Family of the Heart

Two Psychiatrist

Family of the Heart - DIALOGUE & DISCUSSIONS

Ideals: Theirs and Ours

Faiz and the All-India Progressive Writers’ Association

Much been written about the All India Progressive Writers’ Association but there is a dearth of information on the role of Faiz in the formation and subsequent work of this organization. What were the ideological trends that persuaded Faiz to join the movement, define himself as a progressive writer and poet and yet, within a few years, leave the organization, although even today, he is considered one of its leading lights.

The 1930s and 1940s saw the development of Urdu literature and poetry in two directions personified by the ‘Anjuman Taraqi Pasand Musannafeen’ (the organization denoted in the title) and the ‘Halqa-e-Arbab-e-Zauq’ both of which significantly influenced Indian (and later Pakistani) literature in the years 1930 to 1950. However, this distinction is somewhat arbitrary since the supporters of the two literary groups did not identify themselves as belonging to this or that group and in spite of heated rhetorical attacks on each other in newspapers and magazines, most members of the two tendencies were close friends and shared literary and poetical tastes.

Faiz played an important role in the formation of the Progressive Writer’s Association (PWA) and, conversely, his involvement shaped his own ideas and works decisively. The All-India Progressive Writers’ Association was formed at the first conference of progressive writers in Lucknow in April 1936 which brought together writers who wanted to highlight the problems of the times through their writing while remaining true to their ideals of patriotism and nationalism. The movement spread rapidly encompassing the varied disciplines of literature, music, theater and cinema. For three decades, the PWA remained an influential social and literary movement, comparable in scope to Sir Syed Ahmad Khan’s Aligarh reformist movement.

Progressive literature arose in different shapes and forms in the Indian subcontinent in Urdu literature. It was already a manifest reality by the early 1920s and it was mostly Urdu authors and poets who took the lead in uniting others under the banner of the PWA. In addition, the initial supporters of the PWA from the fields of literature, drama, poetry, music and cinema wrote mostly in Urdu. The idea of uniting similar minded authors under a single banner was formulated initially by Sajjad Zaheer during his stay in London and Faiz was one of those who helped make it a reality.

We can find a glimpse of the ideology behind the PWA in the works of Indian authors written a few years before its inception. These were towering literary figures whose works had already achieved considerable renown including Prem Chand, considered the founder of ‘realist’ literature in Urdu and Hindi;, India’s most renowned poet after Muhammad Iqbal, Josh Malihabadi; and distinguished linguist Maulvi Abdul Haq.

The founders of the PWA considered all progressive trends in all Indian languages to be the source of their inspiration. In his book “Roshnaai” (which may be considered the ‘autobiography’ of the PWA), Sajjad Zaheer implies as much.

In October, 1935, upon his return from England, Sajjad Zaheer made contacts with authors in different cities and states and sent a copy of the initial manifesto for signatures. Detailed preparations were made for the inaugural meeting and invitations were sent out. It was a time of national fervor and the struggle for independence was reaching a crescendo. In addition to the young, many older writers and literary figures were brimming just as full with revolutionary sentiments and were eager to welcome a new world and critique the values and rules of the old. In 1938, at the second annual conference, even Rabindranath Tagore admitted in his address to the assembled delegates that he had erred in his reticence. He stated explicitly that he felt he had committed a mistake by disengaging himself for so long in his meditative practice and exhorted the attendees to base their works on the concerns of the common people while living and engaging with them in day to day life. Such sentiments from this great artist attest to the prevailing mood of the times.

Sajjad Zaheer’s invitation was enthusiastically received in most quarters. It probably helped that his recent book “Angaaray”, banned by the British government, had become very popular(1). Anything forbidden by the government usually received an enthusiastic response from the public and Zaheer’s idea of having the signatures of young authors followed by those of Prem Chand, Josh Malihabadi, Maulvi Abdul Haq and the ‘Nightingale of India” Sarojini Naidu helped considerably. From Punjab two literature lovers who helped considerably were Mahmood-Uzzafar and Rasheed Jahan. Though they considered themselves writers, they had abandoned writing a long time ago. Another colleague, Mohammad Deen Taseer, who had helped in the preparation of the original version of the founding document was busy in his teaching activities and in helping his new bride, an Englishwoman (who would later become Faiz’s sister in law) adapt and adjust to her new homeland. He too had given up writing some time back. The main group missing from those contacted about the organization was writers and poets from the Punjab. For this Mahmood-Uzzafar invited Faiz to help in the ‘technical’ matters such as finding addresses for authors, writing letters and preparing copies of the manifesto. The fact that Faiz was well versed in Poetry and Literature, that he knew most Punjabi authors and poets well and that he himself was ‘to some extent’ a poet pleased Mahmood Uzzafar no end. He showed Faiz the Manifesto and explained the plans of Sajjad Zaheer and the ‘founders’ upon which Faiz agreed, whole heartedly, to help in whatever way he could.

It can be said without a doubt that these events had a transformative influence on Faiz’s perception of himself as a poet raising his consciousness to a new level and opening new vistas for him in the world of literature. It was proposed that Faiz travel to Lahore with Sajjad Zaheer and consult with Sufi Tabassum which he did and during meetings with many authors and poets, the number of signatures on the manifesto far exceeded Sajaad Zaheer’s expectations. Thus authors and poets of the Punjab became the most prominent group within the movement. These included the likes of Faiz himself but also Krishan Chander, Rajinder Singh Bedi, Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi, Sahir Ludhianvi, Mirza Adeeb, Upendranath Ashk etc.

Faiz’s meeting with Sajjad Zaheer was a milestone in his life, the point at which he committed himself forever to progressive ideals and also demonstrated extraordinary organizational abilities. The meeting of these two young authors, Faiz aged 25 and Zaheer, 31, was also the beginning of a life long companionship that persisted through prison terms and physical distances until that day in 1973 when after Zaheer’s sudden death from a heart attack, Faiz tearfully bid farewell to his friend and confidante.

The first conference of the PWA was successful and was attended by delegates from all over India. Faiz was the representative from Punjab and Munshi Prem Chand was chosen as its first President. His inaugural address on the uses and purpose of literature was later termed by Sajjad Zaheer as the best exposition of the purpose of progressive literature written until that time. Faiz was one of those who listened attentively since the address was in Urdu with many references of Iqbal’s Persian poetry. Many delegates from other areas of India had only a conversational familiarity with Urdu or Hindi and it was only later, when the address was translated in English, that people understood its true power. As for Faiz, the address served as an inspiration for many of his later essays and editorials and he referred to its influence in many of his poetical works. The manifesto agreed to in Lahore? pointed in two main directions, one political and the other literary. The progressive movement defined itself as a struggle in favor of independence and against British rule and was also termed a guide in building a post independence society free of oppression, exploitation and injustice, a society free of the brutal dictates of capitalism and imperialism. It was accepted that it is the duty of an artist to use all means at their disposal to struggle against such a society and that literature and poetry could be an effective instrument in such a struggle.

It was agreed that existing literature had degenerated into meaningless spirituality while ignoring, accidentally or purposefully, the very real and immediate needs of society. Here the influence of Munshi Prem Chand’s inaugural address is apparent who in his prolific career wrote 300 short stories, novels, essays and letters in a down to earth, easy to read style, avoiding escapist entertainment or a complicated writing style, all the while pointing out the inequalities and injustice in the society around him while living in poverty his entire life. He also pointed out in his inaugural address to the PWA in Lucknow that attaching ‘Progressive’ to a writer or poet is redundant since a writer or an artist is progressive by nature since if this was not their nature, they would not be a writer at all.

It was stated unequivocally in the manifesto that the true and highest purpose of literature, poetry and all art is to mercilessly criticize debased values and real, unequal, unfair social conditions, however ugly or distasteful they may be while maintaining, to the extent possible, our traditional literary values. This was essential in exposing such conditions, a necessary first step in making change.

To us, today, these admonishments of the progressive manifesto may appear harshly pedantic but in the decade of the 1930s, in the heat of the independence struggle, they served an immediate need and affected many writers deeply.

One of the central ideas of the conference, described repeatedly throughout its many documents was a critical reevaluation of existing literary and aesthetic values, the search for new values based on real, fundamental social issues and a definite trend towards ‘realism’ exemplified in the slogan ‘literature should reflect real life’. It was resolved that striving for a better society and a better future was one of the cornerstones of an artist’s life and work. For the participants of the PWA, the principle of ‘Literature (and art) is for the people’ had assumed primary importance. Later in numerous speeches and works, Faiz referred back to, refined and expanded upon these same ideals.

Thus the founders of the Association linked the prevailing social struggles of the time with literature and art. This resulted in rapid dissemination of its ideas and values. Numerous sub chapters of the PWA sprang up in different areas where progressive ideas and values were vigorously discussed and debated, poetry recitations were held and newspapers and periodicals that published progressive works were widely distributed. These publications were considered especially important by progressive writers for they gained their works wide readership all over India. There were a number of such publications including two from Lahore, ‘Humayun’ and ‘Adbi Duniya’. The owners of these publications were affluent, open minded and well read patrons of literature and art, in agreement with the principles of the PWA. One, Mian Iftikhar Uddin, would later play an important role in Faiz’ life. These publications, which were now noticeably ‘left- leaning’ published regular pieces by Faiz, Krishan Chander, Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi, Rajinder singh Bedi, Upendranath Ashk etc. 1937 saw the emergence of another publication, ‘Adab-e-Lateef’, put out by the Punjab section of the PWA and Faiz was immediately appointed to its editorial board. Faiz soon became well acquainted with the intricacies of journalism and demonstrated his considerable intellectual prowess here as well. This led to his other life long love and hence forth, editorial work would remain an important part of his life.

1937 saw the sudden departure of two of the founders of the PWA. Mahmood uzzafar accepted an appointment as the secretary of Jawahar Lal Nehru and Rasheed Jahan left with him for Delhi. M.D.Taseer now assumed the responsibilities vacated by Mahmooduzzafar and though Faiz was clearly grieved by the departure of both Mahmood and Rasheed Jahan, it was now no longer necessary for him to travel back and forth to Lahore since Taseer moved his wife and young son to Amritsar and with it the Punjab section of the PWA.

By 1938, there were three main centers of progressive literature in Lucknow, Hyderabad and Lahore, all with their own active members and publications. The Punjab section of the movement, centered in Lahore was the most active, both in terms of the number of members as well as their activities which included frequent meetings, literature and poetry readings and discussion groups. The association and its ideas were gaining rapidly in popularity fueled, in no small part, by their democratic and egalitarian ideas and their emphasis on keeping their work close to the mass of people. This was evident, not only in their literary works but also in their organizational activities which strove to make their works accessible to ordinary people, most of them illiterate. One such gathering in 1938 underlined this point. It was organized entirely by Faiz and the invitees included Maulvi Abdul Haq, Munshi Prem Chand, Josh Malihabadi, Majaaz, Jaan Nisaar Akhtar, Krishen Chander and Sibte Hasan, among others. Some honorary guests included the Chief Justice of Lucknow Sir Wazir Hasan, the publisher Mian Iftikharuddin, the Indian freedom fighter and political leader Jayaprakash Narayan and a few leaders of the Muslim League who were likely not very interested in progressive ideas but nevertheless disliked the British. There were several other notables invited as well. Both the conference and the Punjab Kissan Sabha (Peasants’ Union) were meeting simultaneously in Amritsar.

Sajjad Zaheer, in ‘Roshnai’ has painted a colorful picture of the meeting. In it he recalls that the Kisaan Sabha was scheduled in Jalianwala Bagh and the PWA decided to hold its meeting there as well. Faiz was the chief organizer and was milling around with the crowd, smiling, with a bag in his hand. Zaheer was noticeably nervous and asked Faiz how they would ever conduct a literary meeting in this noisy multitude since even after the Kissan Sabha finished their meetings a crowd lingered in the area. Faiz responded that he had asked many local colleges and schools for the loan of a hall but no one had agreed until he asked the peasant leaders who happily agreed to let the PWA use their areas in between sessions. Faiz also felt that it was fortuitous since this meant that the local farmers and peasants could get to see ‘their’ writers and poets who would get to read their works in the presence of common people. Zaheer was surprised that even MAO College, where Faiz taught and Taseer was the Principal refused the loan of a hall thereby making clear what they thought about the ideas of the organization.

Zaheer recalls how disturbed he felt at the apparent disorganization of the conference proceedings. How was it possible to have a serious literary discussion under such conditions? He reminded himself though that ‘serious’ discussions are not all that matters in the end. Middle class intellectuals often feel themselves powerless and weak when faced with societal problems. Would not this feeling of impotence and helplessness be erased if fortified with the strength of the mass of people? Are those same intellectuals not part of the people? Zaheer remembers how it felt a little strange to be reciting literary works while being watched curiously by hundreds of young and old peasants who probably did not understand much of what was being said but could, no doubt, appreciate that these educated people were with them, on their side. They probably wished that things would be written and said that they could comprehend and, no doubt, the writers too, felt that even though they were sitting amongst common people, they still had work to do in order to get close to them in their work. Once the poetry recitation began, though, it felt more like a celebration and the conference was generally considered a great success and set the trend for subsequent meetings where peasants, students, workers and representatives of poorer sections of society were especially invited.

It should be obvious by now that state and government officials were extremely suspicious of progressives since it was no secret that they were left leaning, anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist. It is no surprise therefore, that conflict between state officials and progressive groups began immediately upon their founding centered primarily on government efforts to contain and eliminate the ideas and influence of the progressive movement. About 6 months after its inception, the PWA was officially accused of being ‘socialist’ and ‘communist’ and government employees were forbidden to participate in any of its activities. This, of course, included a number of poets, writers and artists. In those years of economic depression and rampant unemployment, losing one’s government employment meant exposing one’s family to poverty and potential starvation. A number of writers and artists, as a consequence had to separate themselves, at least publicly, from the movement. Sufi Tabassum, whose house had been the meeting place and unofficial headquarters for the Punjab section, separated from the movement and finding a place to meet became difficult until a sympathizer offered his studio.

Religious leaders, too, wasted no time coming to the aid of the government and helpfully issues ‘fatwas’ (religious edicts) against progressive writers branding them apostates and heretics.

However, it should be noted that opposition to progressive literature was not confined to government or religious circles. A group of litterateurs (professional writers) also opposed the movement early. The more the progressive movement’s popularity spread, the more vehement became their opposition. Progressive writers had identified early who these opponents would be. It is not by accident that the 1936 manifesto differentiated sharply between ‘progressive’ and ‘reactionary’ or ‘conservative’ literature. It stated clearly that all literary work that led to dissension, confrontation and blind imitation was reactionary while work that led to the development of critical faculties including subjecting our own traditions to healthy criticism, that encouraged unity and fostered independence of thought and freedom of spirit is progressive. In contrast to officialdom which worried about the ‘socialist leadership’ of the movement, conservative writers opposed all ideas within the movement from its poetic works to its political leanings. Sajjad Zaheer summarized their opposition in his autobiography. One of their objections was that progressive writers, by dint of their efforts to make literature accessible to common people were ‘debasing’ or ‘spoiling’ the language that somehow, simplicity was devoid of beauty. They also claimed that instead of trying to reform individuals, they were leading them towards revolution and bloody insurrection, that they were propagating irreligious ideas, licentiousness and moral corruption, that their ideas were somehow ‘foreign’ and alien and were corroding culture and society.

It is hard to believe how similar are the charges leveled against all those who are termed ‘the others’ or ‘enemies’ and how these charges are similar across cultures and ages. In this case, the opponents of progressives were those who rejected literature as a source of reforming society, believed in ‘art for art’s sake’ and were, in the words of the progressives immersed in ‘blind imitation’, in this case, of Western literature and poetry.

Their organization, formed in 1939 as a reaction to the PWA, was named the ‘Halqa-e-Arbab-e-Zauq’ and consisted primarily of two young poets who believed in ‘experimental’ literature, N.M.Rashid and Meeraji. Their differences with progressives centered on a clash of ideology, their points of view about the problems of life and their opinions about how such problems ought to be portrayed in literature.

Rashid described it once in some detail. He was of the view that the progressives, proceeding from a predetermined ideological point of view wanted to deprive artists of their independence of thought whereas, he maintained, an artist, especially a poet, if he or she is true to their art should only use his or her own impressions of the world for their creations. He asserted that his poetry was a reflection only of his own considered, deep beliefs, not of some external influence imposed by others. He criticized progressives for examining life through a single lens while his world view was informed only by his own experience and his own reflections.

By ‘pre-determined point of view’, Rashid meant the Marxist leanings of many leading lights of the PWA as well as the emphasis on social criticism and the striving for social change agreed to in the 1936 manifesto. Members of the ‘Halqa’ forcefully rejected all appeals and ideas of the PWA and raised the banner of their complete freedom from all such ideas. They declared themselves in search of their own aesthetic and artistic values independent of any ‘external’ influences. They were particularly impressed by Western poetry, aesthetics and philosophy and this is evident in their works.

The members of the ‘Halqa’ were interested mainly in the psychic workings of individual minds, the covert motivations of human behavior and the particular circumstances facing individuals. They approached other subjects from the same point of view and occasionally addressed political and social problems though always within the confines of individual experience. Their poetry was inspired by modernist Western works with a heavy emphasis on traditionalism. They were particularly enamored of the conflict between any one person’s desires and fears and the dictates of society and morality. Their poetry was an ode to the alienation and disaffection of Man trapped and alone in a hostile society. Artists in Western countries blamed the philosophical and spiritual bankruptcy of the West on the rule of technocrats (instead of artists) and similarly fixed responsibility for the backwardness and ignorance of the East on thwarted desires and ideals and a loss of traditional values. Members of the ‘Halqa’ agreed with this point of view.

The PWA immediately declared the ‘Halqa’ ‘reactionaries’ and their works ‘modernist’. The word ‘modernist’ had only recently assumed an ‘anti-left’ meaning indicating, in the works of all ‘left’ writers and artists, all that was wrongheaded in literature and art. Only recently has this word reclaimed its true meaning ‘new-ness’ meaning modernity without any ideological taint.

Members of the ‘Halqa’ consistently criticized the PWA and declared its works ‘propaganda’ and ‘slogans in the guise of poetry’. Applied to the works of some of the younger members of the PWA, this was not far from the truth.

The war of words, accusations and counter accusations, insults and barbs traded in the pages of newspapers and magazines continued for several years and though the passage of time and the force of contemporary poetry has long ago swept the distinctions before it, the echoes of that fight between ‘progressives’ and ‘reactionaries’ are still with us.

Once again, the point of view of the progressives was articulated by Sajjad Zaheer who pointed out that those who believed in ‘Art for Art’s sake’ had few followers amongst the general public and usually inclined towards the reactionary ideas of Western Literature. In his description, progressives believe in only that art (including literature and poetry) which encourages in all its readers a passion for life, courage in adversity and love for all humanity. Such works should nurture a person’s individual and social striving and help them see both their inner and outer worlds more clearly. Works of art and literature which confuse the mind and breed within it despair and futility are unacceptable, he continued. Any work that clouds one’s understanding of self and the world , that leads the psyche towards self absorption and breeds ignorance, selfishness and cowardice, which deprives someone of their humanity and, as a consequence, breeds hatred for all humanity, that hardens hearts and saps compassion is unacceptable, to be rejected entirely.

It is not possible to examine the works of members of the ‘Halqa’ is detail here. However, it can be safely said that they did play a significant role in elevating Urdu poetry to a new level. Where the progressives broadened the subjective horizons of poetry and literature immeasurably, members of the ‘Halqa’ took the technical aspects of Urdu poetry in new directions. In the past, Urdu poems had usually followed a fairly standard format where the title of the poem was a good descriptor of the subject allowing the reader to guess with a good deal of accuracy where the poem’s subject was headed.

NM Rashid and Meeraji, influenced by Western poets, attempted and, to some extent, succeeded, in turning Urdu poetry in an entirely new direction. In place of traditional rhyme and meter, they adopted the ‘free verse’ style signaling a radical departure from established Urdu poetry and a trend towards an ‘inward looking’, westernized style. Unlike progressive works, their creations included themes, word formations, and verse groupings which were entirely novel and, as a result, accessible and enjoyable only by a select, usually western educated, audience. In addition, their works were first experiments in the Western ‘stream of consciousness’ style, a narrative mode that seeks to portray an individual’s point of view by giving the written equivalent of the character’s thought processes.

In contrast, the poems of Faiz were read and recited widely, memorized and quoted. In particular the one titled ‘Bol’ (‘Speak’) from his first published collection ‘Naqsh-e-Faryaadi’ (1941) was especially popular and in some ways may be considered the poetical ‘motto’ of his entire life, written immediately upon his return from the Lucknow conference in 1936. In it, Faiz has captured beautifully the longing of an oppressed people ready at last to face their British rulers in a fight to the end.

The above discussion should not be taken to mean though that progressive artists paid no attention to the arrangement or composition of words and phrases or that members of the ‘Halqa’ ignored subject and meaning. However, Halqa members admitted that they preferred to experiment with existing forms while progressives, though always in search of new subjects and new ideas, preferred to stay within the confines of existing literary rules. Sajjad Zaheer himself attested to this when he called poetry a fundamental form of human expression which could never be entirely confined to existing rules.

Thus it was evident from the beginning that in spite of frequent and sometimes bitter arguments, there was more in common between the two groups than either was, perhaps, willing to admit. This was particularly true of the more talented members, especially Faiz. It was also true that both camps published their works in each others’ periodicals. ‘Adab-e-Lateef’ was the main magazine publishing progressive works and with time became the ‘flag ship’ of the PWA. Halqa members published their works in ‘Adabi Duniya’, edited by Meeraji which usually confined itself to publishing poetry rather then polemics about literature.

The poets and authors themselves were usually cordial and friendly towards each other though they disagreed on many topics. Faiz once described his dislike for the subjects which were the basis of the works of the ‘Halqa’ members. He pointed to ‘the cruelty of nature and the wailing of the children of the poor’, the ‘oppression of society and the rising tide of the independence struggle’. How, he asked, could they (meaning members of the Halqa) ignore these concrete realities and close their eyes to such cruelties. He lamented that these artists termed writing about these unpleasant realities ‘propaganda’ and refused to consider them art. Of course, he continued, the worship of beauty is a worthwhile endeavor but endeavoring to create a beautiful society is more worthwhile still. How can one sing praises to the beauty and fragrance of the rose while ignoring entirely the careworn hands and wretched poverty of the gardener who had brought this rose to life?

It should also be pointed out that members of the Halqa not only admired Faiz’s poetry but published it regularly in their journal ‘Adabi Duniya’ although NM Rashid once commented with biting criticism that he did not believe that literature required a ‘music director’ or adherence to a certain set of beliefs. He refused to consider his art subservient to what he considered ‘a group of people with pre-determined ideas intent on imposing their beliefs on me’.

This conflict was never about creative endeavors. Both groups admired the others’ works and even helped at times. Thus the unofficial leader of the ‘modernists’, NM Rashid wrote the foreword to Faiz’s first published collection and dedicated his collection ‘Mavra’ to his friend and ideological rival. The foreword to ‘Mavra’ was written by none other than the leader of the Punjab section of the PWA, Krishen Chander. Upendranath Ashk, another stalwart of the PWA, dedicated one of his short stories to Rashid.

Faiz, as a progressive, paid little heed to traditions and rules. As we have seen, during the 1938 conference, Faiz was completely serene in the face of the chaos of holding the conference amidst a peasant gathering. The noise and disorder between the sessions did not bother Faiz one bit. For him, the presence of the peasants was entirely in line with the founding principles of the PWA of bringing literature to the people. For Faiz, what was important was the work, not the credit. He always differentiated between the ‘movement’ of which he considered himself a part and the ‘organization’ towards which he always had a logical and dialectical approach. In his own words, organizations form and fall away but movements continue. He acknowledged the obvious, that the PWA did not invent progressivism; it merely gave it shape according to the needs of the time.

With the passage of time, differences of opinion arose within the organization. Some artists, chafing against its ideological direction and perceiving it as limiting their creative expression and freedom of thought dissociated themselves from it. Faiz remained aloof from these clashes, he had never paid heed to rules imposed ‘from above’ anyway. He continued experimenting with different poetic forms, writing verses that painted the world in new and delicately beautiful ways and gathering admirers in droves. He never confined his poetry to ‘socially relevant’ themes alone though there remained a strong undercurrent of the pain and longing of ordinary people in all his work. He also believed strongly in the union of all democratic, progressive forces, no matter which ideological school they belonged to. He was convinced that only such a united front could roll back the forces of reaction and evil and he believed the PWA to be such a front.

The mission of the PWA became especially complicated after the division of India and the formation of Pakistan. The PWA had come into being as a broad national vanguard with a core political purpose of defeating British Imperialism. It included writers, poets and artists of many political persuasions all of whom were united in their fervent desire for independence. After this was accomplished, the organization, along with the nation, split into its Indian and Pakistani counterparts. Unlike Pakistan which was faced, immediately, with economic ruin and resulting political and social unrest, the situation in India was relatively settled. As a result of Pakistan’s dilemma, there was in the organization a difference of opinion about how to proceed on the artistic front. As described above, most of the founders and leaders of the PWA believed in socialist ideals and were proponents of social change on the model of the former Soviet Union which, at that time, served as a beacon of hope for all colonial and oppressed people. They had adopted the slogan of ‘if you are not with us, you are against us’ leading many more moderate members to become disillusioned with the organization. In 1948, MD Taseer left the organization and published one of his poems in the magazine ‘Ehsaan’ outlining what his feelings were about the organization members (Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi replaced him as the organization’s secretary).

Faiz, too, was becoming increasingly disillusioned with the ideological rigidity on display. He began to absent himself from the organization’s meetings and grew more taciturn. This did not go unnoticed and led to some vocal criticisms from other members, usually directed at his poetry. In one instance, Ali Sardar Jafri, referring to Faiz’s famous ‘Subh-e-Azadi’ (Dawn of Independence) accused his friend and comrade of ambiguity of thought and evasiveness of meaning going so far as to suggest that the poem reflected the disappointment of those Muslim League leaders who felt betrayed at not having received all the territory they had hoped for in the new country.

Faiz stayed silent. He never responded to personal attacks whether from friend or foe and, in general, refrained from ‘protest politics’. He had protested the expulsion from the PWA of a group of young artists who had been branded ‘Romanticists’, to no avail. Many years later he was still regretful that he had not opposed that move more forcefully in the association’s meetings and blamed himself for what happened. He recounted what happened years later. He remembered that everyone (in the organization) had a nebulous idea of ‘freedom’ in their minds but what that would mean in practice, nobody knew, which led some people to move towards more emotional extremes, leading others who should have remained with the organization, to be marginalized. This led to a restriction of the organization’s goals. Faiz was of the considered opinion that the organization should have restricted itself to trying ot influence the ideas of the artists, not critiquing their works. In his opinion, this was what led to the loss of great artists like Saadat Hasan Manto, Ismat Chughtai and Qurrat-ul-Ain Haider. It is debatable whether an artist like Haider would have stayed on in the organization even if Faiz’s opinion had prevailed given the vocal attacks on her work and person.

Recent books have suggested that Faiz dissociated himself from the organization after just a few years but this is incorrect since even after Pakistan’s inception (i.e. more than ten years after the formation of the PWA), Faiz was still involved with what had, by then, become the All Pakistan Progressive Writer’s Association, helping in organizing meetings and vigorously defending the association from vicious attacks by Mullahs in the editorial pages of the dailies Imrooz and Pakistan Times. He himself described the event that led to him finally distancing himself from the organization. It was at a meeting of the organization at Mazhar Ali Khan’s house. Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi read a paper zealously attacking Allama Muhammad Iqbal and his poetry. Faiz, whose father had been a friend and colleague of Iqbal, and who was a great admirer of Iqbal’s poetry was saddened and angry. He protested forcefully arguing that this was ‘meaningless extremism’ but was over ruled. This broke his heart and from then on, he stopped going to the meetings concentrating on running Pakistan Times.

This was Faiz’s formal break with the association, though he remained on friendly terms with most members except for Qasmi. It is also true though, that when Faiz was imprisoned; it was Qasmi who arranged for the launch ceremony of his new book ‘Dast-e-Saba’ at the risk of his reputation and social standing. Not only was an organization that was considered ‘suspicious’ in government circles arranging for a book launch, it was doing so while the poet was in jail on charges of treason and sedition. Despite this, Faiz and Qasmi’s relations never warmed and their differences continued to grow over time, though for other reasons.

Faiz himself never referred to his ‘divorce’ from the organization and never considered it a distancing from the movement itself or a betrayal of his progressive ideals. He continued writing about themes he considered important as revealed to him by his conscience and intuition. Thus, his disassociation from the PWA was never a big factor in influencing his writings in a different direction since he had always been independent minded. Faiz was never extreme in his views even while maintaining a steadfast dedication to his ideals and beliefs about society and humanity. Moderation and self-restraint was the core of his personality and this served him in good stead while many of his contemporaries would allow their fiery feelings to run away with them leading to all manner of extremist views or works that appeared harsh and demagogic in tone and style.

Urdu literature in this era produced many works in this style which echoed these insurgent slogans, denounced the indolent traditions of the past and called for smashing the decrepit idols of days gone by. Sibte Hasan has termed this ‘the age of literary terrorism’.

Faiz, thanks to his reserve, stayed above this fray while using his poetry to unmask the brutal face of oppression and injustice. His nationalist poems which sang of his love for his land and its people in the same tones that one would reserve for a beloved were especially admired and appreciated by workers and common people. Farmers, peasants and workers would be ecstatic upon hearing these works and would always demand that Faiz recite these at meetings and poetry hearings in poor neighborhoods. Faiz’s more ‘exalted themed’ poems were no less mellifluous in winning over the hearts of his admirers. It was these poems that determined the direction of his poetic evolution and his admirers have always included these in his ‘progressive’ works as well.

The stated objectives of the organization provided authorities with a ready excuse to accuse them of the ‘sins’ of being ‘Socialist’, ‘Communist’ or ‘Atheist’. Efforts were started to revoke their legality and this led, eventually, to a terminal weakening of the association and its eventual division into small, regional sub chapters. This happened much later and the progressive, humanist ideas of its founders stayed alive and vibrant in the works of Faiz and his many contemporaries. Today, these same ideas serve as an inspiration to a new generation. All writers, poets and artists who cast a critical glance at society’s ills and long for a world free of oppression, injustice and poverty (and there is no shortage of such people), whatever their creative endeavors, can still be termed ‘progressive’.

References:

It is appropriate to say a few words in reference to the PWA about a short story collection called ‘Angaaray’. This contained works by Sajjad Zaheer, Rasheed Jahan, Mahmooduzzafar and Ahmad Ali and was published in 1932. Some historians consider this collection a milestone in the formation of the PWA and, in fact, trace the origins of the progressive movement itself to its publication which caused uproar. The writers were self declared Communist and Socialists and, for government authorities, this itself was enough to ban the book as well as issue orders for the revocation of all published copies. This, of course, led to even more attention for the book from all quarters. However, the publication of this collection cannot be considered the beginning of the PWA. A.S. Sukhochov has pointed out that the traditions already present in Urdu literature later termed ‘progressive’ could only be expressed in newer forms adapted by the writers of the PWA. A meeting in January 1935 in London of a small literary group is the true beginning of the association. These were young people educated in England, inspired by socialist ideals and also familiar with Literature who prepared an outline for forming an all India association of progressive writers and artists and prepared the initial manifesto. It had the signatures of its ‘chief editor’ Mulk Raj Anand, Sajjad Zaheer, Mohammad Deen Taseer and a few others. Copies were made of the document and some were dispatched to India to ‘like minded, progressive writers’. One reached the literary group run by Mahmooduzzafar and Rasheed Jahan.
Jallianwala Bagh: The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, alternatively known as the Amritsar Massacre, is named after the Jallianwala Bagh (Garden) in the northern Indian city of Amritsar. On April 13, 1919, British Indian Army soldiers under the command of Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer opened fire on a peaceful, unarmed gathering of men, women and children celebrating the Punjabi New Year. The firing lasted about 10 minutes and official British Raj sources placed the fatalities at 379. According to private sources there were over 1000 deaths, with more than 2000 wounded. The British Civil Surgeon indicated that there were 1,526 casualties.
Meeraji (1913-1949), modernist poet, one of the founders of modernist Urdu poetry.

Excerpted and translated from ‘Parvarish-e-Lauh-o-Qalam; Faiz, hayaat aur takhleeqaat’ by Ludmilla Vasilieva.