seshendrasharma

In countries like India we suffer from great handicaps in the matter of acquisition of knowledge either developed in our own country or in other countries. For a man in quest of knowledge, our country hardly offers any congenial circumstances. In the first place the libraries here are so ill conceived and so badly organised that the book you want is either not known at all to the authorities or there is no competent guide to supply relevant information. They are absolutely useless to any serious pursuit of knowledge. Then we have the universities which virtually play no role whatever in the field of learning; they can offer nothing to the countries number of minds which are thirsting for knowledge. They are only massive buildings empty of the spirit of learning but saturated with spirit of false superiority and intrigue, forging a part of the vicious political structure obtaining in the country.

In this context of things an individual involved in pursuit of knowledge is a miserable creature slogging in loneliness without any help and making no appreciable headway. His knowledge is bound to be imperfect, incomplete and more often appallingly meagre. He does not know what is happening in other parts of his own country, how we expect of him to know of Longinus, or Horace?

For a man like me entirely guided by the ravishing hunger of the soul, and also the inherited classical forces that keep stirring the conscience, my acquisitions are bound to be by fits and starts and to some extent accidental. It was with a certain feeling surprise that I stumbled on information about the work done on poetics in the days of Greece and Rome, by thinkers like Horace, Longinus, Aristorchus and others besides Aristotle.

Horace of the 1st century B.C. who was a poet, contemporary of Julius Caesar and Augustus and a close friend of Virgil has also produced a treatise on poetry called Ars Poetica, which was well known in his times. The work of Horace though, unlike Longinus, is lacking in scientific approach, shows lot of common sense and the calibre of his understanding of the subtleties of craft of poetry, is undoubtedly of a high order. His discussions on words in the literary language are remarkably sensitive. He says:
“ You will make an excellent impression if you use care and subtlety in placing your words and, by the skilful choice of setting, give fresh meaning to a familiar word…”
“ As the woods change their foliage with the decline of each year and earliest leaves fall, so words die out with old age; and the newly born ones thrive and prosper just like human beings in the vigour of youth. We are all destined to die, we and all our works.”
“How much less likely are the glory and grace of language to have an enduring life! Many terms that have now dropped out of use will be revived if usage so requires, and others which are now in disrepute will die out; for it is usage which regulates the laws and conventions of speech.”

Horace being essentially a poet, his treatment of the subject is more poetic and less scientific.

Horace is of the opinion that a poet needs training in his art; he says;
“ If I have not the ability and skill to adhere to these well defined functions and styles of poetic forms, why should I be hailed as a poet? Why out of false shame should I prefer to remain ignorant rather than to learn my craft?”

A more interesting thing to note is that he advises the poet to subject his work voluntarily to the critical analysis of a competent person.

He would say, “you must put this right and this too please.” If after two or three ineffectual attempts you said you could not do any better he would tell you to get rid of the passage, the lines were badly turned and would have to be hammered out again. If you choose to defend a weakness, rather than correct it, he would not say another word, nor waste any effort in trying to prevent you from regarding yourself and your work as unique and unrivalled. An honest, sensible man will condemn any lines that are lifeless, will find fault with them if they are rough, and run his pen through any that are intelligent …. He will not say ‘ why should I quarrel with a friend over trifles? Those trifles will bring his friend into serious trouble when once his efforts have been taken amiss and he has become an object of ridicule.’

There were many other eminent personalities who made invaluable contributions to the development of poetics though they are mere names to us. On the other hand little is known of Longinus, even of his name or his period, even though the text of his Treatise is available to us despite loss of some portions. It is supposed to have been written in the 1st century A.D, and ascribed to an imaginary name Longinus, which is much worse than the position of Bhasa the playwright of Indian Literature whose name at least is undisputed. Aristorchus is another great critic of antiquity who lived in Alexandria in the 2nd century B.C. Ammonius, his disciple was described as the founder of scientific scholarship.

All these and others have left an aura of brilliance in the realm of literary critisicm in those very early days of our history.
-Seshendra Sharma