SITE OF SRI AUROBINDO & THE MOTHER
      
Home Page | Works | Letters of Sri Aurobindo

Sri Aurobindo

Letters of Sri Aurobindo

Volume 2. 1934 — 1935

Letter ID: 535

Sri Aurobindo — Roy, Dilip Kumar

December 1934

I was not in the least pained or hurt by your letters and I did not take them as an intentional challenge from Krishnaprem or anybody else. I look at these things from a more impersonal or, if you like, personal-impersonal point of view. There is on one side my effort at perfection, for myself and others and for the possibility of a greater perfection in a changed humanity: on the other side there is a play of forces, some favouring it but more trying to prevent it. The challenge I speak of comes from these forces. On one side it is a pressure from the pro-forces saying “Your work is not good enough; learn to do better;” on the other it is a pressure from the contrary forces saying “Your work? It is a delusion and error – a poor mediocre thing, and we will trample and trash it to pieces.” Part of the work was an attempt to inspire a poetry which would express first the aspiration and labour towards the spiritual or divine and afterwards its realisation and manifestation. There are many who write poetry in the Ashram under this impulse but in the languages which I know best (English perfectly – at least I hope so – Bengali a little) there were four here whose work seemed to me to contain already on a fairly ample way the ripe possibility of the thing I wanted – yourself, Arjava1, Amal, Harin. (I do not speak of Nishikanta and others because they are new or emergent only.) There are some Gujarati poets but I do not know the poetic language and technique in that tongue well enough to form an indubitable judgment. These four then I have encouraged and tried to push on towards a greater and richer expression. I have praised but there was nothing insincere in my praise. For some time however I have received intimations from many quarters that my judgment was mistaken, ignorant, partial and perhaps not wholly sincere. It began with your poetry even at the time of Anāmi2 and the forces at play spoke through some literary coteries of Bengal and reached here through reviews, letters, etc. There has been much inability to appreciate Arjava’s poetry, Yeats observing that he had evidently something to say but struggled to say it with too much obscurity and roughness. Amal’s work is less criticised, but A.E.’s attitude towards it was rather condescending as to an Indian who writes unexpectedly well in English. Finally, there is the ignoring or rejection of Harin’s work by this army of authorities – there are as good authorities on the other side, a lot that is irrelevant. That makes the issue complete and clear. If I have made so big a mistake, then the whole thing is a hallucination – I am an incompetent critic of poetry, at least of contemporary poetry, and my pretension to inspire cannot stand for a moment. Personally that would not matter to me, for personally I have my own feeling of these things and what it may be in the eyes of others makes no difference – just as it makes no difference to me if my own poetry is really no poetry, as [Annadashekar?] and so many others think and may form their own viewpoint – there are a million possible viewpoints in the world – be justified in thinking. But for my work it does matter. I recognise in it the challenge of the forces and, once I recognise that in whatever field, I never think myself entitled to ignore it. If it is a challenge to do better (from the favourable forces), I must see that and get it done. If it is a challenge from the other forces, I must see that too and know how far it is justifiable or else what can be put against it. That is what I have always done both in my own Yoga looking carefully to see what was imperfect in the instrumentation of my own consciousness as a vehicle of the manifestation and working to set it right or else maintaining what was right against all challenge. So I began to do it here. Instead of reading rapidly through Harin’s poems every day, I began to weigh and consider looking to see what could be justly said from Krishnaprem’s viewpoint and what could be fairly said from mine. I took Krishnaprem’s criticism because it is the only thing I have that is definite and, though his technical strictures are obviously mistaken, the general ones have to be weighed even though they are far from conclusive. But this is a work for my personal use – its main object is not a weighing of Harin’s work but of my own capacity and judgment and that is too personal in scope for me to lay before others. That is why I said I was not writing it to circulate.

I have written all this to explain to you that you have not pained or hurt or displeased me, nor has Krishnaprem either. It would be childish to be displeased with someone because his opinions on literature or a particular piece of literature are not identical with my own at every point. I may also say that I was not displeased with you for your letter. I was a little disappointed that you should have gone back to mental doubts or to vital feelings after you had started so well for something else. But these temporary recessions are too common in the path to the Divine for me to be displeased or discouraged. The work I have to do for myself or for the world or for you or others can only be achieved if I have love for all and faith for all and go firmly on till it is done. It is why I urge you to do the same, because I know that if one does not give up, one is sure to arrive. That is the attitude you had started to take, to go quietly on and give time for the right development, however slow. I want you to return to that and keep to it.

By the way, what I have written about the poetry is [just?] for yourself because it is too personal to me to be made general.

 

1 Arjava: John Chadwick, an English poet who came to the Ashram in 1930 from Lucknow where he was a lecturer in Philosophy.

Back

2 Anāmi: a collection of poems published by Dilip in 1933.

Back