114 URDU POETRY, 1935-1970 occasion of this June meeting, was actually presented before the French chapter of the International Association of Writers for the Defence of Culture in November 1935. See Baxendall, 40. 4 59. 'The International Writers' Congress', The Indian P.E.N., 3 (17 Nov. 1935), 7. 60. Zaheer is incorrect about Madame Wadia's ethnic background and her marital status; Sophia Camacho Wadia was Colombian by birth, married to a Parsi, Bahman The All-India Progressive Writers' Pestonji Wadia (1881-1958), an important, very wealthy Indian theosophist; biographical data about her usually stress that she was of 'French heritage', which Association: The Indian Phase in many circles of the time possessed a more refined social and intellectual cachet than simply being Latin American. [A] memorable occasion in the 61. A comprehensive coverage of this meeting was written by Derek Kahn in LeftReview history of Indian literature 2 (1936-37), 481-90. His report also included the full text of Andre Malraux's -Premchand speech, 'Our Cultural Heritage' 491-96. Kahn wrote a less detailed report for The Daily Worker (London ed.) (25 June 1936), 3. This 1936 London meeting should not be confused with what is generally considered the 'second' Congress of the International Association of Writers for the Defence of Culture. THE PRELIMINARY SETTING: INDIA, 1935-1936 This second Congress of the International Association of Writers for the Defence of Culture was held in Madrid in July 1937; but because of the incipient Spanish Tw o major events confronted Sajjad Zaheer when he returned to civil war and the attack on Madrid, some writers could not reach there. However, India in late 1935: one militated against his efforts for the All-India an impressive delegation from Latin America appeared, including Peruvian poet Cesar Vallejo (1892-1938), Chilean poets Pablo Neruda (1904-1973) Progressive Writers' Association; the second abetted them. In Chapter and Vicente Huidobro (1893-1948), Mexican poet Octavio Paz (1914-1998), 3 it was noted that a linguistic controversy had long been developing Cuban poet-journalist Nicolas Guillen (1902-1989), and Cuban novelist Alejo between Hindi and Urdu writers. This controversy had emerged over Carpentier (1909-1980). Some sessions were moved to Valencia, and most others several centuries, due to the particular complex relationships which were then held in Paris. Because this was an open meeting, and due to the events existed between Muslim rulers and their Hindu subjects, between Hindu surrounding the locale where it was to be held, this congress received considerable press coverage. This was the final meeting of the group before the start of World rulers and their Muslim subjects, between the British and the Muslims, War II. For reports, see Malcolm Cowley, The New Masses (10 Aug. 1937), 16, and the British and the Hindus, and, finally, between Hindus and and The Bulletin (Aug. 1937), 1; Edgell Rickword, LeftReview, 3 (1937), 381-3, Muslims. The question of language was just one aspect of a much larger including an abridgment of speeches by, among others, the Spanish poets Jose conflict between these two communities in the political, economic, Bergamin (1895-1983), who served as president of the congress, and Jorge Guillen (1893-1984), Julien Benda, English novelist Ralph Bates (1899-2000), and Dutch and social spheres. This conflict had ramifications in languages and novelist Jef Last (1898-1972). The speech by Russian journalist Mikhail Koltsov in literatures. Simply stated, the Hindi-Urdu controversy is based on (1898-1942) was printed in The New Masses (21 July 1937), 14-5. Notes on this the following question: Which language-Hindi or Urdu-would meeting by English poet Stephen Spender (1909-1995) appeared in New Writing, best serve as the national language in a free and independent India? 1 ed. J. Lehmann, 4 (Autumn 1937), 245-51. The London edition of The Daily Clearly, this question is tied into questions of Indian nationalism, Worker (21 July 1937), 7 also reported on this meeting. For an article concerning this meeting, see Robert S. Thornberry, 'Writers Ta ke Sides, Stalinists Take Control: religious revivalism in both the Hindu and Muslim communities, and The Second International Congress forthe Defense of Culture', The Historian, 62:3 into political and economic considerations. Because of the growth of (Mar. 2000), 589-605. Hindu nationalism, many Hindus felt that in a multilingual nation 62. See Andre Gide, Back from the USSR and Afterthoughts, A Sequel to Back from the such as India, an Indian, rather than a foreign language such as English, USSR, tr. D. Bussy (London: M Secker & Warburg, 1937 and 1938, respectively). 116 URDU POETRY, 1935-1970 THE AIPWA: THE INDIAN PHASE 117 would be needed as the rashtrabhasa, or 'national language'. They not to have a clear idea of what he meant by it or another popular contended that the language which was spoken and understood by the hyphenated term, 'Hindi-Hindustani'. largest number of people should have this prestigious position. Such a Whatever the arguments for or against this question, one fact was language was spoken in the northern and central parts of India, as well as quite clear to Sajjad Zaheer when he returned to India, and probably in other areas, and was variously called 'Hindi', 'Urdu', or 'Hindustani', even earlier while he was in Europe: he would not get the cooperation the terms sometimes used interchangeably, the distinction among of Hindi writers in his undertaking. them being rather vague in their spoken form. Other attempts-some When Zaheer returned to India, the polite, letter-writing relationship simplistic, some sincere-were made to define this language (or these between Premchand and him, which had existed while the latter was languages): that written in Persio-Arabic script was Urdu; that written in Europe, developed into a warm, personal association. Zaheer was in Devanagari script was Hindi. Another formula sought to divide the named to the advisory board of Hans, which was now published by two according to the classic language fromwhich it borrowed its literary, Hans Limited, 'as the mouthpiece of all the provincial literatures philosophical, and religious-in short, its intellectual-vocabulary. of the country' to foster a national literature. 3 In their exchange of According to this formula, the language that borrowed from Persian letters, Premchand alludes in several places to his efforts to engender and Arabic was Urdu; the one that borrowed from Sanskrit was Hindi. cooperation between Hindi and Urdu writers. In a letter dated 15 March Another attempt at definition-aninsidious one, in fact-was also used 1936, from Benares, Premchand speaks of the Hindustani Sabha, the to clarify the point: Urdu was associated with Muslims; Hindi with Hindustani Council, an organization which sought to create a simple, Hindus. Actually this was not the case, for some Hindus wrote in Urdu comprehensible language (Hindustani) with as few difficult words of and some Muslims wrote in Hindi. Sanskrit, Persian, or Arabic as possible: However, because of communal strife in other areas, politicians and religious leaders in particular popularized this distinction, false and We have formed the Hindustani Sabha at Delhi so that writers of Urdu inaccurate though it was. This is not to say that there were no leaders and Hindi might exchange their ideas through it. The damage which has who clearly understood the issues involved or who offered reasonable been done by politicians has to be overcome by writers. If the right kind of writers somehow come forth, then the hatred [between Hindi and solutions to the problem. Jawaharlal Nehru, for example, whose first Urdu writers] can be minimized . ... Anyway, the sabha has come into language was Urdu, suggests that part of the blame for the rift over the existence and if misunderstandings between Hindi and Urdu poets are two languages belongs to the writers, who 'deliberately seek to write minimized, then this effort will not have been unsuccessful.4 for themselves', using recondite vocabulary and tortuous styles. 2 He himself favoured the term 'Hindustani', and to the question 'What is In another letter dated 19 March 1936, written from Benares, Hindustani'? he answered: 'Vaguely we say that this word includes both Premchand states: 'The aim of the Delhi [i.e. Hindustani] Sabha is to Hindi and Urdu, as spoken and as written in the two scripts, and we keep alive the movement for unity and a common language' (29). endeavour to strike a golden mean between the two, and call this idea It has been noted that Premchand felt that Hindi writers were 'pressed of ours Hindustani' (521-2). with feelings of inferiority'; he elaborated this point in the same letter of The operative word here is 'vaguely', for the term 'Hindustani' had 10 May 1936: 'They [Hindi writers] might understand that this [PWA] not had a precise definition in its usage during this period, not even by movement is a kind of trap laid down by Urdu writers. Perhaps they Gandhi who, as will later be seen, gave currency to the term but seemed THE AIPWA: THE INDIAN PHASE 119 118 URDU POETRY, 1935-1970 have not as yet understood the meaning of this movement. They will which has been extending the techniques of production and creating remain in the dark until things are explained to them at a meeting' (32). literature degenerates into a group with vested interests, it then uses In spite of efforts to win the cooperation and participation of Hindi literature as a means of supporting its own power base and status and writers in the AIPWA, both Premchand and Zaheer failed, initially at as a mode of amusement. The aims of literature and of life are one and least, for only two major Hindi writers-Premchand and Jainendra the same, says Husain: Kumar*-attended the first AIPWA meeting in Lucknow.