|
Literary Review
Nerve-end sensations
ANITA NAIR answers some questions about her writing:
Is writing poetry very different from writing prose? Do you follow the same writing process for both?
TO categorise it very simply, my prose stems from an idea whereas my poetry is born from a feeling.
Naturally this means that there is a certain difference in the writing process. I can plan my prose pieces. Research it; ponder on it and choose a moment to begin work on it. With poetry, it begins with a very strong emotion and a need to capture that emotion or perhaps come to terms with it and such is the strength of that feeling that I write it no matter what time of the day or where I am. With prose, I exercise control over the words and thought. With poetry, it is vice versa.
Though you write in English, your sensibility is partly Malayali. How much does this come through in your poetry?
I agree that my sensibility is partly Malayali. But it wouldn't be right to say that all my poetry or for that matter all my writings are tempered by this sensibility. In poetry, a poem that draws on Kerala or the Kerala experience would, of course, evolve from the partly Malayali sensibility. My metaphors would unconsciously evoke Kerala and even the emotions would be indicative of a Malayali state of mind. But there are several poems in this collection, which have nothing to do with Kerala or I being a Malayali. And in those poems this sensibility has no room.
What influences your poetry writing? Who are your favourite poets? Have you get poetic role models?
Like I said, my poetry is born from a need to understand a feeling, emotion or an experience, whether it is mine or one observed. But as in my fiction or essays, I have no real influences. I do have favourite poets — Robert Creeley, Pablo Neruda, Langston Hughes, Grace Nichols, Philip Larkin — but no poetic role models.
How would you react to the charge that your writing is naïve, lacking the "complex maturity of consciousness touched by the special knowledges of the 20th Century, such as, say, feminism or psychoanalysis"?
First of all I would think a bumptious phrase like "complex maturity of consciousness touched by the special knowledges of the 20th Century, such as, say, feminism or psychoanalysis" reflects a mind lacking in poetic sensibilities or for that matter literary sensitivity. I have always believed that literature or any art ought not to be used as a platform for polemics of any sort. Art ought to reflect real life as it is and not be a tarted up version of it. Art ought to be understood and shouldn't be couched in jargon or in cerebral meanderings that makes it inaccessible to most people. To appreciate art, you shouldn't have to be a scholar or a specialist. It is enough if you have sensitivity.
More specifically, I would say that the person making this charge hasn't read my poetry. I think more than anything else, my poetry strips away the need to create beautiful words and phrases and instead dwells on the beauty of the everyday. The extraordinary of the ordinary. Where complexity is in the thought rather than the phrase. Where maturity is in the restraint rather than the obvious. Where consciousnesses and commonplace sensations drawn from nerve ends temper the mind. As for the "special knowledges of the 20th Century, say feminism," some of that does find its way into my poetry. In fact, I have a series of poems titled "Why Women Dream". (And yet, I wouldn't say that all of my poetry is women-centric... .) Or take psychoanalysis. The poem titled "An Ostrich's Love Song" is a mockery of what psychotherapists do.
Finally, I would think naivety is preferable to pompousness... .
Would you agree that poetry such as yours appeals to a limited audience — the urban, displaced elite?
No, not at all. My poetry, as my fiction, steers very clearly away from the urban displaced elite. It would appeal to anyone who understands poetry as I do. I personally have never been able to identify with poetry that's very esoteric and my poems reflect that discomfort — that is, I write poetry which is open. I wouldn't use the word simple but they are, despite the fact that I write on a wide variety of subjects, easy to identify with.
In fact, my world is neither urban, displaced nor elitist. (That I live in a city is more circumstantial rather than out of choice.) My world is one rooted in reality and it is a familiar world to millions of people. If there is angst, that is a human condition rather than a disorder specific to the urban, displaced elite.
Why Yeti?
I was very impressed by Yeti's interest in poetry and translations, two spheres most publishers shy away from and which is why I was very happy to give them my collection of poetry for their list of inaugural titles.
How good is your Malayalam? Do you write in it?
My spoken Malayalam is very good. I read Malayalam. But do not write it.
Do you write poetry in specific moods?
Almost all my poems are a result of a particular surge of pure emotion in a particular situation. It is never premeditated or an idea that has been worked on. There is no mulling over a poem; instead it is the spontaneous resonance of a mind that's been tuned to a fine pitch by circumstances and surroundings. The business of crafting might happen later but usually my poems are captured as I feel...
What next?
I will begin work on a novel soon. Meanwhile I'm editing an anthology for Penguin and have finished work on a children's book based on Indian myths for Puffin. Both books are scheduled for release in January and July 2003 respectively.
K.K.R.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Literary Review
|
