Identity and Authority: Inclusion of Bengali Poets in the Canon of Indian English Poetry

Abstract

Makarand Paranjape in his review of Bruce King’s Modern Indian English Poetry deliberates on how King’s critical work seemingly authenticated and legitimized the canon of Indian English poetry, focusing only on poets belonging to specific geographical location- Bombay. In 1970s when the process of anthologization commenced, only a dozen or so Indian English poets attained validation, relegating many other meritorious poets to the periphery. As the process of anthologization and canonization are two facets of the same coin, publishing houses like Macmillan and Oxford University Press that captured the Indian literary scene in 1970s brought out Contemporary Indian English Poetry (1972) and Ten Twentieth Century Indian Poets (1976), respectively, shaping a canon of Indian English poetry, which till date remains unquestioned and unchallenged. This coterie of poets essentially belonged to Bombay and therefore the canon of Indian English poetry seemingly became increasingly geographically centric. However, in 1970s, P. Lal also engaged himself in publishing anthologies, and, ostensibly, his endeavors were towards the establishment of an anti-canon. In 1972, when Macmillan brought out its anthology, housing the following poets- Ezekiel, Ramanujan, P. Lal, Kolatkar, Parthasarathy, Katrak, Daruwalla, Kamala Das, Gauri Deshpande, Mamta Kalia, Adil Jussawala, Gieve Patel, A.K. Mehrotra and Saleem Peeradina- P. Lal, in 1974, brought out Indo- English Poetry in Bengal, edited by K.C. Lahiri. The poets that it included were- Margaret Chatterjee, Harindranath Chattopadhyay, Sukanta Chaudhuri, Prafulla Ranjan, Ira De, Rupendra Guha Majumdar, Dhan Gopal Mukherjee, etc. This anthology was allegedly an answer to Macmillan’s Bombay centric anthology. Lahiri’s anthology included forty-six Indian English poets who primarily belonged to Bengal. Ostensibly, this was Lal’s answer to the exclusive canon of Indian English poetry. Absence of any Bengali poet in the canon was jarringly blatant, and this was befittingly answered by Lal. In the Preface, Lal writes, “The inspiration behind the preparation of this anthology of English verse composed by Bengalis has been the distinctive character of the aesthetic appeal and emotive responses of the poets rather than regional parochialism” (Lal xv). This statement of Lal further brings the argument of the identity of Indian English poetry in the post- independence India. Ostensibly, the canon of Indian English poetry was fixated on the idea of forming a single identity, concentrating essentially on the concept of “Indianness”. This overemphasis on forming a single identity did not only obscure the surfacing of myriad themes and issues which were being discussed by many other non-canonical poets but also circumscribed the parameters of the canon of Indian English poetry, withholding further promulgation, growth and development of this genre. This paper therefore argues that instead of focusing on forming a single identity, Indian English poetry should be an amalgamation of multiple identities. India, being a land of pluralities, should not have such a representation in the canon of Indian English poetry which demonstrates only one single identity. Therefore, the idea of representation of Bengal identity must be included in the canon. This paper, while discussing K.C. Lahiri’s Indo English Poetry in Bengal, will put forward the aforementioned arguments. It will argue for the inclusion of Bengal poets in the canon of Indian English poetry, furthering the case of the canon of Indian English poetry to be more inclusive in its outlook.

Keywords

• indian poetry in english
• canon
• bengal identity
• anthologies
• writers workshop