thought it
deserved better, and republished it as The Emerald
Route (Indian Thought Publications, 1980).[57] The book
contains his personal perspective on the local history
and heritage, but being bereft of his characters and
creations, it misses his enjoyable narrative.[47] The same
year, he was elected as an honorary member of
the American Academy of Arts and Letters and won
the AC Benson Medal from the Royal Society of
Literature.[58] Around the same time, Narayan's works
were translated to Chinese for the first time.[59]
In 1983, Narayan published his next novel, A Tiger for
Malgudi, about a tiger and its relationship with
humans.[60] His next novel, Talkative Man, published in
1986, was the tale of an aspiring journalist from
Malgudi.[61] During this time, he also published two
collections of short stories: Malgudi Days (1982), a
revised edition including the original book and some
other stories, and Under the Banyan Tree and Other
Stories, a new collection.[62] In 1987, he completed A
Writer's Nightmare, another collection of essays about
topics as diverse as the caste system, Nobel prize
winners, love, and monkeys. The collection included
essays he had written for newspapers and magazines
since 1958.[63][64]
Living alone in Mysore, Narayan developed an interest
in agriculture. He bought an acre of agricultural land and
tried his hand at farming.[65] He was also prone to walking
to the market every afternoon, not so much for buying
things, but to interact with the people. In a typical
afternoon stroll, he would stop every few steps to greet
and converse with shopkeepers and others, most likely
gathering material for his next book.[66]
In 1980, Narayan was nominated to the Rajya Sabha,
the upper house of the Indian Parliament, for his
contributions to literature.[67] During his entire six-year
term, he was focused on one issuethe plight of school
children, especially the heavy load of school books and
the negative effect of the system on a child's creativity,
which was something that he first highlighted in his
debut novel, Swami and Friends. His inaugural speech
was focused on this particular problem, and resulted in
the formation of a committee chaired by Prof. Yash Pal,
to recommend changes to the school educational
system.[68]
In 1990, he published his next novel, The World of
Nagaraj, also set in Malgudi. Narayan's age shows in
this work as he appears to skip narrative details that he
would have included if this were written earlier in his
career.[69] Soon after he finished the novel, Narayan fell ill
and moved to Madras to be close to his daughter's
family.[65] A few years after his move, in 1994, his
daughter died of cancer and his granddaughter
Bhuvaneswari (Minnie) started taking care of him in
addition to managing Indian Thought
Publications.[4][14]Narayan then published his final
book, Grandmother's Tale. The book is an
autobiographical novella, about his great-grandmother
who travelled far and wide to find her husband, who ran
away shortly after their marriage. The story was narrated
to him by his grandmother, when he was a child.[70]
During his final years, Narayan, ever fond of
conversation, would spend almost every evening with N.
Ram, the publisher of The Hindu, drinking coffee and
talking about various topics until well past
midnight.[71] Despite his fondness of meeting and talking
to people, he stopped giving interviews. The apathy
towards interviews was the result of an interview
with Time, after which Narayan had to spend a few days
in the hospital, as he was dragged around the city to
take photographs that were never used in the article.[33]
In May 2001, Narayan was hospitalised. A few hours
before he was to be put on a ventilator, he was planning
on writing his next novel, a story about a grandfather. As
he was always very selective about his choice of
notebooks, he asked N. Ram to get him one. However,
Narayan did not get better and never started the novel.
He died on 13 May 2001, in Chennai at the age of
94.[11][72]
Literary review[edit]
Writing style[edit]
Narayan's writing technique was unpretentious with a
natural element of humour about it.[73] It focused on
ordinary people, reminding the reader of next-door
neighbours, cousins and the like, thereby providing a
greater ability to relate to the topic.[74] Unlike his national
contemporaries, he was able to write about the
intricacies of Indian society without having to modify his
characteristic simplicity to conform to trends and
fashions in fiction writing.[75] He also employed the use of
nuanced dialogic prose with gentle Tamilovertones
based on the nature of his characters.[76] Critics have
considered Narayan to be the Indian Chekhov, due to
the similarities in their writings, the simplicity and the
gentle beauty and humour in tragic situations.[77] Greene
considered Narayan to be more similar to Chekhov than
any Indian writer.[2] Anthony West of The New
Yorker considered Narayan's writings to be of the
realism variety of Nikolai Gogol.[78]
According to Pulitzer Prize winner Jhumpa Lahiri,
Narayan's short stories have the same captivating
feeling as his novels, with most of them less than ten
pages long, and taking about as many minutes to read.
She adds that between the title sentence and the end,
Narayan provides the reader something novelists
struggle to achieve in hundreds more pages: a complete
insight to the lives of his characters. These
characteristics and abilities led Lahiri to classify him as
belonging to the pantheon of short-story geniuses that
include O. Henry, Frank O'Connor and Flannery
O'Connor. Lahiri also compares him to Guy de
Maupassant for their ability to compress the narrative
without losing the story, and the common themes of
middle-class life written with an unyielding and unpitying
vision.[12]
Critics have noted that Narayan's writings tend to be
more descriptive and less analytical; the objective style,
rooted in a detached spirit, providing for a more
authentic and realistic narration.[79] His attitude, coupled
with his perception of life, provided a unique ability to
fuse characters and actions,[80] and an ability to use
ordinary events to create a connection in the mind of the
reader.[81] A significant contributor to his writing style was
his creation of Malgudi, a stereotypical small town,
where the standard norms of superstition and tradition
apply.[82]
Narayan's writing style was often compared to that
of William Faulkner since both their works brought out
the humour and energy of ordinary life while displaying
compassionate humanism.[83] The similarities also
extended to their juxtaposing of the demands of society
against the confusions of individuality.[84] Although their
approach to subjects was similar, their methods were
different; Faulkner was rhetorical and illustrated his
points with immense prose while Narayan was very
simple and realistic, capturing the elements all the
same.[85]
Malgudi[edit]
Main article: Malgudi
Malgudi is a fictional, semi-urban town in southern India,
conjured by Narayan.[86] He created the town in
September 1930, on Vijayadashami, an auspicious day
to start new efforts and thus chosen for him by his
grandmother.[87] As he mentioned in a later interview to
his biographers Susan and N. Ram, in his mind, he first
saw a railway station, and slowly the
name Malgudi came to him.[88] The town was created
with an impeccable historical record, dating to
the Ramayana days when it was noted that Lord
Rama passed through; it was also said that
the Buddha visited the town during his travels.[89] While
Narayan never provided strict physical constraints for
the town, he allowed it to form shape with events in the
various stories, becoming a reference point for the
future.[90] Dr James M. Fennelly, a scholar of Narayan's
works, created a map of Malgudi based on the fictional
descriptors of the town from the many books and
stories.[12]
Malgudi evolved with the changing political landscape of
India. In the 1980s, when the nationalistic fervor in India
dictated the changing of British names of towns and
localities and removal of British landmarks, Malgudi's
mayor and city council removed the long-standing statue
of Frederick Lawley, one of Malgudi's early residents.
However, when the Historical Societies showed proof
that Lawley was strong in his support of the Indian
independence movement, the council was forced to
undo all their earlier actions.[91] A good comparison to
Malgudi, a place that Greene characterised as "more
familiar than Battersea or Euston Road", is
Faulkner's Yoknapatawpha County.[83] Also, like
Faulkner's, when one looks at Narayan's works, the
town gets a better definition through the many different
novels and stories.[92]
Critical reception[edit]
Narayan first broke through with the help of Graham
Greene who, upon reading Swaminathan and Tate, took
it upon himself to work as Narayan's agent for the book.
He was also instrumental in changing the title to the
more appropriate Swami and Friends, and in finding
publishers for Narayan's next few books. While
Narayan's early works were not commercial successes,
other authors of the time began to notice him. Somerset
Maugham, on a trip to Mysore in 1938, had asked to
meet Narayan, but not enough people had heard of him
to actually effect the meeting. Maugham subsequently
read Narayan's The Dark Room, and wrote to him
expressing his admiration.[93][94] Another contemporary
writer who took a liking to Narayan's early works was E.
M. Forster,[95] an author who shared his dry and
humorous narrative, so much so that Narayan was
labeled the "South Indian E. M. Forster" by
critics.[96] Despite his popularity with the reading public
and fellow writers, Narayan's work has not received the
same amount of critical exploration accorded to other
writers of his stature.[97]
Narayan's success in the United States came a little
later, when Michigan State University Press started
publishing his books. His first visit to the country was on
a fellowship from the Rockefeller Foundation, and he
lectured at various universities including Michigan State
University and the University of California, Berkeley.
Around this time, John Updikenoticed his work and
compared Narayan to Charles Dickens. In a review of
Narayan's works published in The New Yorker, Updike
called him a writer of a vanishing breedthe writer as a
citizen; one who identifies completely with his subjects
and with a belief in the significance of humanity.[98]
Having published many novels, essays and short
stories, Narayan is credited with bringing Indian writing
to the rest of the world. While he has been regarded as
one of India's greatest writers of the twentieth century,
critics have also described his writings with adjectives
such as charming, harmless and benign.[99] Narayan has
also come in for criticism from later writers, particularly
of Indian origin, who have classed his writings as having
a pedestrian style with a shallow vocabulary and a
narrow vision.[14] According to Shashi Tharoor, Narayan's
subjects are similar to those of Jane Austen as they both
deal with a very small section of society. However, he
adds that while Austen's prose was able to take those
subjects beyond ordinariness, Narayan's was not.[100] A
similar opinion is held by Shashi Deshpande who
characterizes Narayan's writings as pedestrian and
naive because of the simplicity of his language and
diction, combined with the lack of any complexity in the
emotions and behaviours of his characters.[101]
A general perception on Narayan was that he did not
involve himself or his writings with the politics or
problems of India, as mentioned by V. S. Naipaul in one
of his columns. However, according to Wyatt
Mason of The New Yorker, although Narayan's writings
seem simple and display a lack of interest in politics, he
delivers his narrative with an artful and deceptive
technique when dealing with such subjects and does not
entirely avoid them, rather letting the words play in the
reader's mind.[99] Srinivasa Iyengar, former vice-
chancellor of Andhra University, says that Narayan
wrote about political topics only in the context of his
subjects, quite unlike his compatriot Mulk Raj
Anand who dealt with the political structures and
problems of the time.[102] Paul Brians, in his book Modern
South Asian Literature in English, says that the fact that
Narayan completely ignored British rule and focused on
the private lives of his characters is a political statement
on its own, declaring his independence from the
influence of colonialism.[97]
In the west, Narayan's simplicity of writing was well
received. One of his biographers, William Walsh, wrote
of his narrative as a comedic art with an inclusive vision
informed by the transience and illusion of human action.
Multiple Booker nominee Anita Desai classes his
writings as "compassionate realism" where the cardinal
sins are unkindness and immodesty.[103] According to
Wyatt Mason, in Narayan's works, the individual is not a
private entity, but rather a public one and this concept is
an innovation that can be called his own. In addition to
his early works being among the most important
English-language fiction from India, with this innovation,
he provided his western readers the first works in
English to be infused with an eastern and Hindu
existential perspective. Mason also holds the view
that Edmund Wilson's assessment of Walt Whitman, "He
does not write editorials on events but describes his
actual feelings", applies equally to Narayan.[99]
Awards and honours[edit]
Narayan won numerous awards during the course of his
literary career.[104] His first major award was in 1958,
the Sahitya Akademi Award for The Guide.[105] When the
book was made into a film, he received the Filmfare
Award for the best story. In 1964, he received
the Padma Bhushan during the Republic
Day honours.[106] In 1980, he was awarded theAC
Benson Medal by the (British) Royal Society of
Literature, of which he was an honorary member.[107] In
1982 he was elected an honorary member of
the American Academy of Arts and Letters.[75] He was
nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature multiple
times, but never won the honour.[108]
Recognition also came in the form of honorary
doctorates by the University of
Leeds (1967),[109] the University of
Mysore (1976)[110] and Delhi
University (1973).[111] Towards the end of his career,
Narayan was nominated to the upper house of the
Indian Parliament for a six-year term starting in 1989, for
his contributions to Indian literature.[67] A year before his
death, in 2001, he was awarded India's second-highest
civilian honour, the Padma Vibhushan.[112]
Legacy[edit]
Narayan's greatest achievement was making India
accessible to the outside world through his literature. He
is regarded as one of the three leading English
language Indian fiction writers, along with Raja
Rao and Mulk Raj Anand. He gave his readers
something to look forward to with Malgudi and its
residents[101][113] and is considered to be one of the best
novelists India has ever produced. He brought small-
town India to his audience in a manner that was both
believable and experiential. Malgudi was not just a
fictional town in India, but one teeming with characters,
each with their own idiosyncrasies and attitudes, making
the situation as familiar to the reader as if it were their
own backyard.[83][114] In 2014, Google commemorated
Narayan's 108th birthday by featuring a doodle showing
him behind a copy of Malgudi Days.[115]

"Whom next shall I meet in Malgudi? That is the thought

that comes to me when I close a novel of Mr Narayan's.
I do not wait for another novel. I wait to go out of my
door into those loved and shabby streets and see with
excitement and a certainty of pleasure a stranger
approaching, past the bank, the cinema, the haircutting
saloon, a stranger who will greet me I know with some
unexpected and revealing phrase that will open a door
on to yet another human existence."
Graham Greene
List of works
Novels
Swami and Friends (1935, Hamish Hamilton)
The Bachelor of Arts (1937, Thomas Nelson)
The Dark Room (1938, Eyre)
The English Teacher (1945, Eyre)
Mr. Sampath (1948, Eyre)
The Financial Expert (1952, Methuen)
Waiting for the Mahatma (1955, Methuen)
The Guide (1958, Methuen)
The Man-Eater of Malgudi (1961, Viking)
The Vendor of Sweets (1967, The Bodley Head)
The Painter of Signs (1977, Heinemann)
A Tiger for Malgudi (1983, Heinemann)
Talkative Man (1986, Heinemann)
The World of Nagaraj (1990, Heinemann)
Grandmother's Tale (1992, Indian Thought
Publications)

Non-fiction
Next Sunday (1960, Indian Thought
Publications)
My Dateless Diary (1960, Indian Thought
Publications)
My Days (1974, Viking)
Reluctant Guru (1974, Orient Paperbacks)
 The Emerald Route (1980, Indian Thought
Publications)
A Writer's Nightmare (1988, Penguin Books)
A Story-Teller's World (1989, Penguin Books)
The Writerly Life (2002, Penguin Books India)
Mysore (1944, second edition, Indian Thought
Publications)

Mythology
Gods, Demons and Others (1964, Viking)
The Ramayana (1973, Chatto & Windus)
The Mahabharata (1978, Heinemann)

Short story collections

Malgudi Days (1942, Indian Thought
Publications)
An Astrologer's Day and Other Stories (1947,
Indian Thought Publications)
Lawley Road and Other Stories (1956, Indian
Thought Publications)
A Horse and Two Goats (1970)
Appreciation of
Walt Whitmans
poems

Whitmans poetry is democratic in both its subject

matter and its language. As the great lists that make up
a large part of Whitmans poetry show, anythingand
anyoneis fair game for a poem. Whitman is
concerned with cataloguing the new America he sees
growing around him. Just as America is far different
politically and practically from its European
counterparts, so too must American poetry distinguish
itself from previous models. Thus we see Whitman
breaking new ground in both subject matter and diction.
In a way, though, Whitman is not so unique. His
preference for the quotidian links him with both
Dante, who was the first to write poetry in a
vernacular language, and with Wordsworth, who
famously stated that poetry should aim to speak in the
language of ordinary men. Unlike Wordsworth,
however, Whitman does not romanticize the
proletariat or the peasant. Instead he takes as his
model himself. The stated mission of his poetry was,
in his words, to make [a]n attempt to put a Person, a
human being (myself, in the latter half of the 19th
century, in America) freely, fully, and truly on
record. A truly democratic poetry, for Whitman, is
one that, using a common language, is able to cross
the gap between the self and another individual, to
effect a sympathetic exchange of experiences.
This leads to a distinct blurring of the boundaries
between the self and the world and between public
and private. Whitman prefers spaces and situations
like journeys, the out-of-doors, citiesthat allow for
ambiguity in these respects. Thus we see poems like
Song of the Open Road and Crossing Brooklyn
Ferry, where the poet claims to be able to enter into
the heads of others. Exploration becomes not just a
trope but a mode of existence.
For Whitman, spiritual communion depends on
physical contact, or at least proximity. The body is
the vessel that enables the soul to experience the
world. Therefore the body is something to be
worshipped and given a certain primacy. Eroticism,
particularly homoeroticism, figures significantly in
Whitmans poetry. This is something that got him in
no small amount of trouble during his lifetime. The
erotic interchange of his poetry, though, is meant to
symbolize the intense but always incomplete
connection between individuals. Having sex is the
closest two people can come to being one merged
individual, but the boundaries of the body always
prevent a complete union. The affection Whitman
shows for the bodies of others, both men and women,
comes out of his appreciation for the linkage between
the body and the soul and the communion that can
come through physical contact. He also has great
respect for the reproductive and generative powers of
the body, which mirror the intellects generation of
poetry.
The Civil War diminished Whitmans faith in
democratic sympathy. While the cause of the war
nominally furthered brotherhood and equality, the
war itself was a quagmire of killing. Reconstruction,
which began to fail almost immediately after it was
begun, further disappointed Whitman. His later
poetry, which displays a marked insecurity about the
place of poetry and the place of emotion in general
(see in particular When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard
Bloomd), is darker and more isolated.
Whitmans style remains consistent throughout,
however. The poetic structures he employs are
unconventional but reflect his democratic ideals. Lists
are a way for him to bring together a wide variety of
items without imposing a hierarchy on them.
Perception, rather than analysis, is the basis for this
kind of poetry, which uses few metaphors or other
kinds of symbolic language. Anecdotes are another
favored device. By transmitting a story, often one he
has gotten from another individual, Whitman hopes to
give his readers a sympathetic experience, which will
allow them to incorporate the anecdote into their own
history. The kind of language Whitman uses
sometimes supports and sometimes seems to
contradict his philosophy. He often uses obscure,
foreign, or invented words. This, however, is not
meant to be intellectually elitist but is instead meant
to signify Whitmans status as a unique individual.
Democracy does not necessarily mean sameness. The
difficulty of some of his language also mirrors the
necessary imperfection of connections between
individuals: no matter how hard we try, we can never
completely understand each other. Whitman largely
avoids rhyme schemes and other traditional poetic
devices. He does, however, use meter in masterful
and innovative ways, often to mimic natural speech.
In these ways, he is able to demonstrate that he has
mastered traditional poetry but is no longer
subservient to it, just as democracy has ended the
subservience of the individual.
Walt Whitman: Poems Themes
The Democratic Self
Whitman celebrates the common man by creating a unified,
overarching concept of the self that applies to individuals as well.
Whitman often casts himself as the main character in his poems,
but the Walt Whitman he refers to is only partially representative
of Whitman's own opinions and experiences. He also uses "I" (or
himself) to represent the archetypal American man. This technique,
known as "an all-powerful I," allows Whitman to draw all
Americans into a unified identity with the poet himself as the
figurehead. The idea of the Democratic Self is common in the work
of Transcendentalist writers like Henry David Thoreau and Ralph
Waldo Emerson.
Individualism
The ideology of individualism is very prevalent in Whitman's
work. This concept thrived in America during the early nineteenth
century - a democratic response to the new class of industrial
wage-workers. Like Whitman, many powerful thinkers, politicians,
and writers encouraged everyday Americans to exercise self-
ownership and value original thought. Whitman's poetry often
addresses the role of the individual within a collective society
while simultaneously emphasizing the importance of self
expression.
Democratic Nature of Poetry
Whitman saw his poems as more than words on a page - he
frequently points out the democratic power of poetry. He felt that
form called for vocalization and sharing rather than private, silent
consumption of the words - he wrote poetry that he intended to be
spoken aloud. In addition to writing inherently communal poetry,
he used the medium to celebrate the struggles of the common man.
He felt that both the form and the content of his work could sow
the democratic spirit in his readers' hearts and minds.
The Body and Soul
Whitman emphasizes the connection between the body and
the soulrepeatedly in his poetry. According to Whitman, the
human soul consists of two parts - mind and body. The body is the
vessel through which the soul experiences the world, and is
therefore sacred. Whitman does not search for divinity within
abstract concepts but rather, he finds God in nature and in the
human body.
The Natural World
Walt Whitman often draws his readers' attention to the everyday
miracles of the natural world. He believed that nature facilitated
connections between human beings over time, distance, and
superficial differences. All human beings, no matter who they are
or where they are from, interact with the same elements of nature -
the water under a boat or the grass growing around a grave.
Whitman portrays nature as all powerful because it can form a
uniting bridge across any chasm - ideological or physical.
War
Whitman's career coincided with the Civil War. Therefore, many
of his poems address themes of war and the loss of humanity that
results from physical conflict. Although Whitman was a patriotic
man, he was also a pacifist. He believed that war was useless and
that fighting was never an effective solution. He worked as a nurse
during the Civil War and during that time, he developed many
personal relationships with wounded soldiers. He felt that it was
his personal responsibility to humanize these brave individuals and
honor their sacrifice. "Ashes of Soldiers," in particular, was
inspired by soldiers that Whitman met during the war.
Eroticism
Whitman's fascination with the human body drove him to explore
themes of both romantic and sexual love in his poetry. Whitman
believed that humans should never be ashamed of their physical
desires, because the human body is a sacred vessel of the soul.
Whitman wrote more freely about eroticism and sex than most of
his contemporaries. As a result, poems like "I Sing the Body
Electric" sparked controversy within the public and some of the
more conservative literary critics of Whitman's era.

1. "O Captain! My
Captain!"
Summary
The poem is an elegy to the speaker's recently
deceased Captain, at once celebrating the safe and
successful return of their ship and mourning the loss
of its great leader. In the first stanza, the speaker
expresses his relief that the ship has reached its home
port at last and describes hearing people cheering.
Despite the celebrations on land and the successful
voyage, the speaker reveals that his Captain's
dead body is lying on the deck. In the second stanza,
the speaker implores the Captain to "rise up and hear
the bells," wishing the dead man could witness the
elation. Everyone adored the captain, and the speaker
admits that his death feels like a horrible dream. In
the final stanza, the speaker juxtaposes his feelings of
mourning and pride.

Analysis
Whitman wrote this poem shortly after President
Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. It is an extended
metaphor intended to memorialize Lincoln's life and
work. The Captain represents the assassinated
president; the ship represents the war-weathered
nation following the Civil War; the "prize won"
represents the salvaged union. The speaker, torn
between relief and despair, captures America's
confusion at the end of the Civil War. It was a time of
many conflicting sentiments, and Whitman
immortalizes this sense of uncertainty in "O Captain!
My Captain!"
Whitman's poetry places a lot of emphasis on the
individual. This particular poem explores a variation
on that theme: the self vs. the other. The speaker
struggles with balancing his personal feelings of loss
with the celebratory mood resulting from the
successful voyage. While the Civil War claimed
many lives, it led to the reunification of the Union, so
many Americans felt similarly divided. In Whitman's
poem, the speaker believes that he should be part of
the "other" group, celebrating the return to safety.
However, his inner thoughts set him apart from the
crowd as he tries to reconcile his emotional reaction
to the Captain's death.
"O Captain! My Captain!" is the only Walt
Whitman poem that has a regular meter and rhyme
scheme. Often hailed as "the father of free verse,"
Whitman tended to write his poems without
following any kind of ordered poetic form. However,
"O Captain! My Captain!" is organized into three
eight-line stanzas, each with an AABBCDED rhyme
scheme. Each stanza closes with the words "fallen
cold and dead," and the first four lines of each stanza
are longer than the last four lines. Because this poem
is an elegy to the dead, the more traditional format
adds to its solemnity. Additionally, the regular meter
is reminiscent of a soldier marching across the
battlefield, which is fitting for a poem that
commemorates the end of the Civil War.
Whitman uses an all-encompassing "I"
throughout Leaves of Grass. It is an inclusive first-
person narrator. Whitman's own opinions and
experiences often intersect with the all-encompassing
"I" because Whitman often described himself as the
archetypal American man. Whitman's use of the all-
encompassing "I" is an effective technique in
actualizing the concept the democratic self and
establishing poetry as a democratizing medium.
2. "The Voice of the
Rain"
Summary:
In this poem, the speaker recounts a conversation he had
with the falling raindrops. He asks the rain, "And who
art thou?" and strangely, the rain answers, calling itself
"the poem of the Earth." The rain goes on to describe
how it rises intangibly (as vapor) out of the land and sea
and floats up to heaven, where it changes form and
becomes a cloud. Then it falls back to Earth to refresh
the drought-filled land, allowing seeds to grow into
something vital and beautiful. The speaker the equates
the role of the rain to a poet's role in crafting this "song"
(or poem, because Whitman refers to his poems as songs
throughout Leaves of Grass). He goes on to write that
the "song" is born in the poet's heart. It leaves the
poet's soul and and changes form, but is always the
same at its core and eventually returns to the poet as
love from his readers.

Analysis:
Similar to most of Whitman's poems, "The Voice of the
Rain" does not follow any specific form, rhyme scheme,
or meter; it is written in free verse. It is made up of one
stanza with nine distinct lines, but some of the lines are
so long that they bleed into the next. The first two lines
contain the speaker's question to the rain ("And who art
thou?"). The rain's response makes up the remaining six
lines. Whitman places the final line in parenthesis in
order to separate the speaker's words from the rain's.
At the end of the poem, the speaker compares poetry to
the rain - equating art with Earth's most essential
element. Here, Whitman reveals the high level of
importance he put on his poems (and poetry in general).
Whitman treated his poems like his children. He put all
of his emotional energy into his work and then released
his poems into the world like water evaporating into the
air. Each reader then has a different relationship with
Whitman's words, which changes the effect of the poem
while maintaining its spirit. Then, the readers rain
praise, criticism, love, and hate back down onto
Whitman. After that, the poem occupies a different role
in the poet's life.
Whitman's comparison between poems and rain is
demonstrative of his transcendental beliefs. Rather than
associate his poetry with something modern and
manmade, he instead chooses to associate it with the
eternal cycles of the natural world. He did not write
poetry for the purpose of making a splash. He wanted
his work to be affecting, vital, and eternal - just like
nature. He describes his audience as "drouths, atomies,
dust-layers of the globe" as if reading Whitman's poetry
is all they need to flourish and grow.
3. "One's-Self I
Sing"
Summary
The poem directly addresses the successive themes in
Whitman's poems. The speaker begins by claiming that the
poem is an ode to "One's-Self" - an individual. He then
immediately expands the scope of the poem by applying it
to individuals "en-masse," emphasizing the democratic
nature of the work. According to this poem, Whitman's
ensuing poetry will encompass both the individual and the
collective, democratic mass, drawing many parallels
between them. The speaker further asserts that he "sings"
(or, as a poet, writes) about the body, about both men and
women, about life and passion. The poem concludes with
the idea of The Modern Man, an ideal of American
society that Whitman hopes to attain through his poetry.

Analysis
"One's-Self I Sing" is the first poem in Inscriptions, which
is the first book of Whitman's Leaves of Grass. The poem
sets the tone for the rest of the volume because Whitman
introduces the themes that he, the poet, will "sing" about.
The poem delves into themes of the self, the all-
encompassing "I," sexuality, democracy, the human body,
and what it means to live in the modern world. Though this
poem is short, it alludes to the broad scope of ideas that
Whitman will explore in the rest of the poems
in Inscriptions and Leaves of Grass.
Whitman speaks to a general idea of self, a commonality
between his personal identitythe Walt Whitman he so
often casts as the protagonist in his poemsand the
Democratic self, which is the collective identity that
everyone shares. Whitman explains that the self is a shared
experience between the poet and the reader. As members
of a democratic society, all selves are intertwinedbut
conversely, each of these intertwined "selves" still retains
his or her individuality.
The human body is also a common theme in Whitman's
poetry. Here, it forms the crucial link that connects each
individual self to the communal Democratic self. At the
same time, the body is inextricably tied to Whitman's image
of the soul. He believes that without the physical body,
there is no soul. This is because the human body is the
vessel through which the soul interacts with and
experiences the world. Therefore, in Whitman's poetry, the
human body is sacred and every individual human is divine.
Whitman goes on to introduce the theme of gender,
specifying that he treats men and women equally in his
poems. "The Female equally with the Male I sing," he
declares. Whitman considers the woman equal to the man
because his view of gender is tied to his definition of the
soul. To Whitman, women are just as sacred as men
because despite their physical differences, they are all
human (and souls are free from gender). In later poems,
particularly in "I Sing the Body Electric," Whitman delves
deeper into his ideas about gender.
4. "Thoughts"
Summary:
"Thoughts" is a collection of Whitman's thoughts on several
different subjects, separated into numbered sections. In the first
section, Whitman considers people. He thinks about digging deeper
and getting to know things better, rather than just glancing at their
"visages." He thinks about ugliness, because he believes (and
accepts) that ugliness is just as important as beauty. He wonders
about "detected persons" and criminals, stating his belief that
everyone has the potential to become a criminal, including the
President.
The second section is about nature. The speaker ponders water,
forests, hills and beautiful sights, in addition to all of the
innovations human beings have added to the planet. In the third
section, he reflects on people whom society honors, and argues that
prizes do not affect the nature of a person's body or soul. He
observes that these "persons of high positions" often live in false
realities, which he proclaims to be "sad." He also describes them as
perpetually "walking in the dusk."
In the fourth stanza, the speaker reflects on ownership and equality
and wonders why society deems it fair for certain individuals to
have more rights than others. In the fifth section, the speaker
describes sitting at a feast when suddenly, he starts thinking about
an a shipwreck in the ocean and all the people drowning. He
wonders whether the soul can survive after death, or if it dies with
the physical body. In the sixth section, he ponders the act of
writing - both his own and others'. He wonders if written history is
as "complete" and "lasting" as his own poems, as "shreds" of
recorded incidents could end up representing the narrative of an
entire nation. In the final section, he wonders why human beings
are so inclined to follow leaders who do not care about their
followers' individual livelihoods.
Analysis:
Per Whitman's typical style, this poem is in free verse and does not
follow a specific meter or rhyme scheme. It is organized into seven
stanzas, or sections, each of a different length. This poem is
another example of Whitman's beloved list format. The whole
poem is a list; each section deals with a different issue that
Whitman is currently pondering. Most of the opening lines begin
with "of," as the speaker describes the subject that weighs most
heavily in his mind at that moment. Whitman does not specify the
context in which he is thinking about these topics, except in section
five. Here, he starts imagining a shipwreck while at a feast where
music is playing. It is possible that the revelers at the feast inspired
Whitman's questions about humanity and the soul.
These musings are not particularly cohesive. Instead, Whitman
provides his readers with small, disjointed glimpses into his mind.
He poses questions without answers, forcing the reader to consider
the same quandaries that occupy his own thoughts. Many of the
thoughts in this poem refute certain societal conventions. For
example, in the first stanza, Whitman claims that everyone has the
potential to become a criminal, even the President.
In section three, Whitman denounces people in high positions. He
espouses the opinion that material wealth rots the "core of life,"
and that people who strive for these external markers of success are
living in false realities, distanced from their humanity. Whitman
stresses his belief that happiness comes from truth and reflection
and not from money or social status.
Whitman wanted his poems to speak to the human condition and
universal truth, and he is hardly the first poet to declare his own
work immortal (Shakespeare did it, too). However, Whitman goes
so far as to claim that his poems are more important than recorded
history. He supports his claim by calling history "shreds, the
records of nations," while his poems are universal and apply to any
person from any nation - without any omissions.
5. "Ashes of
Soldiers"
Summary
"Ashes of Soldiers" is a tribute to the soldiers who died fighting in
the American Civil War. The speaker begins by addressing the
spirits of all the deceased soldiers, from both the North (the Union)
and South (the Confederacy). He describes the soldiers' ghosts
rising from their graves and gathering around him. He requests the
trumpeters to refrain from playing any music. He celebrates the
soldiers' lives, which were filled with joy and pride, and commends
them for enduring such peril. He asks that the drummers make no
sound either, as there is no need for a reveille, an alarm, nor a
burial drumroll.
He calls the soldiers his comrades and clarifies that this "chant" is
to draw attention to these "lost" and "voiceless" souls. He observes
their "faces so pale with wondering eyes," but since they cannot
speak, he must speak for them. He promises them that "love is not
over" and for the rest of his life, he will "exhale [the] love" arising
from their ashes.

Analysis
Whitman wrote "Ashes of Soldiers" after the end of the Civil War.
He actually served as a nurse during the war, so Whitman felt a
special connection to the soldiers. He knew several men who went
on to die in the line of duty. In the poem, Whitman emphasizes his
role in the war by referring to the soldiers as his "comrades" and
promises them that he will keep the memories of them alive for as
long as he can. While history only memorializes battles won and
lost, Whitman is writing this poem for the soldiers who died in
order to create these outcomes. As if it is his patriotic duty, he
gives a voice to those who did not survive to tell their own tales.
Whitman wrote "Ashes of Soldiers" in his typical free verse,
without a rhyme scheme or set meter. It consists of twelve stanzas
of varying lengths, although he uses anaphora to unite certain
clusters of lines. Anaphora, or the repetition of the same word or
phrase at the beginning of each sentence, was one of Whitman's
favorite poetic devices. The shortest stanzas are those in which
Whitman describes the physical features of the dead soldiers, as if
picturing them around him makes him pause for a moment before.
The shortest stanza in the poem is: "Faces so pale with wondrous
eyes, very dear, gather closer yet/Draw close, but speak not." By
placing a break in the stanzas at this point, Whitman forces
the reader to pause, perhaps to consider the individual faces who
made up the two sides of this conflict.
He speaks about them as if they were his friends and family, which
undoubtedly stems from his experiences as a wartime nurse. The
final stanza is his most passionate proclamation of devotion: "Give
me exhaustless, make me a fountain/That I exhale love from me
wherever I go like a moist perennial dew/For the ashes of all dead
soldiers South or North." Dew represents morning, and the dawn of
a new day. A "perennial dew" invokes the image of something
temporary (dew) recurring or lasting forever. Therefore, Whitman's
poem is his way of immortalizing these soldiers even though they
perished on the battlefield.
Although this poem first and foremost serves as a tribute to soldiers
who died during the Civil War, it inherently poses an anti-war
message. Whitman found fighting and violence to be ineffective
solutions for the world's problems. In this poem, he does not at all
celebrate the North's victory or mourn the South's loss, but rather,
he focuses on the soldiers who died for this result to come about.
He distances the dead soldiers from the act of war, sending away
the drummers and the trumpeters who would play at a military
funeral. He even goes so far as to describe the drumbeats as
"warlike."By doing this, Whitman crafts his tribute to the
individual lives cut short by war instead of portraying them as
heroic cannon fodder (which is how the rows of "countless
unnamed graves" make them appear).
Characters in
Whitmans Poetry
The Modern Man
In "One's-Self I Sing," the modern man is an ideal of American
society that Whitman hopes to achieve through his poetry.
Walt Whitman
Whitman casts himself as the subject of several of his poems. As
both the poet and a character, he presents himself as an archetype
of the American everyman.
phantom
The otherworldly specter who visits the narrator in "As I Ponder'd
in Silence" and demands to know what he, as a poet, "sings" about.
Whitman meant the phantom to represent the ancient poets, whom
he saw as his creative equals.
soul
Whitman often refers to the soul as if it were a tangible, interactive
entity. He believed that all human souls are connected, and a
person's soul is what enables love, spirituality, and ultimately,
humanity.
body
Whitman believed that the body is the vehicle through which a
human soul can experience the world. Because of this, his work
emphasizes cherishing the body and keeping it sacred.
Additionally, Whitman frequently writes that male bodies and
female bodies are equally important.
Him
The subject of the poem "For Him I Sing" is an unidentified "him"
- a representation of Whitman's ideal self.
mechanics
In "I Hear America Singing," Whitman describes the mechanics
singing as they do their work. They are an integral part of
America's collective voice.
carpenter
In "I Hear America Singing," the carpenter sings as he measures
his beams. Whtiman saw the working man as an archetypal
American.
mason
In "I Hear America Singing," the mason sings as he leaves for
work. A mason is a worker or a builder working with stone.
boatman
In "I Hear America Singing," the boatman is singing about his
boat.
shoemaker
In "I Hear America Singing," the shoemaker is singing while he
sits on his bench and works on shoes.
deckhand
In "I Hear America Singing," the deckhand is singing on the
steamboat deck. On a ship, a deckhand is responsible for
maintenance, cargo handling, mooring, and other jobs that require
manual labor.
hatter
In "I Hear America Singing," the hatter is singing as he stands. A
hatter is a craftsman and a salesman of hats.
wood-cutter
In "I Hear America Singing," the wood-cutter sings as song as he
works. He is likely cutting down trees or branches, perhaps to be
used as fuel.
ploughboy
In "I Hear America Singing," the ploughboy sings on his way to
work. He is responsible for leading the animals to plough a field.
mother
A major figure in many of Whitman's poems; Whitman believed
the female body was incredible in part because of its capacity to
carry a child.
girl
In "I Hear America Singing," Whitman describes a girl who sings
as she does her sewing and laundry.
You
The stranger to whom Whitman addresses the poem "To You."
Unlike the "Stranger" from "To A Stranger," Whitman has no
connection to this "You." He is simply wondering why it is
unacceptable for two complete strangers to greet each other for no
reason.
reader
Whitman addresses many of his poems in Leaves of Grass to his
reader. The obvious example is "Thou Reader." Whitman felt a
strong connection to his readers and hoped that his poetry would
have an impact on their lives.
patriarchal farmer
Whitman dedicates a section of "I Sing the Body Electric" to a
patriarchal farmer whose body he admired when he visited him. A
patriarch is a man who is the leader of a family, group, or society.
male slave
Whitman describes the body of a male slave in "I Sing the Body
Electric." He insists that slavery is wrong because the same blood
runs through the veins of this man as in every other man -
regardless of race.
female slave
Whitman also describes a female slave who is standing on an
auction block in "I Sing the Body Electric." Her body is just as
beautiful, strong, and capable as any other woman's - black or
white.
a Stranger
In "To a Stranger," The speaker feels as if he's seen and interacted
with this stranger before, perhaps in a past life. Since they are not
acquainted in this life, however, societal conventions dictate that
all the speaker can do is walk past the stranger and hope they meet
again in another life.
Pioneers
The pioneers were the brave explorers who went out to settle the
American West. Whitman admired them greatly for their courage
to face the unknown in search of a better life. He celebrates them in
"Pioneers! O Pioneers!"
sordid crowds
In "O Me! O Life!" the speaker counts himself among the "sordid
crowds" who wander and are constantly seeking something better
than what they have. They are forever faithless and therefore not
taking full advantage of life.
Captain
The subject of "O Captain! My Captain!" is dead on the dock of the
boat as it pulls into shore. The speaker of the poem laments the
Captain's death even though the crowds on shore are celebrating
the soldiers' victories on the battlefield. Whitman wrote this poem
about President Abraham Lincoln, who was assassinated after the
Civil War.
Drums
In "Beat! Beat! Drums!" the speaker personifies the drums and
speaks to them, asking them to play as loud as they can and disturb
everyone's peace. The drums are a symbol of war.
bugles
The speaker of "Beat! Beat! Drums!" addresses the bugles directly,
asking them to blow loudly across the nation. They are also a
symbol of war.
astronomer
The titular astronomer in "When I Heard the Learn'd Astronomer"
tries to teach the speaker about astronomy using charts and maps,
but the speaker feels bored and disconnected.
soldiers
Whitman felt a particularly strong connection to the soldiers who
died in the American Civil War because he served as a nurse in war
hospitals. Whitman celebrates their sacrifice and tries to
immortalize their bravery in his poetry.
commuters
The people in "Crossing Brooklyn Ferry" who make the commute
from Brooklyn to work in Manhattan by ferry each day, just like
the speaker. The speaker knows that many have made this
commute in the past and thousands more will follow in the future.
He uses this shared experience to forge a connection across
generations.
voice of the rain
The rain speaks to the speaker in "The Voice of the Rain." It refers
to itself as the "poem of the earth" because it makes the journey
from the sea to the clouds and then back down to nourish the earth,
just like a poem (in Whitman's opinion).
spider
In "A Noiseless Patient Spider," the speaker observes a spider
patiently weaving its web.

Walt Whitman:
Poems Glossary
accoutrements
(n. pl.) a soldier's outfit other than weapons and clothing;
additional items of dress or equipment
aplomb
(n.) self-confidence or assurance, especially in a demanding
situation
apparition
(n.) a ghost or ghostlike image of a person
carbine
(n.) a light, automatic rifle
contrariety
(n.) opposition or inconsistency between two or more things
corpulent
(adj.) fat (to describe a person)
corroborate
(v. trans.) to confirm or give support to (a statement, theory or
finding)
delectation
(n.) pleasure and delight
disintegrated
(v. intrans.) weakened or broken apart
expostulation
(n.) strong disapproval or disagreement
foetor
(n.) (also fetor) a strong, foul smel
foundry
(n.) a workshop or factory for casting metal
frivolous
(adj.) carefree and not serious (to describe a person)
frolicsome
(adj.) lively and playful
fructify
(v. trans.) to make something fruitful or productive
illustrious
(adj.) well known, respected, and admired for past
achievements
impalpable
(adj.) unable to be felt by touch; not easily comprehended
insatiate
(adj.) never satisfied
lamentable
(adj.) full of or expressing sorrow or grief; unfortunate;
regrettable
meanness
(n.) lack of quality or good appearance; shabbiness; inferiority
novice
(n.) a person new to or inexperienced in a field or situation
oscillating
(v. intrans.) wavering between extremes of opinion, action, or
quality
plodding
(v. intrans.) walking slowly with heavy steps; working slowly
at a dull task
promenade
(n.) a paved public walk
retrospective
(adj.) looking back on or dealing with past events or situations
reveille
(n.) a signal sounded to wake personnel in the armed forces,
usually played on a bugle or drum
robust
(adj.) strong and healthy; vigorous (to describe a person)
serpentine
(adj.) of or like a serpent or snake; winding and twisting like a
snake
sinewy
(adj.) well-muscled
sordid
(adj.) involving ignoble actions and motives; arousing moral
distaste and contempt; dirty or squalid
tremulous
(adj.) shaking or quivering slightly; timid, nervous
trestle
(n.) a framework consisting of a horizontal beam supported by
two pairs of sloping legs, used in pairs to support a flat surface
- like a tabletop
tympanum
(n.) a drum
unmitigated
(adj.) absolute, unqualified
wharves
(n. pl.) level quayside areas to which ships may be moored to
load and unload