Nazrul and Labeling based on fragmented views
June 2006
Several years ago, a prominent Indian journalist Khushwant Singh wrote: " Nazrul was not a Marxist but a socialist." [The Tribune, May 20, 2000] Recently, there was a discussion on this issue at the online Nazrul forum. A participant of Marxist orientation "ditto"ed and went further: " Nazrul Islam was out and out a socialist." Of course, labeling is a common tendency and these authors are not alone.
Nazrul artist Sadya Afreen Mallick wrote in Daily
Star [May 25, 2003]: "
He believed in socialism
and used his fiery writing as an expression of his belief."
During a birthday anniversary of Nazrul, Ganashakti of West Bengal reported
[May 31, 1999]: "
Everywhere in the state the celebrations marked the people's genuine love and
respect for their very own poet who preached the tenets of socialism, and
rebelled against caste, creed and communalism."
One of the things Nazrul was not comfortable
with is such labeling. In this essay, we examine the "socialist" label
for Nazrul. A major problem with any
such labeling is that the labelers don't define the label, just as Khushwant
Singh didn't as to what Socialism is and thus who is a socialist.
When I mentioned that even comrade Muzaffar Ahmad,
one of his closest friends and patrons, didn't use such a label for Nazrul,
one brought up the issue of close involvement of Nazrul with A.K.
Fazlul Haque and Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose in support of his assertion that
Nazrul was an "out and out socialist."
Let me acknowledge my limitation of knowledge and
desire for further enlightenment. However, I am not aware that Fazlul Haque
was a "socialist", unless working with the peasants and workers to
secure their rights is by default associated exclusively with
"socialism." This may happen in a bi-polar world, where
there is only right and left (and nothing in between) and the left is taken
as synonymous with socialism. But such naive and erroneous approach does yield
some rather interesting scenario. But let me defer that toward the end of this
write-up.
Netaji Bose definitely was a socialist by his own
acknowledgment and his life/legacy. However, one should note, his
socialist thought was homegrown and it was more interenationalist in
nature than "socialist" by any strict criteria. He was more
interested in and focused on "Azad Hind" than "Azad Socialist
Hind." That's why to fight the imperialism of the British, he didn't mind
turning to the Nazi Germany and imperial Japan.
Andrew Montgomery wrote in Subhas "Chandra
Bose and India's Struggle for Independence,"
"... while he condemned capitalism and extoled socialism in the pages of The Indian Struggle, Bose was very vague about just what monetary or credit systems he foresaw in a free India. They would be set up, he simply wrote, 'in the light of the theories and the experiments that have been and are current in the modern world.' Throughout his career he never wrote or said anything more specific about such matters. He appears to have had no precise ideas about political economy, save that economics was not important in itself but must be subordinated to national political considerations. Any discussion here of what economic systems he favored, and when and how he intended to implement them, would thus be merely speculative." [http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v14/v14_Montgomery.html]
Bose also called for "full socialism,"
but one needs to understand his homegrown perspective in light of his
rhetoric. Bose asserted: "
…This socialism does not derive its birth from the books of Karl Marx. It
has its origin in the thought and culture of India…We have to shape our
society and politics according to our own ideals and according to our
need." [http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/Netaji/socialism.htm]
But much of this is not quite relevant to the
discussion about Nazrul. The assertion that Nazrul was "closely
involved" with Bose, in particular, is not supported by fact. Anyone
can read up any major biography of Nazrul by Comrade Muzaffar Ahmad, Dr.
Sushilkumar Gupta, etc, and learn about this matter further. The presence of
Netaji Bose at the program honoring Nazrul at Calcutta's Albert Hall in 1929
is often used by some to hold or give the impression that the eulogy of Bose
regarding Nazrul and especially about his songs reflects "close"
involvement of Nazrul with Bose and the socialist/communist movement. But the
reality is not so.
Interestingly, often "red" is taken as
the symbol of socialist/communist revolution, ideology, or movement. Nazrul
may have been influenced by his contemporary experience, just as he was
influenced, among many other things, by Kamal Pasha's anti-colonial
struggle and success. But notably, Kamal Pasha was not a socialist.
Readers are encouraged to read the chapter
"Rush biplob, Lal-fouj o Kazi Nazrul Islam" in Comrade Muzaffar
Ahmad's biography of Nazrul (pp. 101-110). In one of the manuscripts, Nazrul
used the expression "Lal-fouj", which Ahmad recognized as a
reference to the Lal-fouj associated with the Russian revolution. However,
according to Ahmad, he himself edited that expression and replaced with "muktishebok
shoinnoder dal" - without asking Nazrul. Apparently, Nazrul thanked Ahmad
for this editing by Ahmad. Muzaffar Ahmad clarified that he edited it to
protect Nazrul from the wrath of the British. It is not clear as to when
Nazrul was interested in escaping the wrath of the British! However, adducing
further evidence, what Ahmad concludes is not that Nazrul became a socialist,
but that he became inspired to be an internationalist. [p. 106] Of course,
another major biographer of Nazrul, Dr. Sushilkumar Gupta, thoroughly disputes
any such "red"-related observations about Nazrul.
So, despite he may have been influenced by his
contemporary events and experience, Nazrul wasn't closely involved with Bose.
Yes, he was closely involved with Fazlul Haque, not necessarily as a
card-carrying member of his political apparatus. However, unless someone can
establish otherwise, Fazlul Haque was not even a socialist. Thus, referring to
these people in making an argument that Nazrul was not just a socialist or
"out and out socialist" is quite amusing.
Anyway, as I said, if socialism is erroneously
taken as a synonym for all political struggles and movements focused on
securing the rights of the oppressed (especially the working people), then
there can be interesting "socialist" scenarios or angles.
Let's consider the "birth story of Dhumketu", as narrated by Comrade
Muzaffar Ahmad.
Nazrul was working with 'Shebok'. Around that time, very abruptly someone raised with him the issue of publishing a weekly paper. Though not closely, I used to know a person, Hafiz Masud Ahmad. He was from Chittagong district. ... Since he was a student from Deoband Madrassah, I had some respect for him. At the Deoband Madrassah of Uttar Pradesh's Saharanpur district, there were efforts to rear religiously-inspired revolutionaries against the British. However, not necessarily every student used to be revolutionary. ... There was a separate reason for which I also used to dislike Masud Ahmad. Even as a Bangali, he used to speak to Bangali Muslims in Urdu. This is the reason we never became close. I recall one day I was standing in the evening at the footpath of Dharmatala Street. Suddenly, Masud Ahmad came and stood by me and started inquiring about my well-being. I was surprised that he was speaking in Bangla, although he was having considerable difficulty. He pronounced "shomoshya" (problem) as "shomishya". Then, I realized that since his early childhood, he has studied in madrassah, never having a chance to study in Bangla. His mother tongue was the special Bangla dialect from Chittagong, which he used to avoid in conversation with others.Masud Ahamd proposed that he is interested in publishing a Bangla weekly and wants me to take the primary responsiblity of writing and managing. He also mentioned that it would be thoroughly politically oriented. He didn't forget to mention that that even Hadrat Umar [note: the second of the rightly guided khalifa after the Prophet Muhammad] experinted with socialism." [Kazi Nazrul Islam Smritikatha, pp. 157-158]
This story is also briefly referred
to by Dr. Sushilkumar Gupta [p. 58] in his book. Dhumketu came out in
1922 at the initiative and patronage of a "socialist" from Deoband
Madrassah! Rabindranath Tagore, Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyay, and many others
blessed Dhumketu with their welcoming message. The message of Tagore became
well known.
"Kazi Nazrul Islam kallyaniyeshuAy chole ay, re dhumketu ...
So, if Hadrat Umar also experimented with
"socialism", a "socialist" maulana from Deoband initiated
and involved Muzaffar Ahmad and Nazrul, and Tagore/Sharatchandra wrote the
welcoming messages for Dhumketu, then Nazrul must be an "out and out
socialist." Wait. Moharram must be also a socialist month. Remember
the lal (red) connection? Nil siya asman, lal-e lal duniya
... (smile).
Even though in this essay only the
"socialist" label has been explored, the reality is that
almost any such label about Nazrul can be based on only a fragmented view of
him. In his poem Amar Koifiyot, he aptly exposed such tendency.
No one is happy with me; the disciples of non-violence? of course, not!
I am blamed I play the violin of violence; I get the revolutionaries' hot heads even more hot.
The revolutionaries say: This one is non-violent,
My songs deal with spinning wheels: they resent.
Top Brahmins find me atheist, lesser ones regard me as one of the Confucians;
Independence lovers don't accept me; their opponents prefer me to be with those Europeans!Men think I am a feminist; women, however, think otherwise,
I never went to England; I am worthless in my expatriate friends' eyes!
My admirers see me as Rabi of new age,
If not of new age, at least a poet of these trendy days!
I hear all these, bemused; exercise for a stronger heart,
Lie down with eyeglasses on; sleeping through the day is my life's part.