Skip to main content

Writer or a Right-er?- Righteousness in Writing

Isn't it unfair to insist that stories should be cleansed to match the fanatic measure of moralism and righteousness. A story doesn't need to be a lecture or an essay in morality. I had recently shared an immensely beautiful, intricately ornate paragraph, picked out from "Lord Jim" by Joseph Conrad on a social media site. As a rare one for me, I received an almost immediate response, objecting to the fact that women, some women was blamed for some sorry state of affair. Why women? was the theme of comment.
 
I was totally lost. The context was not there, agreed. But it wasn't supposed to be. It was written with a broad notice that it was an excerpt, which I was sharing simply because how exquisitely words were woven into that paragraph by the master wordsmith. The near-poetic feel of the prose was mesmerizing. It wasn't a political statement, neither from me, not from the writer. I could not understand the indignation.  
 
In my view, Every stories need both sides, as arrogant as stubborn as the other for one of them to prevail. Every writer takes a position initially when he writes a story. Story-writing is driven by two things, one- to propagate a position which is dear to the writer and Two- to tell an enchanting tale, purely out of a sense of sharing. Even when the case is former, still, the writer needs to have two sides. The two sides are represented by two characters, two forces in the story, who take diametrically opposite position and who have enough arguments on their respective sides to keep the story engrossing. The struggle, the drama arise from the two contradictory positions. If the two were to speak the same language, take same position, story becomes tame, rather it is no longer a story, it becomes an essay, a viewpoint.
 
The writer wears a mask of neutrality till the end, when he throws his weight behind the preferred point of view and lets the reader know where his sympathies lie. The insistence on the story not to have anything racial/communal/political/ gender- biased will kill a story. Any righteous fanaticism will kill the spirit of a story and kill its purpose. All kind of fanaticism kills free thought and thus kills literature and we must be watchful against it. We need to have characters speaking in different language through the story for the truth to emerge. All fanaticism rest on unyielding, unbending position. This can exist on either side of the divide. "All women are goddess and divine" is as ridiculous a position as is "All men as animals", thought the former carries the garb of neutrality and progressive thought. Life does not breath in absolutes. We are all children of gray. We live and prosper in our inherent contradictions. To insist to paint one class as absolutely divine is as much an insult to intellect as is to paint a class as criminal.
 
A writer can be a crusader of truth and justice, but truth and justice by the very nature of them are derived facts. You can not start a discussion with absolute fact and you can surely not write a story based on absolute fact. The story needs to tease you, guide and beckon you to the truth which itself can have many colors and hues. We all need to discover our own truths through the literature we peruse. The premise ought to evolve, the position ought to develop. The beauty lies in the contrasts. Through the contrasts, truth emerges- between Man and woman, Light and dark, ecstasy and gloom, dread and courage, confusion and clarity. A writer can not decide for you, he can merely be a light in which you may see.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

दो जोड़ी नन्ही आँखें

अनदेखे ख़्वाबों की दो जोड़ी नन्हीआँखें, जिन्होंने स्वप्न देखने की आयु से पूर्व दु:स्वप्न देख आँखें मूँद लीं। जो क़दम अभी चलना ही सीखे थे, लड़खड़ा कर थम गए। बचपन के घुटने पर लगी हर खरोंच, व्यस्कों के गाल पर एक तमाचा है। धर्म के आडंबरों से अछूता बाल मन जो मंदिरों और मस्जिदों को अपनी आत्मा में रखता था, धर्म की दरारों पर अपना नन्हा शव छोड़ निकल पड़ा। कहीं दूर,दग्ध शरीर के ताप से दूर, जब यह अकलुषित हृदय पहुँचा तो एक और निष्पाप दूधिया आत्मा दिखी, जिसकी पलकों के कोरों में उसकी आँखों के जैसे ही अविश्वास से सहमा हुआ अश्रु रूका था। एक दूसरे के गले लग कर दोनों बाल मन दरिया के टूटे बाँध की तरह बह निकले। घाव बाँटे, एक दूसरे के हृदय में चुभी धरती की किरचें निकाली और न देखे हुए स्वप्नों का श्राद्ध रचा। उसने थमती हिचकियों में अपना नाम बताया - ‘आसिफा’। और दुख के साथी की ठोड़ी थाम कर कहा - ‘मत रो, न्याय होगा।’ धरती की तरफ़ नन्ही गुलाबी उँगली दिखा कर कहा- “देख, भले लोग लड़ रहे है मेरे लिए, न्याय होगा। तेरे लिये भी लड़ रहे होंगे। तू मत रो” फिर बोली, “मैं पश्चिम से हूँ, तू पूरब से, पर हैं

बुद्धिजीवियों की बारात

बुद्धिजीवियों की बारात शरद जी रिटायर हो चुके थे। आधार का भय आधारहीन मान कर आधार बनवा चुके थे, और पेंशन प्राप्त कर के भोपाल मे जीवनयापन कर रहे थे। एक बार बिहार जा कर शरद जी नरभसा चुके थे, पुन: नरभसाने का कोई इरादा था नहीं, सो मामाजी के राज में स्वयं को सीमित कर के रखे हुए थे। इस्लाम आज कल ख़तरे मे नही आता था, संभवत: इमर्जेंसी के बाद से, इस्लाम सबल हो चुका था, और कल निपचती जींस और लोकतंत्र के ख़तरे मे रहने का दौर चल रहा था। न्यू मार्केट के कॉफ़ी हाऊस मे चंद बुद्धिजीवी लोकतंत्र पर आए संकट पर चर्चा कर लेते थे, जोशी जी वहाँ भी नहीं जाते थे। एक दफे वहाँ के मलियाली वेटर्स को जोशी जी के हिंदी लेखक होने का पता चल गया और उन्होंने जोशीजी को यिंदी यिम्पोजीशन के विरोध मे कॉफ़ी देने से मना कर दिया था। कहाँ शरदजी सरस्वती से ब्रह्मप्रदेश तक लिखना चाहते थे और कहाँ उन्हे बड़े तालाब के उत्तर भाग का लेखक घोषित कर दिया गया था। इस से क्षुब्ध जोशी जी अपने बग़ीचे मे टमाटर उगा रहे थे। जानने वाले कहते हैं कि इसके पीछे उनकी मँशा महान किसान नेता बन कर उभरने की थी, किंतु उन्हे पता चला कि आधुनिक किसान न

That Evil Ignorance- Rahul Gandhi and his Everyday Questions

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” - Theodore Roosevelt, American President 1901-1909 Rahul Gandhi  has again asked as question as to why the Soldiers martyred in the cowardly attack of the Chinese in the Galwan Valley did not carry weapons (ignoring that the treaty si