THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY October 5, 1950

A Calcutta Diary The Unhonouring and "The Undefeated"

THE Bengali never tires of telling by small men. But it was not true United States, it was entered in you, and himself, that Tagore, that had failed to recognise international film festivals and its the only Asian Nobel Laureate in his genius. Measuring it adequately producer was disappointed when it literature, was a Bengali, and that was, and is, impossible. Honour did not get a certificate. Iceland in 1911 it was a Bengali team, him, love him, the did, and may or may not have appreciated Mohun Bagan, which won the long before Yeats ever heard of him. Laxness before he got his Nobel I F A Shield. To these two Bankim Chahdra Chatterji, the Prize; there can be little doubt that achievements has now been dictator of the literary scene in his the event pleased Iceland. added the Golden Lion of St time, spotted him as a man of genius How does Bengal treat its talent? Mark won by the Bengali film, The when Tagore was a mere boy. The Again, not very differently from the Undefeated at Venice. Aparajita younger generation raved about him, others. Satyajit Roy is now mak­ to call the film by its original name, started wearing long hair after him, ing two more films, has got a fifth is undoubtedly a very fine film, spoke like him and wrote like him. (a Tagore story) on schedule, and although it is an entirely tenable There grew a sect of Tagorites. s approached with more offers from view that Satyajit Roy's earlier What escaped Tagore when the producers than he can accept—this work, Father Panchali, was a more Bangiya Sahitya Parishad had gone despite the commercial failure of inspired and hence more sincere to honour him was that the literary Aparajita. This is not a record of work of art. Nor is it necessary to body was celebrating international which Bengal need be ashamed. belittle the Nobel Prize and the I F A recognition of the object of their * * * love and admiration. One does not Shield, although there may be a cer­ Indeed, a case can be made out tain lack of discernment in lumping always follow the other, and it is difficult to see what was wrong with that Bengal's preoccupation with the three together, as is being done. culture is a trifle excessive. Music, The only point of this piece is to rejoicing over the receipt of the Nobel Prize by a Bengali, literature, theatre and films take so enquire how Bengalis take their much of the Bengali's time that it achievements, and how they honour Nor is it true that Satyajit Roy was a writer who was recently the honoured, was not appreciated in Bengal until moved to cry, "Culture will be the Venice discovered him. His Pather The question is currently being Bengali's undoing." The statement Panchali was nationally honoured, discussed, and an incident of many is not merely rhetorical. Popular acclaimed by all critics, and the years ago is being recalled -with indifference to the arts is not a com­ public paid lakhs to see it. some, only some, justification. plaint that can be sustained against Aparajita was not so honoured, and the Bengali. He pays for a lot of Tagore had got the Nobel Prize, and its commercial success was limited then the Bangiya Sahitya Parishad junk, undoubtedly—as most people too. What's wrong with that? do. But a good thing, a work of decided to give him a reception. The Surely a film is a thing on which Poet declined to come down to art rarely goes unrecognised in there can be honest differences of Bengal. Calcutta. So the mountain, the opinion. With due respect to the Parishad, had to go to the Poet. judges of the Venice Festival, this So. eager, in fact, is your Bengali The address was read, by Ramen- writer too had found Aparajita a to appreciate the arts that not infre­ dra Strodar Trivedi himself—one of shade less moving than the earlier quently he forgets Standards and the greatest Bengalis and a great work. Again, the endless round of assesses the second-rate and the admirer of Tagore. The latter was receptions Satyajit Roy is now going medicore as works of genius. Cri­ pleased, he said, but thought it fit through does not mean that the ticism is not at fault because it does to add, on such an occasion, that Bengalis are making amends for not recognise talent but because be could not help feeling a trifle sad past negligence. What is being talent is not distinguished from that his countrymen honoured him made an occasion for rejoicing is genius. The kind of literary criti­ thus only after he had obtained in­ that a young Bengali director has cism Bankim Chatterji and his con­ ternational recognition. The Ben­ won international recognition and temporaries used to write is just galis, he said with not very polite put on the film map of the not written today, and book reviews unequivocation, never knew the world. and film reviews have fallen very genius in their midst until the out­ * * * low. There has been a sad debase­ side world had honoured it. It is ment of the language of criticism, being repeated now that Bengal had Is there a suggestion of an infe­ riority complex implicit in this look­ and if the superlatives used for not honoured Satyajit Boy before Father Panchali did not make the Venice had done so. ing up to world opinion for the assessment of our own talent? Com­ Impression they should have done it plexes are not simplexes, and hasty was largely because inflation had corroded the value of literary praise For all their deficiencies, which attribution of them to individuals and peoples should not be encourag­ in Bengal. Newcomers in the arts have been increasing with the pas­ are sometimes praised today in sage of the years, this particular ed. And then, it is not the Bengali alone who is pleased when some­ terms that might have made Tagore accusation against the Bengalis may blush. A revival of critical stand­ be only partially true. To be sure thing he has done impresses the the world outside. Even after ards in the arts may yet be the first Tagore had his detractors in Ben- need in Bengal. gal; some of the criticism against Around the World in Eighty Days him was petty and malicious, made had made millions of dollars in the October 2. —Flibbertigibbet 1281 October 5, 1957 THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY