Comparative Literature in India by Amiya Dev

Hello Monks...
I am Riddhi Bhatt. Today I want to talk about  "Comparative Literature in India" by Amiya Dev. This article is from the book 'CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 2.4 '. This task is assigned by Prof. Dr.Dilip Barad sir, Head of the English Department of Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavsinhji Bhavnagar University (MKBU). As a part of the syllabus, students of the English Department are learning the paper called Comparative Literature & Translation Studies. So, let’s start friends. But before we start I want to give short information about what kind of things we see here…

📌Abstract :

In this article, "Comparative Literature in India," Amiya Dev's argument is based on the fact that India has a diverse range of languages and literature

,implying a pre-existing scenario and surroundings of plurality. As a result, he claims that referring to Indian literature in the singular is inappropriate. Nonetheless, Dev points out that speaking about Indian literature in the plural is problematic as well. He contends that such a categorization either ignores or obscures obvious interrelationships and affinities. His paper contrasts the unity and diversity theories, identifying the link between Indian commonality and variety as the primary focus of comparative literature in India.

📌Key Arguments :

In this article, She discusses a categorical imperatives placement of comparative literature in terms of features of variety and unity in India, a nation with enormous language diversity and, consequently, many literatures. Scholars of literature argue for either a unity of Indian literature or a variety and distinctness of Indian literatures based on history, philosophy, and frequently politics. Instead of a binary approach, my proposal entails a unique perspective on the subject of comparative literature, since I suggest that the study of literature in India should include an understanding of the interliterary process as well as a dialectical view of literary interaction. 

She argue that Brief summary of linguistic diversity: earlier census in 1961 and 1971 reported a total of 1,652 languages, while the most recent census in 1981 recorded 221 spoken languages (excluding languages with less than 10,000 speakers). Of course, many of the 221 languages and dialects are small, and only the eighteen major languages listed in the Indian Constitution account for the majority of the population's speakers.

📌Main Analysis :

In the article, we see that Except for one new entrance in the nineteenth century as a result of colonial Western influence, Indian literatures are old — two of them (Sansjrit and Tamil) ancient in the sense of antiquity, while the rest have an average age of eight to nine hundred years (Indian English).Presently, a different kind of resistance has emerged to the unity thesis in the form of what may be called "hegemonic apprehensions." This perspective includes the argumentation that the designation "Indian literature" will eventually be equated with one of the major literatures of India, perhaps or likely with the largest single spoken language and literature.

The foundations of Comparative Literature as either a field in India are the dilemma of unity in variety and its viewpoints. Let me start by mentioning Gurbhagat Singh, who has been talking about "differential multilogue" (see Singh). He rejects the concept of Indian literature as such, preferring instead to refer to literatures created in India. He also dismisses the concept of Indian literature since it implies and supports a nationalist identity. Singh, as a relativist, attributes not just linguistic but it also cultural uniqueness to literatures. He dismisses both the French and American schools, as well as Goethe's Weltliteratur, when it comes towards the history of comparative literature as a subject.

"The notion of an "English" archive of Indian literature came about two decades ago by the suggestion of V.K. Gokak and Sujit Mukherjee who were speaking of an Indo-English corpus of literature that was created out of English translations of major texts from major Indian languages (see Mukherjee)."The approach Das has taken is methodologically pragmatic: He has a team of scholars working with him (at least one scholar for each language) who collect the initial data which he then processes through a number of checks resulting in a chronological history of literature.

Apart from reception studies, there are a number of additional factors that contribute to interliterary knowledge of Indian literature: we are immersed in our own languages, whether we are active or passive bilinguals, and we have access to one or two other languages. We now have access to materials from a fourth and more languages thanks to inter-Indian translation. As readers, we now arrange messages in various languages alongside our original and the first text, whether consciously or subconsciously. Alternatively, one may argue that these other linguistic texts compel us to use it.

📌Conclusion :

After finishing this essay, we can state unequivocally that the issues of unity and diversity are not unique to India. However, in keeping with Amiya Dev's suggestion that the location of both theorist and theory is critical, illustrate the proposal's application here. For example, if Canadian diversity had been highlighted, it would be from the outside, from an Indian perspective. Although Amiya does not advocate severe relativism, Comparative Literature has taught us not to take comparisons literally and that theory creation in literary history is not always tenable. And that we should start by looking at ourselves and gaining a clear understanding of our own conditions. Let us begin by fleshing out our own comparative analysis.

📌Work Cited :

• Dev, Amiya. "Comparative Literature in India." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 2.4 (2000): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.1093>

THANK YOU...