Writing exercises

-Anushka kashyap (BA0190008)

1. What are the major arguments presented by K. Satchidanandan in his article, “The
Plural and the Singular’ in relation to Indian Literature?

Ans: -According to K. Satchidanandan, one of the fundamental questions in any discussion

of Indian Literature has been whether to speak of Indian Literature in singular or plural. The
diversity of India’s literature can match only the complexity of its linguistic map. Probably,
this challenging complexity had forced an astute critic like N. R. Ray to conclude that there
cannot be single Indian literature as there is no single language that can be termed “Indian”.
Sujit Mukherjee, in his book “Towards a Literary History of India” quoted that “Literature is
absolutely language-based, and language being a cultural phenomenon, it is all but wholly
conditioned by its locale and socio-historical forces.” From this, one may reasonably draw an
argument that the literature of a given language will have its specific character of nuances,
associations, form, and style. Indians tend to imply the values that argue for the cultural unity
of India as a whole and the use of English to write about literature in Indian languages
reinforces such a view. Comparative literature scholars have put forth the view that a literary
text produced in an Indian language answers a certain need or performs a historical function
in the context of a specific linguistic community, and its meaning lies essentially in its
specificity.

The other argument that arises is language cannot be the only criterion of literature. There
exist other criterions such as social, cultural, political, ethical and aesthetic. Literature has
been categorized, read and analyzed from the point of class, race, caste, gender, myth,
archetype, sign, etc.

Thirdly, many literatures are known by the name of the nations they belong to rather than the
languages they are written in. Also, crossings of linguistic boundaries are so frequent in
Indian literature that we find it difficult to divide our literature solely based on language.
There are many bilingual writers like Jayanta Mahapatra, Kamala Das, and Kiran Nagarkar
who write in their mother tongue as well as in English.

“Indian literature is one even while written in different languages” quotes S. Radhakrishnan.
But one problem with this approach is that it is reductive and tends to standardize all the
works of literature of India and in the process leaves out and thus alienates many works of
literature like oral-tribal literature or literature of the north-eastern region.

In short, while languages have interacted from time to time and received forms, trends, and
movements from other regions and languages each language also has a period of its isolated
growth. Hence, a comparative concept relating to fresh literary cartography has to be
designed to overcome the opposition of singular and plural antinomies and develop Indian
literature in terms of its cultural diversity.

2. What a critical note on V.S. Naipaul based on Dr. Meenakshi Mukerjee's article "A
House for Mr. Naipaul"?

Ans: - V. S. Naipaul is a Trinidad born comic writer. A scholarship to England at the age of
18 made it possible for V. S. Naipaul to escape from the country of his birth. Naipaul is
never nostalgic. he was convinced at an early age that everything about Trinidad was
provisional, makeshift, temporary and England was "surely where real life was to be found".

It seemed for a while Naipaul blended into this "real life" easily. After four years at Oxford
and a stint with BBC, he received literary recognition in London. He became a British citizen
soon enough; his first wife was an English-woman. He left one island hopping to get
permanently settled in another, and yet his work - his best work in any case - does not
indicate a strong mooring in any culture. His restless travels around the world have resulted
in more than a score of unforgettable books but have not given him any sense of belonging.
This unhousedness could be seen as a problem that has haunted him all his life - but it is also
his source of strength, providing him with a detached and ruthless precision that marks his
vision as well as his prose.

His ancestors left eastern Uttar Pradesh as girmitiyas (as indentured laborers were called)
more than a century ago. Naipaul himself had no personal connection with India until he was
30. His family's past was to him part of "historical darkness". When he did inquire further
into that darkness, the first attempt was a disaster because what he found was not what he had
expected. The anger in the earliest of his three Indian travelogues - An Area of Darkness
(1965) - was directed as much towards the disorder and squalor of the country as towards
himself who came to look for roots here. It is possible, more than his books, his occasional
pronouncements on the wounds Islam has inflicted on Hindu civilization has gone a long way
to making his name known in India, especially among people who normally might not have
been concerned with his books at all.
His career in travel writing and in excavating forgotten histories began when 10 years after he
had left Trinidad he went back there on a three-month fellowship and was asked to write an
account of his travel and stay in the Caribbean islands. Since then he has not stopped
traveling - to Africa, to the Arab countries, to East Asia, to South America, the U.S. and of
course repeatedly to India. Naipaul calls traveling "one side of a writer's business... adding to
his knowledge of the world and exposing himself to new people and new relationships."

3. Write a critical summary of Francis Bacon's essay "Of Judicature"?

Ans: - Bacon outlines the duty of judges in his essay as The office of the Judge is jus dicere
(to interpret law), and not jus dare (to make law, or give law). Else will it be like the authority
claimed by the Church of Rome which pronounces that which they do not find and tries to
introduce novelty. Further, he explains that Judges ought to be more learned than witty, more
reverend than plausible, more advised than confident. Judges must possess integrity. He
further discusses the principal duty of a judge as it is to suppress force and fraud; whereof
force is more pernicious when it is open, fraud when it is close and disguised. Judges should
make inequality equal. He says that in cases of life and death, judges ought to remember
mercy; a severe eye upon the example but a merciful eye upon the person. He also
summarized the role of a judge in a hearing.

4. What are the functions of the study, according to Bacon?

Ans: - According to Bacon, Studies serve for delight, for ornament, and ability. The use of
studies is in privateness and retiring, discourse, in the judgment and disposition of business.
He terms that to spend too much time in studies is sloth; to use them too much for ornament,
is affection; to make judgment wholly by their rules, is the humour of a scholar. Crafty men
contemn studies, simple men admire them, and wise men use them. For Bacon, the study is
always related to the application of knowledge in practical life. The author is the notion that
only learned as well-read men can execute plans effectively, manage their daily affairs with
expertise and lead a healthy and stable life. He further states that reading makes a full man,
conference leads to a ready man while writing makes an exact man. He also put forwards
some demerits of study as he thinks that studying for a prolonged period of time may lead to
laziness. According to Bacon, the study deals with the benefits of studies for the individuals
in their daily lives. From reading books to writing papers, study plays a vital role in a man’s
life making him learned, witty and experienced.
5. Write a literary appreciation on any one short story which I have sent, in terms of
character, settings, and plot.

Ans. - The story of Sankarkutty and his mother is one that has a mystical factor attached to it.
The story revolves around three characters which are Sankarkutty, his mother and a curious
boy, Kannan. The story begins with Sankarkutty visiting his mother after very long. This
reaction of the mother indicates the lack of attention and compassion she feels. This is when
we see the introduction of a boy called Kannan. This sense of storytelling indicates that the
void that is present in her life because of the distancing of her son is filled by this boy. His
mother goes on to describe the circumstances under which she met Kannan. The mother
describes the feeling of a divine connection with the boy. The setting of the temple and the
prayer to god also indicate the same. She describes a feeling of familiarity that she feels with
the boy and a description of the motherly connection she immediately feels with him. The son
is very apprehensive about this boy and his stories. This indicates a lack of belief or
emotional capabilities in the son. The story goes on to build on this rather mysterious
connection of the boy with the family. The last string is when Kannan is seen looking for the
papers of a case that not even the mother is well-versed with.

This story beautifully lays its elements of divinity out front. The underlying idea of
compassion and the emotional company is reiterated through various acts of the boy towards
the mother. The setting of the play suggests that the mother is a woman of belief. When she is
lonely, she seeks out for company and reaches out to god and it is almost like her faith is
rewarded in the form of this young boy. It is not clear to the end of the story if the boy is true
or false but the author has put him in the position of a god. The last line of the story indicates
this with Sankarkutty asking if he should call the boy “elder brother”. The story despite its
short nature shows the entire character flip and growth of Sankarkutty. Sankarkutty is first
filled with absolute dismissal of the connection with the boy, he then goes on to a confusing
stage and in the end, is filled with faith.
This is a beautiful story that reinforces the importance of faith. Maybe there was no divine
connection but if the feeling of it can lead to someone’s happiness then no one has the right to
take that away. This is the story of love in the form of an ambiguous form of god. The
takeaway, in the end, is irrespective of the form, love is the most important thing.