“Politics, ideology and poetry”:An Interview with Faiz-IV
Ideology exists as an established theory, however if the doctrine is not imbued in the heart and mind, then it should not be included in poetry just because the doctrine is true
Qayyum Nazar: Let us return to your poems. After 1936, as you said, you had a change in your way of thinking under the influence of socialist ideology. Some of your critics hold that there are two distinct waves in your work. One is, as you say, Saaqi-e-Gulfaam and the other is Laila-e-Watan. These two are not united anywhere, i.e. they are dealt with separately. Is it really true that Laila-e-Watan is more important to you than Saaqi-e-Gulfaam, because you talk more about collectivism?
Faiz: As I said previously, in the beginning I was indeed unable to unify the two, and it was perhaps because their assimilation did not exist in my nature. Subsequently as I developed more interest and enthusiasm, I do not think there is a duality anymore. I consider that a man can bring politics in poetry only to that extent to which it exists in his own nature. If it is not a component of his own nature, if it is not imbibed in his self, then obviously the two will appear disparate. Politics should assimilated into poetry only to the extent that it is part of the poet’s own personality. It is not appropriate to do so just for the sake of a good cause, or to seek people’s approval or for the purpose of preaching, because that is not effective.
Qayyum Nazar: I said that because you were just talking about your life in prison, and how there is a significant difference in your poetry before it and after it.
Faiz: That is correct. I probably grasped this formula during my prison sentence. I didn’t comprehend it properly before, also because I didn’t have much experience then. Staying in the jail made me realize that such things happen in politics, and afterwards I did not feel as if it was something alien to me, i.e. I no longer dissociated between personal emotions, political thoughts or political experience. That is one advantage of prison.
Anees Nagi: Does that mean that you do not really believe in the literary view of Marxism and the notion of a committed writer?
Faiz: No, I definitely believe in that, however, only to the extent to which a person can imbibe that ideology in his self or in his emotions. Ideology exists as an established theory, however if the doctrine is not imbued in the heart and mind, then it should not be included in poetry just because the doctrine is true. That is a useful thing in itself, because many people do poetry according to an ideology merely because they happen to believe in it. I do not think that this is the Marxist view. This is the viewpoint of those who apply Marxism in a completely mechanical fashion. For example, the most respected commentator of Marxism in my view is Lukasz, a Hungarian critic who died recently. If you read his books, you’ll find out that it is not the Marxist view to always create poetry by using your doctrines or the few points you have derived from your political condition.
Ijaz Batalwi: One gains the impression from your prose that you are a believer of the doctrine that one can shape minds by means of poetry and impress upon them a certain ideology which the poet believes in, so that the society to which the poet belongs can be developed to a special state. Would you like to say something about this poetic ideology, as to when you adopted it and after having done so much poetry and having achieved this status, do you still believe that poetry can be utilized for this purpose?
Faiz: Yes. It is my firm conviction that poetry can be used for the purpose, and that poetry is used for this purpose.
Ijaz Batalwi: Does it mean Ghalib also used it for this purpose?
Faiz: Yes. The thing is, every perceptive person has some system of values in his mind which he believes to be true. There is also some vision of the future as well, what he feels the world should be like. He also has some idea of the faults and imperfections of the world around him, and what their solution should be. Now there are many ways to express all this. One way is to convert a few slogans directly into verse. The second way is that the extent to which you can make it a reflection of yourself and can explain it by means of your own emotions, you do so. The thing is that every word which we utter – poetry is a much more profound thing, let’s leave that for now – in our ordinary everyday language, we communicate some idea, some thought, some opinion to others, which influences them to some extent, and even if just one person is influenced, I believe that a small part of the world has been changed. If you bring about a minute change in someone’s mind with expressing just one thought, then you have brought a change in the system of the world to that extent. Poetry can do this work to a greater extent. Therefore, I have not changed this view. However, I do believe that to accomplish this, a person need not employ slogans, shouts and direct political statements as poetry. This wasn’t my view previously, nor is it now. People are influenced by poetry and they should be influenced. A person should preach something to the extent to which he believes to be true. This is my view.
Baqir Rizvi: In this regard, our classical poets were apparently not associated with any ideology, however, in your view, were they also doing the same work?
Faiz: Yes, in my view they have definitely been doing so.
Ijaz Batalwi: From one perspective, as you said, this also happens through conversation. A person voices his disagreement or agreement that way. As poetry is the pinnacle of conversation, influence is an inbuilt property of poetry. However, the view that one is going to deliberately influence people and promote a certain ideology, I do not think this is found with much intensity in your two beloved poets that you mentioned, Ghalib and Hafiz. This seems like a 20th century invention. It appears that previously classical poets did not consciously employ poetry in this manner. This is a modern point of view. For example, (T.S) Eliot says that he does not preach Christianity. However, as a Christian he wants to inform the world about his condition of being Christian. This is understandable but I doubt it is a conscious effort at preaching a particular ideology through poetry. How valid do you think this is?
Faiz: Firstly, I do not agree that our classical poets did nothing of the sort. This is because, we don’t just have Hafiz and Ghalib, we also have a poet like Saadi, who is purely a missionary poet and has garbed his ethics with poetry beautifully. Same is the case with many of our Sufis, in which we will find many teachers who directly promoted their views. I agree with you on this that it is not the task of a poet to promote his doctrines in a manner in which a politician or a preacher does so. In fact, as you mentioned that Eliot states that he does not preach Christianity but his poetry does, and this preaching is in the manner that he is explaining his own condition, as you have said. I agree that this is the way a poet’s preaches; he delivers what is incidental to him. I have said this before, to the extent to which an ideology does not become a part of one’s self, to that extent it is not effective to stuff that ideology in poetry, and probably it is not correct from an aesthetic point of view as well. However, when an ideology becomes a part of your condition and you express it in poetry, then it is preaching, but it is not preaching in the sense in which it is done in journalism and politics. I have no disagreement with this.
Sufi Tabassum: Faiz sahib, there are many aspects to your life, for example, you have been a teacher, a journalist, you have taught workers, have been in the army. Which of these environments did you find the most convenient?
Faiz: I believe that if I look back at my life, the most pleasant and productive time with regards to my poetry has been my time of teaching at MAO College, Amritsar. Partly it is because teaching is as much satisfying as any other creative work. My students were more my friends and less my students. I taught them much and learnt from them a lot of as well. The other period which was equally satisfactory in a different way is the four, five years I worked as a journalist. It was the early period of Pakistan, 1947 to 1951. There was a satisfaction and refreshment in the effort and pruning in journalism. And I was also involved with politics in those days somewhat. These are the two periods where I feel I was successful in the realization of my being to an extent.
Intizaar Hussain: Faiz sahib, two aspects have been missing completely from the discussion up till now, so simultaneously these two questions appear in my mind. First is that I remember you got mature very early, and there was no such person as immature Faiz. However, when you were describing your experiences of prison life, those observations of the colors of a pigeon’s neck and the variations in colors of the leaves of Peepal tree, I realized that perhaps there was an immature Faiz as well. It may be because you did not have such experiences in your childhood. After all, there is a whole world outside poetry, such as painting, music, fiction and religion. And this whole area belongs to the experience of love. I am surprised that none of your friends have asked any questions regarding love. Certainly this universe would have been a part of your life as well. Would you shed some light on this?
Faiz: It is correct to a degree that adulthood came to me early. One reason was that, as I have said, the small amount we got daily as pocket money, my brothers used to spend it on games like spinning tops and flying kites, and eating ice cream. I used to get books from the adjacent shop and read them. It is true that I still regret missing out on all the wanton and frivolous activities, except cricket. *laughter* So there is a sort of sense of deprival, you have identified it correctly. It was compensated partly when I came to Government College in Lahore. Regarding your query about love, definitely everyone has experienced it and it also offered some compensation. Something else which really affected me happened when I was in Matric and I repeatedly entered the state in which I saw the sudden change of color of sunlight and experienced an illusion in which very near objects appeared very far and far objects appeared near. I remember that state even now, we were playing cricket and suddenly instead of keeping my eyes on the ball, I saw a light from afar and saw a tree. Now I do not experience such a state, however, up to a time I used to experience such things as sudden shifts in the colors of the world, dimming of the sunlight instead of it turning yellow, and a play of fog and lights. As far as other subjects are concerned, apart from literature I got introduced to music early as well. My dearest friend is Khwaja Khursheed Anwar, who is a great music director now. He used to be a terrorist in the times of Bhagat Singh. After being released from prison, he suddenly got obsessed with music and immersed himself in it. He introduced me to music. I remember the first musical experiment. I used to listen to Ashiq Ali Khan and Abdul Waheed Khan, and other teachers before as well, but there was not much substantial impact on my mind. Once I heard my friend Rafi Ghaznavi singing a thumri ‘Puppi-haaraa pi ki boli na bol’, a thumri of (Raag) Peelo. That suddenly made me appreciate music. Often I and Khursheed Anwar used to visit the mountains in summer vacations. He would sing and I would listen. So I have been interested in this field since the beginning.
(To be continued)
 |
The writer is a psychiatrist and a trustee of the Faiz Foundation, Pakistan and Faiz Ghar, Lahore (www.faizghar.net). He can be reached at |