CHAPTER-V

DEPICTION OF INDIAN CULTURE AND PHILOSOPHY IN COMRADE KIRILLOV

Introduction:

This chapter attempts an analysis of Raja Rao’s Comrade Kirillov from the viewpoint of Indian culture and philosophy. The novel Comrade Kirillov was first published in 1976. However, a French version by George Fradier had come out in 1965. Its primary edition was printed in the 1950’s. M.K.Naik has marked out its chronology and inveterate that it was perhaps written in the nineteen-fifties: “Comrade Kirillov was written some years before The Serpent and the Rope.”(Naik, 1982:142) Comrade Kirillov is a compact novelette, little than The Cat and Shakespeare. Initially, the book had only eighty-five pages of typeset and nineteen thousand words only. The published edition has one hundred and thirty-two sheets and twenty-nine thousand words.

All this indicates a dynamic and brilliant creative movement going all these years between its first translation and the published version in 1976. Rao worked repeatedly on the book, as acknowledged in the Post face. The book before us is the definite edition of the text. This novel also forms a continuation to the previous masterpieces- viz., The Serpent and the Rope and The Cat and Shakespeare which deal with the mission for Indianness as their subject. The Serpent and the Rope discovers on an individual level, The Cat and Shakespeare on a communal level and Comrade Kirillov on a political level. Fundamentally, Comrade Kirillov is a quest for one's heredity. It is charming and captivating story of an Indian intellectual-turned socialist misplaced in his quest. While stating the brevity of the novel, A.N.Gupta comments:

“The story…. of Comrade Kirillov may be said to be slender, so thin that it can be summed in a few words” (Gupta, 1980:120)

The novel Comrade Kirillov is a satirical draft of an Indian communist; whose original name is Padmanabhan Iyer. When very young, he is selected by Annie Besant

142 and the Theosophist and fling to California to be groomed as a companion of J. Krishnamurti. He begins reading literature on socialism, when Krishnamurti discards the role of Messiah. He respects the British Labour Party and arrives to England. He is called by the name Comrade Kirillov after his renovation to communism. The novelist frequently talks of Kirillov as a kind of sadhu devoted to communism. The speaker, “R” a reporter of The Hindu, meets Padmanabhan Iyer in the first convenes in London. Padmanabhan Iyer marries to a Czech girl, Irene, “with red blood and red hair”, and they have a son, Kamal. The speaker last sees Kirillov in 1948, before leaving to America:

“When I returned from America, a strange, tragic news awaited me. Irene had died in childbirth, her two days old son, lovely dark haired and well-built, following her. Kamal, for care and change was sent to his grandfather, in Trichinopalli. Kirillov, indefatigable left for Moscow. He sent to me greetings” (P.93)

The very first part of the novel moves by an extract from Irene’s diary. The twenty six pages of Irene’s relating are followed by an eight page explanation by ‘R’ of his meeting with Kamal. Therefore, we observe that the novel has a very slender plot. About slenderness of the plot, Shyamala A. Narayan comments:

“Unlike The Cat and Shakespeare, Comrade Kirillov does not have any story worth the name… P. becomes a communist, though in his heart he still believes in Mahatma Gandhi and his principles. He marries a Czeck wife, has a son, and goes off to Moscow, that Mecca of communists leaving his son in India. The important thing in the novelette is not the story but the ironical sketch of the self- contradictory Indian communist. But this ironical presentation by itself is not enough to sustain the book, which suffers from the thinness of the content.” (Narayan, 1988:100)

It is this thinness of the plot that characterizes the novel as it becomes the strength of the narration. It is a progression in art on the part of the novelist and a kind of new theme for the readers to deal with.

143

One of the most important traits of this novel is that it was written in the post independence period and in the wake of the self-realization on the part of Indians. It features the encounter of Padmanabha Iyer with communism and thus explores the possibility of social and culture change through communist philosophy. Rao attempts a possibility of the Indian interaction with the communist ideology as it would work as an alternative to the Indian philosophy or other Western philosophies. It is in this respect that Comrade Kirillov (1976) deals with the communism and its socio-cultural interaction. The novel puts forth Indian culture and philosophy related to cultural differences which create various philosophical issues. The novel might also be seen as a passage of bewilderment and despair in the life of Raja Rao. After the meeting with his guru Swami Atmananda he gets peace and lined the way for mental lucidity and broadening of religious vision.

For Kirillov, this was the motivation. Also, the big gap of twenty two years between the two novels had helped the writer experiment with different methods, fiction-ideas and shapes. These steady attempts gave Comrade Kirillov its structure. According to Shiva Niranjan:

“Comrade Kirillov also expressed the novelist's disapproval and dismay with the forceful upsurge of communism during the final phase of the Indian freedom struggle. Providing glimpses of the novelist's temporary association with the underground activities of the Young India Socialist Movement, it depicted his consequent frustration with these extremist activities. The disillusionment led to rejection of the communist mode and a firm commitment to the Vedantic way of life.” (Niranjan, 1985:1)

The novel Comrade Kirillov should be positioned after Kanthapura in chronology if a survey is made to draw Rao's concern with nationalistic and political philosophy before his final pilgrimage in the area of Truth. For some indefinite cause, the novel was available after The Serpent and the Rape and The Cat and Shakespeare. Perhaps, the structure as well as the context took time to appear, perception being at chaos, and form also at continuous testing. However, thematically, it can be related to Kanthapura as well as The Cat and Shakespeare. Like Kanthapura the political and

144 social developments in Europe had provided the motivation for this novel as well as the writer was experiencing a hope of some drastic change through communism in India. The rise of Hitler and Stalin during the World War II inspired Kirillov with a new trust of extreme change in the world map. Kirillov had confidence that Stalin's order to the Indian Communist Party would be bottomed on a specific rational conclusion. But the policy of war was changed by order to the British line up. He remained in the dark night of the spirit to realize the new directions. But the consequences disillusioned him; Kirillov lapsed into deep consideration seeking the meaning of occasion and statistic to their dialectical inevitability. The distorted conditions appeared almost to change his skin and he came outside as Padmanabhan Iyer.

The speaker proclaims that with the big change of 1947, India was free from the British rule. The non-violent theory of Gandhi had finally appeared triumphant. This triumph was not unforeseen for Iyer knew the power and potency of India. Faith in India and its leader’s gets renovate. A brilliant script entitled India and our fight hold the history of the Indian association with Tilak, Gandhi as main actors and motivators re-establishes faith while explaining to Irene the implication of a wife in the cast he says that all traditions initiated first in India his Motherland:

“Who does not know...that from the airplane to the latest theories of democracy, passing through medicine and mathematics, all had one, and only one origin - Holy India?” (P.78-79)

In her diary Irene minutes her husband’s profound facts about “Mantra-Sastra”-the science of the sacred word- of the artistic syllable which was made clear to her by him prior. It gives details of her husband’s alertness and Brahminic priorities. Just as in Kanthapura the British-the red people represented wickedness in this novel- Russia turn out to be the evil one. The Indian philosophy of Buddhism and the deliverance of Bodhisattva are compared with the Marxist ideology. Marxist ideology excites Kirillov and holds sway over him. The story goes that the fiend Mara enticed Buddha and discouraged he from getting his goal but the saint did not give way to Mara. Unlike Buddha Kirillov gets trapped in the attraction of theosophy, Marxism and communism. But Rama, the observer, considers in his capacity to exceed Mara and

145 arrive at the final target like Buddha. At one place in the novel, he disgraces and rebukes wickedness:

“Go, go, Mara,...I know of your doings, I know the dialectic of Feurbach, and the State and the Revolution of Lenin... Go, you many - mouthed, many-armed, you multiple monster, Mara!” (P.92)

The Indian Brahmin who distinguishes the "intrinsic reason behind all meditation" is destined to find out the glory of his resident land. The lost Kirillov has to distinguish his real individuality as Padmanabhan Iyer. Rama, the observer, continues:

“I told you Kirillov was an Indian—and his Indianhood would break through every communist chain." (P.91)

The end depicts Kirillov disguise thoroughly miserable, confused and jumbled. He identifies his society, yet the sturdy pulls from both accepted views and modernism leaves him perplexed. While explaining the bewilderment Shiva Niranjan writes:

“Kirillov knows that the greatest virtue on the earth is Truth and Truth is the only substance that India can offer to the materialistic West, and that Truth has no history, yet like any other communist he, too, seeks historical evidence in everything. This pathetic state of his being ultimately leaves him a thoroughly confused fellow…neither a communist nor a patriotic Indian.” (Niranjan, 1985:64)

As a consequence to the World War II, two different approaches appeared on the world scene modern common sense which conformed to existing demands and established values of power and principles. Through the intermediate of the novel Rao depicted the awful dilemma of innumerable young people who were distressed and puzzled by these situations. Like Kirillov, they too were penetrating for moorings and support. Rama appreciated that the Kirillov-logic is very dissimilar from his own. The disjunct's balanced may help him in his mission but all this could fall petite of the final aim. In this respect Rao comments:

“Vedanta alone has the courage of the ultimate- it….. asks for more inquiry into your biological, psychological, and psychic self, delimiting you bit by bit into acute dissolution, when, intensified in

146

your desperate anonymity, you surrender yourself to that which is ever your "I" (P.73)

The speaker knows the worth and meaning of Vedanta. He distinguishes that sacrifice is a process of ending and decline of the self setting up of true magnificence. Breaking the Kirillov absurdity, he states that were Kirillov able of free thoughts and not tied to a credo, he would not have acknowledged intellectual pungent. Rao philosophies:

“Logic comes to an end by its own suicide. For if you lead logic by logic it reaches a dead end.” (Rao, 1996:189)

This novel brings for the first time, into Rao's fictional sphere, a thematic concern which he allows to extend in his later novel -The Serpent and the Rope. The preface of Irene and the milieu of Comrade Kirillov are both of singular implication as they are familiar demonstration of the West against which Rao depths his own eastern world and metaphysics. It becomes clear in the title Comrade Kirillov - a western name with a discrete Russian identity. The hero's name is Padmanabhan Iyer and for causes best known to him, he gets intentionally named- Kirillov. Both selves connote adversative ideologies and civilizations. The East-West conflict is manifest in the qualities of the protagonist and also in his connection with his wife. They represent two separate ideological views. Their consideration processes and responses differ. Though the marriage is not a breakdown, yet nowhere in the book does their relationship emerge usual.

The Indian philosophy is such that it nurtures the idea of denunciation in Indians. The Indians naturally tend towards self-abnegation. Paradoxically, the deceived Kirillov rejects his own principles, getting trapped in a trivial world of greediness, gleam, sparkle, shine and passion of the West. Rao himself valued women and in all his novels, he portrayed them as embodiments of Shakti. Irene represents proper womanhood. She is unpersuasive. She is unknown to Padmanabhan's world in the novel. Padmanabhan's world is a world of Truth, intelligence and attachment. Perception of metaphysics, renaissance, transmigration and nirvana characterize Padmanabhan as unknown and bizarre to the Westerners.

147

The East and the West exhibit different traditions and cultures. However these differences do not deter the characters in this novel from each other. In Comrade Kirillov, the main characters get involved to each other primarily because of the major difference in the partner's background. Possibly they have not explicitly understood their own inheritance. Removed from their national land they undergo transition bPecause they have to discover support structure and buttress of culture and faith in the other culture. In the absence of such native support system, the human beings are reduced to a state of a nomadic wanderer. They try to clutch and hold a foreign culture that makes them unhappy. Native culture, environment, philosophy, tradition, heritage offer the pivot for an individual to lean on and dig into time of requirement.

Such cultural exposures and consequent alienation inform Rao's delineation of the Indian culture and philosophy in his novels. They restate the need of understanding the dissimilar world cultures. He wishes to state that citizens foolishly hurry into experiences for newness. It is this lack of acquaintance that consequences in disenchant. People from the West lack approaching and fail to clutch the essence of the East. Indian people are obsessive and set aside. They fall as a victim to surface glamour and pretense artificiality of the West. However, the orient has always displayed capacity to incorporate all cultures and yet hold its own innate dignity and uniqueness. This trait of Rao's heroes attracts foreigners. The flavour, originality and novelty of the Indian practice are fundamental for them. When the West reveled in superficial information and new findings, Indians held on to roots and moorings which were thoughtful and fascinating. This makes the Indian culture obscure and the Indian attitude, as a riddle.

As a part of Indian culture and mode of life, Raja Rao deals with the feature of fantasy and reality in a dualistic manner - firstly, on the level of characters and secondly, as the mysterious titles of the novels. In this particular novel, the characters are unsuccessful to know the double aspects of appearance and truth. The hero accepts a false name and hides his self beneath a concealing facade. is unable to decide illusion from actuality or Truth. The young man wrongly presumes that by remaining Padmanabhan Iyer he may not be able to complete his task. However the adopted name only adds to the inconsistency in his character. Kirillov cannot be

148 allowed to live because all appearances are temporary. Padmanabhan symbolizes that reality which is responsible for itself as a continuous presence in the backdrop and allows the obvious to maintain provisional supremacy on the sight. The misleading mask is only a superimposition.

And as maya are a creation and an addition of Reality itself, the actual inner self becomes momentarily wearing a veil. The life accorded to maya or illusion or the Kirillov counterpoint is not a permanent one. Apart from such duality on the level of appearance and reality where the hero of the novel personifies the indecisiveness shown in the Indian scriptures, the other level is duality between words and their sounds. For example, the Arjuna-vishada yoga or 'the sorrow of Arjuna, hesitates between the four mechanisms of vak. Through mental power and understanding, he reaches madhyama. But the unchanging speech of the everlasting cannot be reach without involvement from a mentor.

Change in Comrade’s Attitude from Active Political Spiritualism to Passive Spiritualism:

Keeping in view the title of the novel, it is important to know that Raja Rao was under the impact of the Great Russian novelist Feydor Dostoevsky’s work The Possessed. The epigraph of Comrade Kirillov is taken from The Possessed and that is the proof of the influence. The character of Shatov asserts his willpower to believe in God. This assertion of Shatov is Rao’s epigraph of Comrade Kirillov. Besides, Kirillov is also a character in The Possessed. Alexei Kirillov of Dostovesky’s work is an engineer by line of work. This Alexei Kirillov urges suicide. A search is made to outline the novelist's anxiety with patriotic and political beliefs before his last pilgrimage in the dominion of Truth. The novel was available after The Serpent and the Rape and The Cat and Shakespeare. The form and the circumstances took time to appear, perception being at a chaos, and structure also at continuous trial. It can be connected to Kanthapura and The Cat and Shakespeare.

The utmost aim of philosophy- ‘Absolute Monism’ cannot be attained through 'devotion' or 'karma' alone. (Misra, 1957:31) Adoration in the pretext of act or 'bhava' can lead to information but not the final truth. A true supporter may find spirituality within reach but fail to appreciate that Supreme Power without Knowledge Rite

149 jnanan na muktih. It implies that without Knowledge, there is no freedom possible. Thus, the quester of The Cat and Shakespeare, exploration in his investigate for the exact consummation, misdirects himself through cynicism. This period of predicament was similar to the absurdity to be witnessed in Comrade Kirillov.

The novel Comrade Kirillov can also be located right away after Kanthapura. Towards the novel's ending, the village-people attain a strange sense of completion. Moorthy remains disgruntled by the social circumstances of the times and shifts loyalty from the idealism of Gandhi to the sort of socialism. This conscious option of his abnormal precursor is also shown in the courage of Kirillov. Kirillov perhaps also felt that the new theory of communism may reduce poverty and change the prevalent social conditions. If Kirillov be looked upon as Moorthy’s successor, there is sufficient justification of his shifting faithfulness to varied ideologies. The crisis of trust in Moorthy gets perpetuated in Kirillov who too is disappointed with the lost and declining religion-cultural inheritance of India.

The independence struggle in Kanthapura becomes the Russian rebellion in Comrade Kirillov. Freedom and independence are still remote dreams. The truth is that the struggle was not yet complete. But as the hero in Comrade Kirillov ventures overseas, the political scenario in India and its struggle for freedom move away into the backdrop. The effect of Russian and French revolutions and the crash of the Labour Party increase prevalence. The mind of the hero does not remain unchanged by these prominent ideologies. References in the book to revolutions, actions, clashes, philosophies and ideas show the excruciating attempt at the level of mind and thinking.

The culture multiplicity and philosophical duality is displayed through a remarkable technique of splitting the individuality of the protagonist into three selves-Rama, Padmanabhan and Kirillov. Among these, Rama proceeds as the eternal spectator, a Gandhian, a Vedantin and an Indian. Padmanabhan is the believing himself and he represents faith in Indian principles and becomes the alter self of Rao. The Rama’s character is familiar with the Padmanabhan position of the protagonist. He is also conscious that Kirillov is that mask of cause and judgment which disguise the Brahminic self and conceals the real traits of the seeker. Rama upholds that he found communism in Kirillov, not in Padmanabhan. The statement is important as the faith

150 of communism is opposed to the beliefs of a true Brahmin. Communism is experienced in the appearance of Kirillov. He gets deceived. The speaker in this novel is: “…a thirsty soul pining for the attainment of the higher truths and is given to meditations and serious thinking.” (Sharma, 1980: P.X)

Kirillov symbolizes Rao's own expedition towards Truth. The declaration of doubt in the personality and spirit of Kirillov is an issue which leads to oneness. Rao's expedition would also have ended. Merely an individual who perceives duality can expect to arrive at non-duality. The quest carries on and Comrade Kirillov also proceeds on a similar course or doubt and cynicism to reach the concluding state of 'oneness'. He investigates his faith against many philosophies which becomes an essential trait in his search.

The hero gets his individuality intentionally rehabilitated to Comrade Kirillov. Apparently disgruntled with the socio-political situations of India, he dreams of making a new Benares city in America. The change in name assists him in spreading his ideas with better freedom. Kirillov appreciated his country with a noble, fragile unreasoned love but his communist disguise is a cover intended to suit his rational and reason-oriented self. His feeling towards the soil of his birth could only be measure when he lays bare his necessary self of a South-Indian Brahmin. Kirillov provided with training into the culture and attitude of the Indian ethos. He stands for a real paradox in being. Rama views:

“To hear him recite Sanskrit verse was like listening to a Pandit from Tanjore. His sincerity, his enthusiasm,, his learning, were all alike - of one sovereign made." (P.87)

He accomplished that the theosophical exploit was inadequate to make a development in the lot of his deprived countrymen. He did not carry the universal remedy for the anguish of the Indian masses. Apprehending the uselessness of this venture, his sensibility turns towards the Marxism. The choice was resulting to his rationalistic answer-seeking approach. The quester and national hero Kirillov’s voyage towards the truth move through associates with other theories and ideologies

151 which provisionally lead him astray. The change towards this practice is more a subject of expedience than of some moving self-reliance.

The colour difficulty in America and the simple complexity of 'existence' push him towards socialism put forward by Marx. Kirillov feels that the Messiah for India can only be born in a brace boiler, for, the achievement of the Russian Revolution captivate him and he examines:

“The Russian Revolution was a remarkable experiment—it was the only historic revelation of the modern world. The Messiah was not only born-he worked, and his land was called the Union of die Soviet Socialist Republics, and may be a new Ganges flowed there …..” (P.15)

Padmanabhan Iyer moves away and revives as the Comrade Kirillov-persona which thereafter occupies centre-stage. Marxist beliefs mix with Indian beliefs. The radical metamorphosis in his inner self is the result of profound philosophical thinking. Rama, the narrator observes:

“Marxism had given a strange ascetic incision to his brahminic manners and his sweetness had that unction, the theological compassion, of a catholic priest.” (P.30)

Advancing Marxism as a way of life above all other ideology, Kirillov views thus:

“The communist, the true Marxist, is above all a realist. For him, the fact speaks in terms of its history. And its meaning is in terms of itself like in any experiment in a laboratory”. (P.30)

The words seem tempered by communist terms, but they come into view empty and worthless. They lack the ring of essential sincerity. The Marxist world may have enthralled him, yet it de-humanizes his necessary identity and confused, he exclaims to Rama: “Anonymous my name…Logic my religion, Communism my motherland.” (P.71) Kirillov becomes a communist priest. He becomes unaware of the real identity

152 of Padmanabhan. This results in a never-ending fight between his emotions and accepted beliefs and a meaningless gulf divides his thought and action. The disjunctions surrender his heart to his unspecified theory and begin mistreatment Indian nationalists and leaders. He opens almost an outburst against Gandhi, whom he had respected as a divine archetype. The predictable masks of Kirillov reduce his hero as a "friend and fool of the poor, the Sadhu intransigent who still supposed in caste and faith and such kind. His declining faith criticize non - violence as a genetic lie. Gandhi now comes into view to his biased vision, the sole enemy of Marxism. He warns everybody against Gandhi, “More insidious than Hitler is this intellectual venom that is spreading over vast and ignorant humanity. Beware!” (P.35) Kirillov abuses his god:

“Besides, ....your Gandhi is a kleptomaniac. You know what kleptomaniac is. It is the instinct for stealing money from others.” (P.35)

It is fundamentally a concern for his country that prompts him into disapproval of its leaders and their working strategy. Kirillov’s counterpoint seeks for a free society to replace the caste-ridden, marked and alienated polity of India. There will be no man who is the master of one more. Instead of wandering in exploration of metaphysics, the person will enjoy himself sitting alone on the hilltop and write stunning books. Marxism instills self-confidence in him and with full faith in its ideological viewpoint. Kirillov carves varied and straightforward policies. His dialogue echoes with Gandhi mannerism. He cries out with sadhu enthusiasm:

“I know only one God, and that is the common man. I know only one worship and that is the Party meeting. I know only one morality, and that is a classless society”. (P.39)

Kirillov admires communism but he nurtures his Indian spirit. This necessary core reasserts itself, and Indianness re-emerges as an enduring power. The Marxist- vedantin now declaims verses from Sanskrit texts and occasionally resorts to inhabitant "Hindustani".

153

Kirillov holds himself back. Rama on the other hand penetrates through the defenses of his fragile exterior, reaching the deepness of his thoughts, inspiration and events. He knows the pure "invalidity" of communism in Kirillov's life and accuses him of insincerity. Rama knows the difference between his speech and thoughts of Kirillov, he says and boasts about Islam and communism and yet calls his son- Kamal. This alienated self of the hero is certain that Kirillov continues his daily prayers and morning rites in accordance with observances done in India. His spirit has remained fundamentally Indian. Just as it was hard for the hero to kill the mask of Kirillov, in the same way, the elimination of Indian roots from his personality is a difficult task.

It is huge task for readers to understand the reality of Kirillov's calculated Padmanabhan. Elimination of unenthusiastic intellect thus became an essential adjunct to devastating of the Kirillov persona. By entrusting his soul to Marxism, Kirillov had almost executed himself. Being an Indian, the hero is bound to come again to his roots. Raja Rao's novel displays the strong and acute magnetism in the strength of India which courageously draws its natives. This is no mere inactive attraction for the mysteries of India but a continued and genuine interest in its spirit.

Significantly as a big move towards realizing the long-cherished dream of socio- political equality in India, Kirillov marries to a Czech girl in a "flush of enthusiasm". It should not be forgotten that the women characters of Rao's novels appreciate India for its culture. Irene became ready to marry him as Padmanabhan its cultural representative. She writes down in her diary as “I met P., after all, in my Indian enthusiasm. Tiger and all that aside, India's pattern of man seemed deeply satisfying.” (P.106)

It is ironical that the mistaken Kirillov fails to appreciate the ethos and deep-rooted civilization of his nation and Irene believes in him for the splendor and cultural diversity of this same land. Irene experiences steady rift and fear as she senses her husband's extreme fascination with the origin country, so much so that he fails in responsibility of a perfect husband. The split between 'Eastern beliefs' and 'Western sensibility' grow broad with time. In spite of such widening rift, Irene remains completely truthful to her husband and enthusiastically supports him in his communist party venture. But Kirillov, introvert and odd, does not allow her space

154 near his own opinion. His spiritual confusion prevents Irene's christening into Indian customs and life. Irene is hardly ever encouraged to contribute in discussions on India. The widening gulf intimidates her married life with further possibility of total estrangement.

When she loses attraction and charm for India her closeness to Kirillov turns into the utmost reason of desolation. The following words in the text show Irene’s anxiety:

“I hope I shall never have to settle in India. I have grown afraid of India. P. is completely an Indian. Will I ever recognize him there?... No, no, I will not go to India. I almost begin to hate it." (P.112)

Such increasing estrangement leads to discord between Kirillov and Irene. She realizes the widening of gap between them. She loses communication and contact with Kirillov. She is anxious by his total lack of response. Her previous feelings towards both her husband and India surface in profound distrust. The mere outlet for her is the diary which is both a confessional and also gives reply to her doubt. It is an expression of Irene's anxiety and India phobia as well as the unrewarded attempt she made to recognize her husband. Irene's reserved emotions, wants and desires find the written word a suitable medium. Irene persists on upholding it even though it appears 'bourgeois'. The pages disclose her hidden fear and tremendous loneliness and her internal struggle with herself. She is puzzled, afraid and finds herself incapable and ill-equipped to undertake the very unclear and occult world represented by the man she wedded. The strange in India discover its objective correlative, in Kirillov. Both of them are beyond her understanding. Kirillov is typically an Indian and his mask of West only improves the absurdity in his personality.

Irene knows in better way that Kirillov cannot tolerate any European, bourgeois, or yet communist, speak against Congress or Gandhi. She is criticized frequently and treated as a foe, and yet she makes an effort to grasp the spirit of the East and struggle to establish her own confidential relationship with Kirillov. Kirillov fails to know that the dormant divinity in womanhood needs approval. Irene gets anxious and terrified:

155

“India is now my enemy. It will eat up P. His Indianness will rise up once he touches the soil of his land, and all this Occidental veneer will scuttle into European hatred”. (P.113)

Irene is aware of the eccentric blend in Kirillov’s personality. He tries to identify himself with Western identity as a purposeful escape from his native land and yet possesses deep love for India. Although Irene is convinced that she will never visit India, she wish to send her son Kamal for an associate with its culture, faith and philosophy. She understands that he must recognize his nation's classics. But the woman in Irene is incapable to reveal the unrest that her child may get sucked into the whirlpool of India's obscure mysteries and get alienated from her. A range becomes visible large before Irene. Rao permits Irene lastly to move out of the scene during the birth of the second baby. This document is also a medium of admiration of her husband. In a paradoxically revelatory fashion, the text exhibits her endorsement for Kirillov's superior intellect.

Kamal, the first son of Kirillov and Irene has given an Indian name in preference to a Western identity of Stepanovich just because his skin was "dark". Kirillov expected that his son's corporeal body would be "proud" of this oriental inheritance. Kamal is sent off to India with the clear purpose of endorsing a deeper knowledge and kinship with his roots and its ancient civilization as Kirillov does not desire his dilemma to be responsible for in his children. The hero permits his Rama persona to go with Kamal for the very reason that it personifies pure and better intelligence. Intricate and complex matter of faith and belief need devotion to norms and certitude which Kirillov had shattered through incredulity and skepticism. Rama accompanies Kamal to the South of India- Kanyakumari. India is seen personified in Parvati — the Kanyakumari, an everlasting and holy virgin, waiting for her bridegroom- Shiva. She symbolizes the glory inherent in the meaning of ‘India’. The tale of Lord Shiva and Goddess Parvati is narrated to the young boy so that he may imbibe the necessary spirit of the nation. Kanyakumari is India in miniature with loveliness, magnificence, prosperity and majesty. As A.N.Gupta points out that:

“The myth of Parvati and Lord Shiva of Kailash is introduced in the novel as a story told by the narrator to Kamal. The story is narrated not only in an interesting manner, capturing the total

156

attention of Kamal, but also with the purpose of emphasizing the spirit for which India stands to the narrator Comrade Kirillov and to Kamal to whom the story is narrated.” (Gupta, 1980:138)

Rama exists as a Vedanta in the novel. His huge knowledge and Brahminic manners surprise even his Kirillov persona and Irene. It is the Kirillov-self that allows Irene to peek into this occult Brahminic counterpoint. Comrade Kirillov is therefore a stage in the development of the writer. The novel thus presents all the essential elements of the Indian culture and philosophy- Vedanta, Buddhism, Gandhian philosophy and the Kirillov’s interaction with the contrasting European Marxism. The novel depicts Kirillov’s anxious effort to fly from one uneasy ideology to another to look for of a good anchor. The sadhaka is in confused state and cannot decide his mode of thinking. Kirillov, skeptical of the whole world of metaphysics, gets lost in the maze infrequently surfacing as Padmanabhan or Rama.

His anxious deep feeling has to learn to bring together the three disjoints into a single self. The discord in his confused pneumatic needs harmony. This turn out to be a primary obligation because only agreement between them can lead him out of the 'dark period' of hesitation and skepticism that plagues him all through the novel - Comrade Kirillov. Kirillov is the connection between the responsiveness of Moorthy and Ramaswamy. The dilemma is determined later in The Serpent and the Rope when its protagonist perceives the want of a guide or guru to lead and direct him to enlightenment.

Change from practical struggle to abstract thinking:

Comrade Kirillov, a focused analysis of communism, offers a satirical description of Kirillov, whose actual name is Padmanabhan Iyer. The writer first met communism in him. The satire employed is friendly and gentle. Kirillov is an objective of sympathy for he wavers between his ideological promises and his mission for spirituality. The action of the theme and the depiction of the protagonist, undoubtedly disclose the author's attraction for Dostoevsky in deciding the title and the theme. The hero Kirillov splits the traits of Dostoevskyean nature. Shatov and Kirillov portrayed in The Possessed. The hero ridicules of Indian politics and prevailing Lord

157

Mountbatten's government. Kirillov also mentions to Theosophical movement, Gandhism, Buddhism and Vedantic philosophy.

Rao uses the narrative device of the Witness-narrator method. But what distinguishes it from other novels in that this novel has two witness-narrators and not one. The initial and the chief witness-narrator is 'R' (Raja Rao himself) who is a true Vedantist and a Gandhian. He is an intimate friend and relation of the main character Padmanabhan Iyer, who later turn out to be a communist and acquires the name of Kirillov. The next witness-narrator is Irene, the wife of Kirillov. She has recorded actions and her feeling of her husband, son, Mr. 'S' in her diary which falls in the hands of 'R', the main witness-narrator. Therefore there is a witness narrator in the novel. These two witness-narrators—'R' and Irene are opposite to each other and help the reader to understand the meaning of Comrade Kirillov's life and goals. As Irene's diary is included in 'R's narration, the two narratives become one and as a result lead the novel to a united meaning and structure.

The writer also follows one of Dostoevskyean method and stylistic strategy, employed by the later in The Brothers Karamazov. Different from the earlier novels, this novella does not present any continued mythic parallels. But some of them have been employed with a vision to highlighting, adapting and explicating the important characteristics of the hero. This use of legend and symbols, not only helps in understanding the theme but also in the appropriate understanding of different characters and circumstances.

The novelist begins the novel by stating that he first met communism in Kirillov Padmanabhan Iyer turned communist. He dressed in a necktie which had a "prater plus-parenthetical" (P.25) are as if some profound philosophy had gone into its creation. It comes into view to betray his unsure spirit. Other items of his turn-out are very exciting. A South Indian Brahmin, who had his early schooling and higher education in India, came under the mysterious spell of Theosophy which took him to California seashore. It was a place where new beliefs were born and where through theosophical civilization a new Benares was to be established. Padmanabhan Iyer went to this place away from his motherland. There he found many spiritually hungry souls like him who were infatuated for the vision of the Messiah.

158

It was a very important stage for India as her fate was bound with the achievement of Theosophy and Mrs. Annie Besant, the creator of the movement. Mrs.Besant desired India to come out of Anglo-Saxon devilry. The family of the protagononist’s enjoyed a popular place in the society as they belonged to landed nobility. Padmanabhan was an insatiable reader and purchased a lot of books particularly socialistic books. England and the Labour Party had an immense attraction for him. When he turned Kirillov he wished to consume all accessible knowledge on Western thinking. Thus, he learnt French and obtains proficiency in this language in order to read and incorporate appropriately. Fourier and Saint Simon and he learnt German in order to search intensely into Karl Marx and Engels. He had immense respect for Lenin and the Russian Revolution, the most notable trial of those days.

In the year 1928, one summer morning, he landed at Liverpool with very small luggage but with a grave load of books. He obtained a small grimy room for fourteen shillings a week. He was a stern vegetarian, and he ate at a vegetarian restaurant where he gets in touch with with people who were concerned to India and also were dedicated associates of Labour Party. He found them mild, genuine, and pleasant and fully familiar with Labour leaders along with their total antecedents. In the approaching elections the conquest of Labour Party appears to be on the cards. The ethnic discrimination on account of colour was horrifying. This was a horrible atmosphere and Padmanabhan Iyer slept in his cold bed with tears drip down his cheeks. As a keen reader of books and journals, he found the reality of Karl Marx on the benches of the Bloomsbury Park. Karl Marx's worldwide outlook had a great attraction for young Indian. After two weeks, with the assist of a Negro he got a large area room on the Wakefield gardens. He found plenty of work of conversion particularly from left-wing publishers.

He was moving away from Theosophy and Gandhism and touching towards Marx and communism wherein he would receive his spirit’s desire. The British Museum becomes visible to have clutched all his power. It is here that Kirillov develops love for Russia as an abode of communism. There is a close resemblance between Shatov (the character from Dostovesky’s The Possessed) and Rao's Kirillov. He believes in Russia and is completely sure that a new arrival will take place in Russia. He is ambivalent as he cannot make a clear-cut option between his philosophy and the drag

159 of his Mother India. Kirillov is by nature ambivalent; he is a bundle of disagreement. Both the narrators, i.e. ‘R’ and Irene focus on this aspect of Kirillov’s personality. The novel opens with ‘R's description of Kirillov’s personal look. His face is olden and mysterious and his coat is fluttering a slight too concerned on his tiny, round muscles of seats and his tie has a prater plus -parenthetical curve. Intellectually, he is a passionate Marxist, but emotionally he is a true South Indian Brahmin taking care thoroughly of his holy thread.

Kirillov is fixed in powerful ideological delicacy and difficulties of the modern world and is torn between his intellectual search and emotional drags. He worships all that is dignified and good in Indian thought and living and discards promptly all that is outdated in it. He rejects Gandhi because non-violence is a biological recline. Even though he goes to Moscow and then to Peking yet he sends his son Kamal to India to become familiar with his rich cultural and spiritual legacy so that his love for India and may live through his son. The narrator 'R' is the writer himsel as he states in the footnote on page no.116. It makes the narration authentic and real. Pursued further the narration ofd the novel reveals many points of similarity between Kirillov and the witness-narrator. This fact persuades us to speculate that Camrade Kirillov like The Serpent and the Rope is a spiritual life story of the novelist himself. The narrator, who poses to be a South Indian Brahmin and a distant cousin of Kirillov, come into view to narrate his own story with alteration. He does not only recount the events of Kirillov's life but tries to find out the reality behind them. He does not just present a sequential order of events in a simple manner. But to make the narration more genuine and marked with truth, he takes the reader through thoughtful entries, innermost feelings, and study of human relationship, Irene's diary, legends, myths, myths and argument of political and philosophical systems.

The novel reflects Kirillov’s strong love for India, its tradition, philosophy and writing which became powerful during his stay in foreign countries. His life like that of the novelist had been a constant quest for truth and the ultimate awareness that Indians will never be disloyal to their land. Mother is superior to all in life, viz. politics, philosophy, economics, and class. Kirillov, like Raja Rao, is an inheritor to two worlds, the world of his birth and the other where he spent major part of his adult life. His debt to the West is significant but he is an Indian to the center.

160

The novel discloses Rao's continuous experimentation in narrative technique. It is a new novel both in subject and method. In this novel there are no chapter-divisions. The plot of the novel does not follow a chronological progression of time and place, although in order to maintain interest semblance of it has been uphold. The novel centers on the evolution and the thinking processes in the mind of Kirillov. An innovation of this novel is the use of diary entries of Irene. The diary dates from July 4, 1944 to January 4, 1949. This part or the narrative technique assists the reader to comprehend a variety of characters. Kirillov is in the habit of keeping his care close to his chest and does not share even with his wife. Irene's discontent can be seen in her remark dated Aug. 27, "Grave news from India. P. is very worried. I dislike his silence when it is to hide the painful from me-more painful." (P.106) He mocks the personal look of Tagore and:

"calls him our Olympian film star, beard insured, etc. Why not insure beards...Tagore's celebrity is based on the strength of his beard." (P.107)

Kirillov's visions on Nehru are recorded as:

"You will like him He is straight and simple as a child, and like most Indian magniloquent. He loves India with a love I often wish I had. He loves an India, all with silken sari and diadem, lotus under and star on top, elephant kneeling in adoration and river behind....Jawaharlal never became an adult and Ravi Verma has done more harm to Indian-politics than Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru." (P.109)

Irene gives the reason of recording her views and feelings in the diary:

"...I take up the diary...I need to speak to something. Mother is dead, says the news. She alone understood me..P. has such infinite love, but he completely lacks understanding is it difference of race? Will 1 never understand Kamal wholly? I hope I shall never have to settle in India, I have grown afraid of India. P is completely Indian." (P.112)

161

Thus, it is sufficiently clear from the extracts from Irene's diary quoted above that entries in the diary discloses a lot of things about characters and circumstances which we could have otherwise, never known 'S’. The shorn Sikh was only referred in typescript of the primary version of the novel. Other particulars about his becoming a Gandhian and a vegetarian, his second wedding with Peggay, his sad death by a bomb, while trying to save a child, have been expressed to the reader through different entries in Irene's diary.

The narration of the novel flourishes in myths legends which help us to recognize various characters and circumstances. Gandhi for Irene appears as a "Messiah" who will certainly lead the Indian freedom struggle who could victory over ten-headed Ravana by following a winning plan of war and the constituent of surprise in attack. Gandhi, though he reads the Ramayan every day, he has unsuccessful to comprehend it properly. Irene in her diary calls the Satyagrahs "pieces of gross childness"(P.99) because Gandhi does not pursue the principle of surprise in attack. It is stupid on his part to proclaim his programmes in advance which give sufficient time to the British government to get ready itself. Irene writes:

"Ravana was not conquered with symbolic protests....Nor did Hanuman announce to Ravana, the day and hour of commando attack." (P.99)

In Irene's diary dated Jan 3, a reference has been made to the Prince Uttara in the Mahabharatha. She makes fun of Gandhi's Satyagrah in which consent has been given "to join symbolic Satyagrah to those who spin regularly two hundred twenty yards of yarn per day etc." She added further: "Their courage’s before the kitchen fire, like Uttara in the Mahabaratha” (P.100) Irene thinks that these volunteers may shout slogans but they would not be capable to face the powerful British force.

She links this condition with that of Uttara in the Mahabharatha. Prince Uttara, the son of Virata enthusiastically went to save the cows which had been encircling by the Kauravas. He was struck with wonder and bewilderment when he saw a well prepared army with Bhishma, Drona, Kripa, Karan and Duryodhan there. He closes his eyes with both of his hands and shivered at the very consideration of fighting single-handedly with such a powerful force. This myth has been intertwining in

162

Irene's comment just to elucidate and to implement the idea that these so called Satyagrahis cannot endure the effective force of the British Government.

The pregnant Irene thinks that the true joy for a woman is in her womanhood i.e. being pregnant. Irene like Savithri in The Serpent and the Rope and Shantha in The Cat and Shakespeare represent the Feminine Principle. Irene, thus, compares her contentment to that of Sita when she felt the natural happiness of womanhood i.e. of pregnancy. Irene remarks: "The woman's belly is the seat of natural joy."(P.117) Irene, again, in her diary makes a very important remark about the real male and female:

"The real man is the one who runs after abstractions, and the real woman in she who catches or tries to catch the man who is trying to catch abstractions" (P.117)

This declaration is made while she is trying to comprehend the expulsion of Sita by Lord Rama on the grievance of a washer man about her chastity, in spite of the evidence of cleanliness through crucible of fire. Rama took this action because he, as a king of Ayodhya, was supposed to present a model. For him his principles and concepts were most significant part of life. Kirillov's principles are related to the wellbeing of the people through his thoughts and actions. It is because he loved the widespread view of Marxism. Irene, therefore, thinks lucky to have Kirillov as her husband. Irene like Sita is faithful to Kirillov. Both Irene and Sita have the Indian womanly virtue of being true to their husbands. Irene also refers to Helen whose changing faithfulness is as well-known as her blissful beauty.

Kirillov is a person who is caught in the ideological incongruities of the modern world. A disjointed character, he is torn between his academic ideas and oscillating spiritual pulls. He eventually fails to resolve this clash. The novella, like previous novels, has also a few passages of lyrical beauty, mainly his descriptions of the beauty of Kanyakumari such as:

“Unmarried, she ever awaits the marriage that will never take place. Shiva, in disgrace, went back—he weeps. He woos her from the Himalayas. She has not changed her mind. At the tip

163

of India stands Parvati, she is India” (P.126)

The narrative technique used by Rao has facilitated the author to completely present his theme persuasively and efficiently. Though there are limits when Raja Rao almost worships India and expressively praises her spirit, her insight and timelessness, yet he is very truthful with the impartiality, and the discipline of the historical sciences.

Indian Culture as Reflected in the novel:

Comrade Kirillov is a sarcastic observation on the evil effects of communism on the life of Indian intellectual who had a sincere wish to get better the lot of the suffering humankind. Rao offers evidences of his journalistic fondness right through the novel, and the story of Kirillov is treated only as a structure into which the narrator's views on diverse subjects are fitted, and not a natural whole of which the views, and the philosophy behind them, are separate. He alters his tone regularly, from the ironic to the eulogistic, and allows a free play of his journalistic thoughts. He is, for example, very satirical about Kirillov's affection to his bind, and never allows an occasion to be hilarious about it slip by unveiled. R., the storyteller, meets Comrade Kirillov in London when the latter is already a devoted communist.

Kirillov has changed from a supporter in Gandhi's satyagrah to one in Annie Besant’s theosophy and lastly, into a staunch communist; but his emotional association with India has not vanished, and he carries on to value profound love for the people, the civilization and culture of the nation, and even for its flora and fauna. But his ideological dedication to communism is so great that he stays on in England, writing propaganda literature for his ideology, and for Soviet Russia which is, in his view, a society where man is actually free and contented. In the meantime many important changes took place in India and abroad, and Soviet Russia's policies, both family and foreign, changed in consistency with the interests of the ruling group, and communists all over the world, with total honesty of trust, changed their outlook towards persons and matters with every change in the Soviet policy.

Communist intellectuals justified these somersaults with suitable quotations from their scripture and with new interpretations of the purpose phenomena. Kirillov, with full genuineness of confidence, justified Stalin's atrocities in his own nation and overseas and also the opportunistic twists and turns in the Soviet overseas policy.

164

When Raja Rao, the narrator, asked him to sign a "Manifesto" against the Moscow Trials, in which Stalin had got hundreds of political adversary executed on false charges, Kirillov declined on the ground that people enjoyed real freedom in Soviet Russia. He said:

"In Soviet Russia.... the freest liberty is given to all men for self-expression. You will not find a beggar there. You will find people reading more books in Soviet Russia than anywhere else in the capitalist world. You could write books in freedom, and cultivate your garden, if you will. Otherwise, even a vegetarian like you would be allowed his idiosyncrasies, and can have a tomato at breakfast and a turnip for tea." (P.42-43)

This was also the view of most communists, and fellow-travelers, about freedom enjoyed by the people of Soviet Russia, and it was real faith born of blindness resulting from irrational loyalty to dogma. Kirillov, in good reason of his decision not to sign the "Manifesto “against the Moscow Trials, added the communist analysis of history in a language which bore the stamp of his own "incisive" brahminic mind. Kirillov, like most communists all over the world, changed his approach towards people and ideas with every change in Stalin's policies, and even exulted in the change, completely convinced that what he did was the only right thing.

He was so contented in this "changing world of ideologies, geographies, shapes and colours" that he took a wife, though, as a true communist, he should not have thought of the comfort of marriage. Stalin's foreign policy altered again; Britain became his supporter and Hitler his opponent. He issued an instruction to the communists to toe the British line. Kirillov meditated intensely; he "wandered into himself in order to find a theoretical justification for Stalin's policies, and he did succeed in his endeavour ; his "incisive" mind found a justification which was hold up by both cause and dogma. Like all other communists, he was persuaded that Stalin, as always, was in the right; but he had to discover a theoretical justification for the latter's about- turns, and it necessary a thorough application of his mind and spirit. He, thus, strolled into himself. Those were very aching days really, among the murkiest he had even known, but his single-minded application bore fruit, and:

165

"he sat himself down, one morning, and wrote a brilliant thesis on the subject. He was inspired like a poet, and his arguments came easily and learnedly. He wrote it all down, and handed the document to the right party authority...." (P.60)

This outstanding achievement on his part brought about a additional change in his character—it raised him in his own opinion, and introduced a new kind of sweetness—born of condescension—in his nature:

"he looked at his wife for the first time in true sweetness. Somehow this inner conversion appeared almost to have changed his skin—he seemed suddenly to see the skin of Irene on his own wrist and hand, as if by divine compassion. Stalin had made him white—the Indian struggle now entered the international arena, and Marx was justified." (P. 60)

This brought about another change in the character of Kirillov, from an extreme who detested social decency and luxury; he changed into a fan of middle class respectability.

Kirillov is not an individual but a type, one of the characteristic Indian communist intellectuals who were guided by an authentic attachment to their ideology, and whose dream was destroyed by passion and not by desire for power. In the portrayal of Kirillov, there is, obviously, a strong suggestion of sympathy. He is a child-like and endearing person, and his mistakes are the off-spring of his head not of his heart. Although he spent most of his adult years outside India, his heart was in the country, and the permanent marks that his upbringing in a family of culture and erudite tradition had left on him showed themselves repeatedly. “There was something of the austere in him, and his face grew in beauty with age”. (P.72) This plainness was inherited from the convention to which he belonged and was accentuated by his unalloyed dedication to his new faith-communism; it was as single-minded and strong as the devotion of his ancestors to their own trust.

The novel Comrade Kirillov is a political parody marred by the presence of a strong journalistic strain in the narrator, who mixes satire with discourse and analysis with

166 tribute. In the pen-picture of Kirillov, the emphasis on his child-like ease is always there and in spite of his passion, which leads to academic blindness and the consequential incapability to differentiate between right and wrong, he appears as a endearing person. He was not insulted even when the storyteller mocked at him for his passion and his inability for free-thinking, and only laughed good-humouredly when he advised him to visit the ashram of Raman Maharishi of Tiruvannamalai.

In fact, Kirillov's love for India grows with time, and coldness from the country accelerates its speed. He believes that the Indian words of address between a husband and his wife are superior to the English word "darling", because they mirror the exact spirit of the affiliation between a husband and his wife at a time when the relationship becomes a socially accepted truth. He says to Irene:

"You must address me as Patiji, reverend spouse, and I must call you Patni, the espoused one. Between you and me, there is reverence, but there is not so between me and you." (P.78)

After that he tells Irene how the use of the term "darling", by a married couple for each other, which is a proof of the occurrence of the spirit of democracy in personal relationship, could be probable only because of India—the independent system of government had its origin in the country. He goes on to add, in a light vein but with great honesty: "Who does not know... that from the latest theories of democracy, passing through medicine and mathematics, all had one, and only one, origin—Holy India." (P. 78-79)

It is unnecessary to point out that Kirillov is, here, as at many places in the novel, acting as the mouth-piece of Raja Rao, the writer, and not of Raja Rao, the journalist, whose mask the writer has put on. It is a fact that most of the communist intellectuals of India were great nationalists, and their ardent commitment to doctrine could not overcome their love for their motherland; but it was not true in all cases. Kirillov's emotional affection to his motherland is stronger than his attachment to the communist dogma, and he goes on to emphasize that many of the significant ideological movements of the West were influenced by those in India, and even the notion of modern love had its basis in India.

167

"You would not have called me 'darling', he says to his wife, "but for modern love, and but for it, would'st then have been my espoused one, Irene. Hence India is the sinner if love is sin." (P. 80-81)

Kirillov had not been able to renounce, in spite of his commitment to the communist ideology, many of the Hindu habits he had obtained in his childhood and youth; for example, the practice of opening his palms and reciting the prescribed Sanskrit verse when he awakened in the morning, or of recited the Sanskrit rhyme composed by Shankara to be said at the time of bath. At the end of novel, Raja Rao, the storyteller, becomes more categorical in his claim of his Indianness and his love for India. The storyteller emphasizes the child-like ease of Krillov's nature, in order, no doubt, to bring out the dissimilarity between him and most other communists, and also to underline the tragedy of the life of the noble spirits who had been trapped in the web of the communist doctrine. Kirillov’s mind worked in a different way from that of a saint.

The narrator goes on to depict the disparity in the life of the saint and the communist leader after death. It is notable that the satirical postures which the narrator has accept to tell the story of Kirillov is occasionally, as at this place, restored by either philosophizing or exhibition of learning, or all of these concurrently. When his wife died, Kirillov, like a true communist dedicated to the reason of the victory of communism throughout the world, gave up his plan to settle down in India, and though he sent his son Kamal to the nation to stay with his parents in Trichinopoly, he himself gone for Moscow, the Mecca of the communists.

Here the story of the hero ends, Comrade Kirillov, whose dedication to the communist doctrine led to a dissociation of sensibility, and to a refusal of rest to himself which he otherwise deserved. But there is also one more character Kirillov's wife Irene, who also deserves notice because her character throws light on Rao's peculiarities as a writer. During the vital years of the World War II in the ever-changing world of philosophies, characteristics, profiles and colours, when Hitler, after Stalin's about- turn, became almost an angel, and his blaze had communist blaze, Kirillov was so contented that he took “a wife to himself”, (P. 54) The wife was Irene, a Czech national, a communist who, like Kirillov, lived in London. "She had the red blood, the

168 red hair, the passionate index finger, and dialectics had rained her lust into irate channels", (P. 54) But she was faithful to Kirillov because it was her "comradely duty...to be faithful to this man, and fight for the Party." (P. 55).

She did her responsibility towards him with the dedication that her ideology demanded, and which her passionate nature was capable of. She could not know many things about him— his regard for India, for instance:

"He could speak of India as though he was talking of a venerable old lady in a fairy tale who had nothing but goodness in her heart, and who was made of morning dew and mountain honey. He could not bear a word said against Mahatma Gandhi (though he could sometimes say more severe things than even Churchill might ever about the saintly Indian leader), but if Irene spoke of India, he simply remarked, 'What do you know, Irene?' and she was silenced by his ecclesiastical look." But it did not in any way lessen her love for him, and when he was disturbed because of the sudden changes in Stalin's politics which his dialectics could not easily explain; she stood by him like a pillar of confidence and strength, and played both “the nurse and the Party-member, according to circumstance..." (P. 57)

Irene tried to comprehend India, and obtained a working knowledge of Hindustani because she wanted to be with her husband when the latter returned to India; but she comprehend, later, that though she loved her husband intensely, she could not adjust herself to his nation. She became influenced, almost five years before her death, that she did not like India because she could not comprehend the country, born and brought up as she was in a totally dissimilar background. In her diary, a few pages of which have been added to the story of the life of Kirillov, she writes, on numerous occasions, of her intention, and afterwards of her decision, not to settle in India.

The narrator is highlighting, through Irene's diary, the mysteriousness of India for a European—or for any foreigner, for that matter—and the impact of its old culture on the character of an Indian who is steeped in its customs. But what is true of India is

169 true also of every nation with an old culture; it has a character of its own, and a foreign will always find it difficult to comprehend it and to adjust him to it. But Irene's response—her determination never to settle in India—and her almost planned death to escape the dilemma, is indicative of a sentimentalism which has crossed the boundaries of normalcy; a normal woman would either have decided to go with a loving husband to wherever he decide to settle, or else, in the case of conviction of maladjustment, sought a divorce.

It should be noted that Irene's prediction about her husband does not prove to be correct, and, after her death, he leaves his son Kamal with his parents and goes to Europe in search of the accomplishment of the task of his life—the conquest of communism. The last note in Irene's diary was entered on the date 4 January, a few days prior to her death in childbirth. Here also she repeat her choice not to go to India, though she has told—a lie— her doctor's wife, who has a cousin in India, a doctor resembling her husband, that she would go "After the great event — after the baby can walk." (P. 120) this neurotic element, which prohibited her from making adjustment where it was, she knew, essential not only for her happiness but also for her survival, might have been inherent in Irene's nature — her mother was, according to her own admission, "bizarre" (P.112); it might have been the result of the shocking experience she had undergone from her childhood, or else the consequence of her communist training or else, the result of all these three. She had, obviously, a sad end, though she actually deserved to be happy.

Comrade Kirillov is a good observation on the tragedy of the typical Indian intellectual keen to serve his fellowmen and to find out an ideology which could provide the best programme of action. But it is at best a sketch in which the outlines of the story of a person are filled with sarcastic comments, scholarly musings, and journalistic outbursts. It is not a depiction of life where emotional association and critical aloofness are an essential part of the colours and the details; it is, rather like a lyrical piece written by a novice who is overwhelmed by the awareness of his own talent, and who often pauses, between the lines of verse, to clarify the details of his art or to amuse through digressions.

170

Indian Philosophy as Reflected in the Novel:

Comrade Kirillov is less socio-political and more philosophical in its orientation. It reflects an encounter between the East and the West philosophy; it conducts its main character through several ideological quagmires and finally lands into the ideological world of India. In the novel the ideological clash gets internalized in the perception of the central character, Comrade Kirillov, alias Padmanabhan Iyer. The ideological ambivalence is the consequence of the long drawn colonial experience. The colonial intellectuals often came under the impact of Marxist theory and the practice. Coming out of centuries of alien dominance, he reacted readily to the communist manifesto advocated by Karl Marx. The Marxist thesis of production and conditions of production along through the dictatorship of proletariat as envisaged by Marx and Engels forms the major part of communist ideology.

Those who are dedicated to communist ideology resolutely believe that socio- economic conditions are the real determinants of human life. The ultimate impact of this new theory on the conventional Indian awareness was chaotic. Rao's Comrade Kirillov offers an insightful analysis of this clash. Kirillov's real name is Padmanabhan Iyer. He goes to England, stays there for quite some time and marries a Czech girl named Irene. Their only child is Kamal during the course of time comes back to India who happens to meet Gandhi and Nehru. He also visits the Ashram of Ramana Maharshi and there upon regains the lost ground to preserve the Indian moorings.

His love for his motherland runs parallel to his own love to his beloved Irene This account of his immediate past has been recorded by his wife Irene in her personal diary. Irene, in spite of her sincerity to identify herself with Kirillov and his family, is infected about her approval into a Hindu family of her Indian husband. She is depicted as a victim of inter-racial marriages. This is a personal predicament of Irene. This is paralleled by an ideological one that Kirillov faces caught in between the influence of communism, on the one hand, and the tempting attraction of Mahatma, on the other.

As Rao states Comrade Kirillov is a new novel. Its newness consists in as much as the author chooses to use irony as a structural tool. Irony, in fact, emerges as a vital

171 narratorial tool in much of the post-colonial writing. Rao merely affirms its appropriateness in such situations. Irony has been proved to be the most flourishing tool for communicating the post-Independence, post-colonial political situation gets in the Indian sub-continent. The component of irony adds force and lends fullness to the narrative of the novel Comrade Kirillov. This prevents the novel from falling apart as a beautiful piece of political propaganda of communist ideology. Narsing Srivastava writes: "Irony sustains the double voice of the narrative, articulating the indefatigable logic of communism and on its limitations through an implicit criticism of the tenets.” (Srivastava, 1980:93)

The central character in the novel 'P' frequently referred by the author is not reduced to a caricature. He is the representative of a class of new intellectuals that appeared as the exact products of colonial education planned to continue its unfair rule. Kirillov gets at first initiated into the much well-known and patriotic system of theosophical society established by and patterned by Annie Besant. ‘P’ is a fellow citizen of renowned philosopher J. Krishnamurthy, who disowned his messianic position in his unique style. Annie Besant selects him as the Messiah of her Indian theosophical society. P. Kirillov bade goodbye to his theosophical leanings for good. He gets dedicated to the dogma of communism as the choicest thing which turned to be every part of his life. This is not just a shift in political ideology but an effort to modify his vision of life itself. Narsing Srivastava writes:

"But Padmanabha's real conversion took place when he became a communist and in that conversion lay a veritable reincarnation. Padmanabha became Kirillov, creating ambivalence in his own character and mind.” (Srivastava, 1980:93)

The essential absurdity in this abrupt ideological turnover of Comrade Kirillov is paradoxically enough reflected in the kind of dress he wears. Rao describes the odd change in amusing terms:

172

"Marxism had given a strange ascetic incision to his Brahminic manners and the "inwardness of his nature gave a prominent curve to his chest, which in turn gave that particular parabola of his neck-tie.” (P.30)

The neck- tie is representative of his extreme trust in communism which too hangs around his neck and on his heart very much like his tie. Kirillov adheres on to his tie with nearly a frantic dependence. Despite his frequent declarations of his dedication to communism, Kirillov has not been capable to separate his links with the customary Indian thought. This leads to a deep and sharp clash between the inherited philosophy and imbibed ideology.

Comrade Kirillov holds fast to the tender hope that communism would help create a state of society, where no man would be the master of another. This is characteristic of the dreams of Indian communists who envisage a socialist Utopia in which ideal parity reins and that no man would be at the beck and call of another. Kirillov makes a purposeful and cognizant effort to obtain the values of communism. The hardest job for the Indian communist was to calm his inborn spiritual springs to sleep or dry up and promote or care for the transplanted branches of materialism that he ideologically opted. Kirillov argues:"Kalidas does not produce lentils or Birthrihari milk” (P.83). The ideological and the resulting emotional clash an Indian communist undergoes has become a part of evidence particulars of history.

The coalition between communist Russian and imperialist Britain during the World War II encouraged Indian communists to think an open-minded approach towards British Government in India. ‘R’, who in all likeliness symbolizes the novelist Raja Rao himself comments on thus odd situation with all sharpness at his disposal,: "the comrade and collector had now become friends, like the dog and the jackal"(P.63).The assurance that the communists make and the unholy compromises lastly they arrive at on promptings from their Mecca, Soviet Union make Indian communists a bit of mockery. This happening is brilliantly depicted in Comrade Kirillov.

Rao never permits any resemblance of partisanship in his satirical assaults. Whether it is rigid Communism, debauched Hinduism or Imperialistic British — nothing flees

173 the ironist's whip. He does not spare anything that appears to go incorrect. The focal point is on three major fields as for his critical concern is concerned: Indian capitalist bourgeoisie, Western capitalism and its imperialistic overtones and the Russian Hegemonistic policies of communism.

In a way American capitalism in the name of fighting the threatening aim of communism and Russian communism in the name of the unity of working class all over the world further their expansionist designs, in an unimpeded manner. The Chinese are no fewer expansionists in their unholy cooperation with America. In the midst of American imperialism, Russian domination and Chinese expansionism in the framework of world politics, the only saving grace is Indian's promise to the cause of non-alignment as preserved in the principles of Panchasheela. Taking about the reactionary tendencies of Hinduism Kirillov scrutinizes:

"Indeed the most reactionary force in world politics today — far more poisonous than Chiang Kai Shek is your Hindu. He and his metaphysical myths, his Karma and his caste, his I-will- not-eat-this, and I-will-not-touch that, his superior feelings and his impotence — his decadence is the foulest of our earth has to bear.” (P. 83)

Alongside Kirillov Rao, too, goes through phases of skepticism, disenchanted by the corrupt practices observed in the name of religion. As Narsing Srivastva aptly observes: "As a philosopher of history he depicts in Comrade Kirillov a phase of contemporary Indian history in which one finds the intellectual torn between divergent pulls of two ways of life. The author seems to have dramatised an unrevealed part of his own being which in its disgust of all that is rotten in India leans towards communism of which Kirillov is an extreme case.” (Srivastava, 1980:96)

The progressive ingredient in him clubbed with his fundamental vision of mind comes into conflict fervently with his orthodox, traditional awareness. Most of the Indian intellectuals are responsive to the two trends. although, they have not

174 eventually subscribed to the communist ideology, they give due regard to Marxism and weigh things seriously and recognize certain of its creed such as justice to working class people and the ultimate struggle that results in such context. But they are always hammering and trace in rejecting the attendant aggression. Minus materialism and means of violence, every Indian intellectual is a communist in the affirmation of mass movements initiated in the reason of the humble and downtrodden.

O.P. Mathur illustrates the duality in Kirillov's mind as a psychosomatic predicament. Kirillov has seen much and known much, but is not capable to get out himself of this double bind He could not come to terms with one influence, nor could he condemn the other. O.P.Mathur chooses to put it as a cleavage between a "convinced communist" and “existential creature" (1982:259). The duality at his conscious and unconscious stages is efficiently performed by the novelist in very persuasive terms. The coalition between British imperialism and Russian communism provided release to both Russian and Indian communists. They recovered their deportment and began to relapse to their original position. The structural irony is the most helpful device in the portrayal of this social change. As V.V. Badve states, “Raja Rao's irony reaches the heights of Socratic irony in this context”. (Badve, 1979:124)

"One wonders how much Stalin confidence did not sustain and reassure Roosevelt. The Churchillian resources are on the verbal side. Stalin creates the world of his willing. Roosevelt must, at moments, have almost envied and perhaps worshipped his communist colleague. Churchill, the fighting cock could blow the loudest Marlborough trumpet.” (P.89)

Raja Rao loses no chance to mock the divided loyalties of the Indian communists. They are always on the horns of predicament. Kirillov's love for India is that of an innocent child, who obviously imbibes certain habits, abilities from her own mother. Here is a textual quotation:

"He was so like a child, was Kirillov when it came to simple things; he loved India with a noble, delicate unreasoned love. He loved her poetry as few among the so called educate ones in

175

India had. He loved the intricacies, the permutations, the magnitude of the Sanskrit verse.” (P.86-87)

He was upset with the view of the unhappiness experienced by the poor people of India. His earlier image of India eluded its actuality in the reality of life. The subsequent textual quotation elaborates it:

"His keenness pierced through the theosophical comforts, and the urgency of his sincerity set him thinking. Was this indeed the India that had to be? Where aerial chariots, pulled by heavenly horses and bedecked with many, unearthly precious stones, should move, the thin-legged Indian drove his miserable bullock, its sides flagging for want of fodder, and its bones speaking of the chemistry of death —it is this argument which had pursued Kirillov. The humiliation of man is awful, especially if you have seen the untouchable has to leap the fence to let your Brahminic presence pass by, or the niggardly twist of dhoti on a ploughing peasant.” (P.10-11)

Raja Rao mocks the intense postures taken by Indian communists to uphold originality of the imitated demeanor of Russian ideologues. Indian communists are die-hard rationalists. One person who comprehends Kirillov's predicament entirely well is Irene. Irene's diary undoubtedly evidences and intricate Kirillov's ideological clash between Marx and Mahatma. She records on the very first page of her diary:

"He lives on grave tensions" (P.94). Kirillov is continuously at war with himself. It is a split personality as is desire with many Indian intellectuals that prompts him to be in two minds. His Indianness is so strong that it "would break through every communist chain"(P.91)

His love for India makes him hate Europe; however, he is staunch internationalist. Such an odd amalgamation is astonishing. But this understanding is typical of the Indian sensibility. The following lines from the text explain the same:

176

"Kirillov was an Indian, and he had peculiar reactions which no dialectic could clarify. He could almost speak of India as though he were talking of a venerable old lady in a fairy tale who had nothing but goodness in her heart, and was made of morning dew and mountain honey.” (P. 58)

Despite his faithfulness to his newlywed communism his allegiance to India is unwavering. The character of Kirillov's comes out of Dostoevsky's The Possessed. Kirillov is both Kirillov and Shatov. Shatov is disappointed by revolution; whereas Kirillov of 'R' carry on to believe in communism throughout in spite of all his dormant appreciation of Mahatma. Many communists in India are described as communist Gandhi’s. Raja Rao's anxiety for metaphysical India is similar to Dostoevsky's for Russia. According to D.S. Maini:

"It is a pity that Raja Rao brings Dostoevsky into the title to lend his tale an aura of Russian Messianism. Dostoevsky's name remains extravagant in this lean and starved book"(Maini, 1980:9)

Shyamala Narayan exactly reacts to the above and says that Maini's view might have been formed on the foundation of dissimilarity in the length of the two novels. Raja Rao packs into it the concentration and enormity of the ideological clash of Indian intellectuals and in his sarcastic rendering of the situations parallels Dostoevsky’s achievement. Irene appreciates the dual nature of P. Kirillov's personality, his inmost conflicts and decides not to go to India. She knows:

“His Indianness will rise up once he touches the soil of his land, and all this occidental veneer will scuttle into European hatred” (P.113)

Unlike Madeline, she concludes her marriage in her death. The novel makes a sensible depiction of ‘P’. Kirillov's alienated loyalty and his split awareness with a sharp sense of irony and an insightful understanding of human psyche. Rao faithfully depicts the ideological ambivalence of Indian intellectuals caught up in the dominion of communism. His Kirllov is a representative of a class of neo-colonials and

177

Kirillov's ambivalence is thoughtful of a general ideological bewilderment that followed independence in most of the ex-colonial nations.

Thus, in this novel, Raja Rao is under the influence of Dostoevsky and his work The Possessed. The impact of Dostoevsky on Raja Rao’s novel is obviously observable in the fact that the epigraph of Comrade Kirillov is from The Possessed. Besides, we must not forget that Kirillov is also a character in The Possessed. Alexei Kirillov of Dostovesky’s work is an engineer by profession.

The significant characteristic of this novel is that in this expedition of Comrade Kirillov from India to California and then to London followed ending to Moscow and Peking, we see the passage of a hungry soul who sets himself seeking certainty in his country and then moves towards the other nations of the world…. America, England and Russia. In this voyage of the hero in the novel, the reader finds spread through the text of the novel gems of thought on various subjects like Theosophy, University education, Gandhism, Marxism and the Albegensian heresy.

While dealing with a number of cultural and philosophical issues, the Rao has shown in Comrade Kirillov that the actions of the main character which takes place far away from India in the West. Those remote countries are USA, England and USSR, where most of his life was spent. Though, he spent major part of his life in foreign nations, India, the country of his origin and birth, has a strong and concrete holds on Comrade Kirillov, a Theosophist distorted into a communist or a Marxist. In fact, the novel successfully brings out the powerful motherly pull that India has over her sons living abroad. Kirillov’s love for Indian culture is clearly perceptible in the following words of the narrator:

"He could almost speak of India as though he were talking of a venerable old lady in a fairy tale who had nothing but goodness in her heart…. He could not bear a word against Mahatma Gandhi…” (P.38)

Comrade Kirillov, in spite of Marxism and communism and his profound contact with the Western thought and life where he probe deep into lessons of Communism, was almost like a gracious and dedicate child, loving his country India with a profound

178 love. Indeed through this Communist’s love for India, we see that he is a character caught in the influential ideological contradiction of the Western thought and Eastern systems of philosophy. Next remarkable point about this novel is that like The Serpent and the Rope, Comrade Kirillov is also an autobiographical work of Raja Rao. There appears to be close resemblance between the protagonist and the novelist.

The novel Comrade Kirillov is to a substantial extent a copy of Raja Rao. Though being an emigrant like Raja Rao, he never lost view or remembrance of India; on the other hand, just like the novelist his love for India, its custom, culture, philosophy and literature became all the more strong as he continued to live in alien countries. Comrade Kirillov’s life, like Raja Rao has been a constant quest for truth and the eventual comprehension that the Indians will not betray their land. Besides, like Raja Rao, Comrade Kirillov is an heir to the two worlds….The world of his birth and parentage; and the world where he spend the major part of his adult life.

The novel deals with a metaphysical, abstract theme cannot be in a large mode. Its circulation will blow a limited one; as a result it will not be much admired in India or the West. It demands an extremely intellectual, knowledgeable and enduring category of readers for its full approval. By the way, the novel has a number of defects. It is popular as in it symbol, myth, verse and philosophy are cautiously synchronized. The best instance of symbolism in the novel is Comrade Kirillov himself. He symbolizes the Rao’s search for reality and identity. There is sharp legendary technique in the novel. In the novel there are references to the myths of Krishna and Rama, Goddess Lakshmi, Uttarramcharita, Ravana, Hanuman, Sita, mother Kanya Kumari etc.

The novel, thus, brings to culmination the journey of Rao’s characters that started with Moorthy in Kanthapura through Ramaswamy in Serpent and the Rope to Kirillov. It is conclusive and the conclusion that it offers is that Indians are ambivalent in their approach to the world and bewildered in the array of so many ideologies. This novel focuses more on the Indian philosophy and its encounter with the Western philosophy, features the surrender of the protagonist to the force of the Marxist philosophy and his natural urge towards the Indian ideology.

179