1

ASSIGNMENT GURU (2018-2019)

M.E.G.-10
English Studies In India
Disclaimer/Special Note: These are just the sample of the Answers/Solutions to some of the Questions given in the
Assignments. These Sample Answers/Solutions are prepared by Private Teacher/Tutors/Authors for the help and guidance
of the student to get an idea of how he/she can answer the Questions given the Assignments. We do not claim 100%
accuracy of these sample answers as these are based on the knowledge and capability of Private Teacher/Tutor. Sample
answers may be seen as the Guide/Help for the reference to prepare the answers of the Questions given in the assignment.
As these solutions and answers are prepared by the private Teacher/Tutor so the chances of error or mistake cannot be
denied. Any Omission or Error is highly regretted though every care has been taken while preparing these Sample Answers/
Solutions. Please consult your own Teacher/Tutor before you prepare a Particular Answer and for up-to-date and exact
information, data and solution. Student should must read and refer the official study material provided by the university.

Answer all questions.

Q. 1. Why do you supposed English/ English Studies was introduced in post-independent India?
Ans. The dominance of English in the educational sphere after 1947 reflects a betrayal of the promises made to
the Indians at the time of independence. A close relationship already existed between the policy of educating the
Indians in the literatures and languages of the colonisers and the political-ideological imperatives of British
imperialism. The great nationalists of the pre-independence period had understood the crucial role of English in the
hegemonisation of the native mind. The political independence of India from British rule raised hopes of a possible
decolonisation in cultural and educational fields through the formulation of new policies by Indian Government.
One of the simplest strategies to subvert the dominance of English was its replacement by a modern Indian language.
For this, three language formula was adopted. The Commission emphasised that the continuance of English was
highly desirable because not only did it occupy significant place on the Indian education scene as a library language
but it could be used for developing the Indian languages. The concept of the development of Indian languages
through English can be traced from the early nineteenth century. The major issue over which the British educational
administrators fought was the enrichment of Indian vernaculars but the enrichment project recognised a hierarchy
among languages. It amounted to an admission on the part of Commission that the modern Indian languages, when
compared to English, were deficient in certain respects. British ideologues instilled into the native mind that English
was an agent of rationality and modern sensibility. The average middle class Indian student well versed in English
in post-independence India was inclined to enroll herself in the original centres of English learning i.e. Oxford and
Cambridge than to languish in ‘sub-standard’ institutes of higher education in India. The association of English with
civilisational and cultural progress was never seriously questioned even after independence. The bureaucracy and
universities of independent India have shown a marked preference for students who have received education in
western countries thus replicating the pre-independence period when the England returned elite manned the higher
echelons of administration and educational institution. The Commission failed to see all these factors responsible
for the so called brain-drain. Though it did not take suitable measures to counter the bias for English education, it
certainly strengthened the dominant notion of the superiority of English by recommending the establishment of
major universities. A.R. Kamat’s association of English with Indian elitism marks a significant departure from the
traditional view on Indian education as a familiarisation tool with modern forms of thought and progressive attitudes
is replaced by a view that the continuance of English in India perpetuated the political social hegemony of the Indian
ruling class. Thus, the ruling elite of India betrayed any hope of an indigenous cultural revolution. As Kamat observes,
the arbiters of India’s destiny soon found that their interests were better served not by removing this stranglehold of
English but by continuing it with minor modifications so that their own offspring (often mediocre and not good)
could also join the select group of ‘foreign trained’. It was found that the universities produced a great number of
graduates many of whom were unable to find employment in the job market. Yet it could not frame a policy to help

2
the educated unemployed youth. As unemployment and poverty rose in India, due to the impoverishment of the
agricultural sector and indiscriminate industrialisation of the country, the consciousness that the political class has
failed in its promises grew stronger. Nehru’s hope of building an educational system on new foundations after
independence has been belied. English which was used by the colonial masters in the nineteenth century to build up
a class of indigenous elites has not only continued but has become synonymous with education itself in the post-
independence period of Indian history. The Indian elite, which played a progressive role in the nationalist struggle
against British imperialism, lost its contact with the masses in the decades that followed Indian independence. The
national system of education with the dissemination of political, social and cultural awareness among the Indian
people as its goal could not be carried through English. Any attempts to bring the fruits of modern sciences and arts
to the doorsteps of the people entailed the use of the people’s own languages. However, such a goal was not congenial
to the interests of the Indian ruling class. It was a well calculated strategy of this class to keep the masses in ignorance
by using English which not only insulated them from the concerns of the people but also gave them social power and
prestige. At the same time the ruling elite justified the use of English in the name of progress, modernity and national
unity and integrity. It raised the bogey of linguistic nationalism which threatened to spilt the nation into small
linguistic entities. Both the attempts to evolve a federal language which would transcend linguistic boundaries and
the proposition that English be used as the national language were based on the theoretical premise that a single
language unite people while several languages divide them.
As unemployment and poverty rose in India due to the impoverishment of the agricultural sector and indiscriminate
industrialisation of the country, the consciousness that the political class has failed in its promises grew stronger.
The diverse political groups that had come up in the meantime posed a significant challenge to India’s main political
party the Congress, who exploited consciousness. The chief strength of such groups was social and economic
disempowerment of people who held, sectarian views about Indian society. These groups used the anguish of the
oppressed masses to further their own political agenda.
The nineteenth century saw an increased number of caste and Communal violence threatened to tear the secular
fabric of country to shreds. In early 1990s, the United Front Government came to power which realised the threats
and sought to counter them. It appointed Ramamurti Commission to review the educational policy of 1986 and to
bring about educational reforms to check the growing menace of casteism and communalism in Indian society.
The Ramamurti Commission focused upon the evils of casteism, communalism and obscurantism that had also
infested educational establishments. It understood that the reason for the growth of such forces lay on the socio-
economic oppression of the Indian masses. Thus, in the Commission’s scheme of education, villages were assigned
a primary role. The reason given for it was that the majority of the Indian population lived in villages. Villages are
“where our producers live, voters live, the poor and illiterate live.” It was clear that the Commission’s educational
framework had no place or use for English. However, the Commission neglected the sphere of higher education and
therefore, the controversial subject of languages. Rather, it insisted upon the universalisation of primary education
and vocationalisation and decentralisation of education in general. Decentralisation meant an implicit opposition to
the ideas of all institutes that were meant to produce the anglicists elites of India. The Ramamurti Commission did
not indulge in any debates on cultural unity or diversity of India as these debates were usually used to oppose the
process of educational decentralisation. Its aim was to educate the masses directly so as to generate a consciousness
of social justice and equality in them.
Thus, the Commission implicitly critiqued the Macaulayan idea of educating a privileged few. It rejected the
fake pessimism of the ruling class expressed in the view that it was impossible to educate the vast population of an
equally vast country such as India.
During the Indian National Movement that began towards the end of the nineteenth century and culminated in
independence of India in 1947, there was a peculiar relationship between the nationalistic upsurge in India and
English. India was a British colony bearing the bitterness of being second to a metropolitan centre. It was supposed
to serve at the cost of its resources, culture, identity dignity and the interest of a foreign power. There was a split
between the English-knowing middle class meant to emulate the behaviour and values of the master segment and
thus working to the detriment of their own society. The enlightened sections in India had a modernity and rationality
as well as a moral daring that would be the envy of the thinkers and practitioners of the eighteenth century European
enlightenment. It was stressed by the enlightened and respectable persons that the language of the National Movement
was to be an Indian language which should be understood and spoken by the ordinary Indians. In the phase of the

3
National Movement India needed a language through which the message of freedom, resistance to imperialism,
identity and self-respect could be put across effectively. The kind of Hindi that evolved over the first few decades
fitted better rather than any other language. English didn’t even figure anywhere in the scheme, despite being the
language of higher discourse at the national level. A mass movement required a language capable of being understood
and absorbed by the masses and Hindi was the one meant to play the role of carrying the nationalist argument to the
ordinary people. The National Movement is the phase which marks the hey-day of India’s languages and literatures
that pushed the language of our colonial masters clearly to the margins. However, marginalisation had occurred long
before in the phase of 1857-1880. The momentous happening with which the second phase (1857-1880) of English
in India is linked was the famous revolt of Indian soldiers against the British in 1857. It was termed as mutiny since
the British considered it an illegal and unethical act. From the Indian point of view it was an expression of discontent
and anger against a power in the presence which the country felt helpless. The British from 1857 onwards chose a
course different from the one they had adopted earlier. Status of India was changed according to which India was
placed directly under the English monarch and thus, becoming a colony. The general conception of the British was
also meanwhile altered for Indians. Indians, from now were treated with suspicion irrespective of whether they were
from the middle classe, the urban poor, villagers or the landed gentry. The phase was productive in the area of
literature unlike the previous one that had inspired only thinkers and reformers. With increaseing knowledge, a large
number of creative minds began to look at their counterparts in England as their role models and sought to emulate
their examples. Through this emerged a phenomenon in which the Indian art formed an interface with the European
ones. The latter helped the Indian mind to wrestle free from the highly stylised and moralistic renderings of myths in
the Indian writing. However, this phase unhappily caused the marginalisation of those Indian forms that struggled to
represent new experiences, dichotomies and disharmonies in Indian life. It took the middle class minds away from
some of the best trends emerging in Indian languages. The third phase (1880-1947) however, brought out the inefficacy
of a foreign language. In this period, our society decided to form itself as a meaningful entity by adopting a course at
once challenging and desirable. With the start of the Indian National Movement at the end of the nineteenth century,
which culminated in the independence of India in 1947 a genuine relation which was totally antagonistic one,
developed between the nationalist upsurge in India and English. This is also the question of the role of a language or
a number of languages play in social life. India was a British colony at that time and had to bear the bitter or we can
say undesirable implications of being next to a metropolitan centre. It had to serve at the cost of everything. Macaulay’s
dream of creating a middle class in India that would fight English battles and act as buffer between the administration
and the common masses took a reverse turn in the nationalist phase in society. There occurred a crack between the
English knowing middle classes meant to emulate the behaviour and values of the master segment and thus working
to the detriment of their own society. This happened but the reverse also raised its head deep within their psyche. In
this context, the examples of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru are particularly educative in that they symbolise
the need of the time. Both stood for the effort of the enlightened sections aimed at creating nationalist consciousness.
The enlightened sections in India chose in the case of the split the issue of dignity in preference to the modernity of
the kind the British represented as colonisers. Enlightened sections in India had modernity and rationality as well as
a moral daring that would be the envy of the thinkers and practitioners of the eighteenth century European
enlightenment. Both of them spoke and wrote better English than most Indians. However, they sent a different
message across to people within the Congress as well as outside. They stressed that the language of the National
Movement was to be an Indian language, a language that ordinary Indians could understand and speak. Most of the
Indian languages in the nineteenth century had a vocabulary rooted in the medieval life and ethos. Few of them had
a grammar of their own which recognised their structures and identified rules determining them. After it came
Bankim Chandra. He decided to write in the Bengali although being fluent in English as well. But the language for
his fiction had to be Bengali for the reason cited before. Premchand’s example comes next, a truly perfect example
as unlike most other Indian writers of the time, he shuffled between many native languages and dialects to finally
settle down to writing in Hindi. His Hindi drew from the spoken word and was yet formal. There is no denying that
Premchand’s linguistic resources with respect to Persian and Urdu were enormous. His English also matched well
with that of his contemporaries, most of who felt more at ease in it than in their mother tongue. His mother tongue
was Avadhi, a dialect that had a greater claim on acceptability in North India than any other spoken language in the
region, with the sole exception of Braj. India in this phase of the National Movement, needed a language through
which the message of freedom, resistance to imperialism, identity and self-respect could be put across effectively.

4
The kind of Hindi that evolved over the first few decades of the twentieth century fitted this requirement in spite of
the fact that languages such as Bengali, Tamil, Malyalam, etc. were richer in vocabulary and cultural content. The
important thing in the discussion is that English did not figure anywhere in the scheme, even as it remained the
language of higher discourse at the national level. A mass movement needs a language capable of being understood
and absorbed by the masses and Hindi, Bengali, Oriya, Gujarati or Marathi were the ones meant to play the role of
carrying the nationalist argument to the ordinary people. This is the reason why Indian writing in this period flourished
as never before in different Indian languages. If there is any renaissance of Indian writing in our history, it belongs to
this phase of the national movement.
Q. 2. Would you agree that Raja Ram Mohan Roy contributed effectively to the promotion of Indian
English Writers? Comment
Ans. Raja Ram Mohan Roy locates a contradiction between the modern scientific spirit of European civilisation
and its educational policy in India. He was shocked when he came to know about the proposal to establish the new
Sanskrit College. In his view, it does not conform to the liberal image of the British. He expected the colonial power
to be true to its liberal image and to find ways and means to promote western sciences and arts for the benefit of its
Indian subjects. According to Roy, Europeans have emerged from the medievalism of the scholastic philosophers
by replacing scholasticism with the scientific spirit of Baconian philosophy. By analysing the march of European
civilisation from the rational religiosity of the Middle Ages to the world of modern science, Roy was able to give a
historical dimension to the pitiful ignorance of the Indians. Within Roy’s framework, the superstitious and essentially
religious character of the native’s world defines the pre-Renaissance world of the schoolmen in Europe. Roy’s
historicisation of the socio-cultural practices of the Indian masses subverts the idea of their inherent inferiority. It
ushers in the possibility of change as an intensive educational programme consisting of modern sciences and arts
that could root out the decadent medieval ideas that in his view, hampered progress. He gave the English studies
importance for increasing the knowledge of his countrymen. According to Roy it was only the English studies with
the help of which Indians would be able to come out of their rigid thinking, their evil traditions and rituals, the
complex they had. Also with the English studies they would be able to gain knowledge, understand the intention of
their rulers (Britishers) who wanted to take their advantage. They would be able to take right decisions and would be
able to come to know about the good or bad deeds of their rulers. According to him, English studies would open the
gates of progress for them. Through English studies Indians would be able to sow the seeds of revolt among other
natives to root out the aliens from their country. English studies would be able to sow the liberal rational ideas of the
West in India. With the help of English studies the source of subversion was no longer a hostile India whose religious
sensibility was hurt but a cultural gap between the Indians and their rulers. Native culture wouldn’t be interpreted as
an agent that increases this gap. As a learned scholar he had studied various languages so he was very well aware of
the positive as well as negative points of all. Secondly, he wanted his countrymen to learn the policies, techniques
and methods of their rulers, which they were applying to rule over them. He wanted to root out the feeling of
inferiority which had made home in his countrymen’s hearts. Thirdly, according to him the native’s language like
Sanskrit was restricted to a limit and taught nothing practical and scientific basis and was of little use in the modern
world whereas English studies were a sure and short way to progress as well as modernisation. According to Roy,
English studies were necessary for the Indians to instil in them the thought of freedom, the better way of communication,
to differentiate between the rights and wrongs of the society, to remove superstitions rooted deep inside their mind
as well as culture, to be able to express themselves easily, to be able to learn more and more techniques and methods
of making their own as well as the life of their countrymen comfortable, to throw out the feeling of inferiority
complex from their hearts. Even he wanted to make them good citizens. Through English studies he wanted them to
be able to know about the rules and regulations of the country, their rights. He felt that Sanskrit was a language that
due to its intrinsic difficulties acts as a barrier to the diffusion of useful knowledge. He was against a mechanical
kind of language that treated language as an end in itself and not a means of conveying something useful. According
to Roy, it could only be English studies which would be able to bring revolution and regard in the life of Indians.
Raja Ram mohun Roy was born in a village named Radhanagar in the Hoogly District of Bengal on the 22nd of
May 1772, to orthodox and conservative Bengali Brahman parents. He had his elementary education in the village
school in Bengali (which was his mother toungue). At the age of twelve he left his home and joined a Muslim school
in Patna and learned Persian and Arabic which enabled him to read the Koran as well as the Sufi saints in original.
He then taught himself the principles of Islamic religion and culture through the medium of the two languages

5
(Persian & Arabic) which he had learned in Patna. From this vantage point of an alternative to Hinduism, he began
to critique Hindu orthodoxies. When he was sixteen years old, his anti-Hindu posturing incensed his father to such
extent that he expelled Roy from home. After being expelled out of home, Roy travelled far and wide. He went to
northern India and spent three years in his quest for knowledge of Buddhism. Then he travelled to Banaras and
studied Sanskrit and all the while acquired knowledge of several religions and especially Hinduism whose texts he
read in detail at Benaras. Reconciliation with his father brought him back to Calcutta and to employment with the
East India Company in 1803. His employment with the Company sent him on a posting in Rangpur in 1809 where he
met Marwari Jains and learned about Jainism from them and studied the Jain text. His initiation into western ways of
life sharpened not only his critical attitude towards Hindu practices, but also prompted him to justify Hindu precepts
which were often misrepresented by the Hindu priesthood. He is largely remembered as the man who fought to
abolish Sati and as the founder of Brahmo Samaj. Because of his deep understanding of religion and an open mind,
he could sieve through the good points of the various religions. He formed an association with the help of both Hindu
and English scholars and even started a school where he introduced several modern subjects like Science, Mathematics,
Physics, Political Science and English. He was also against the British rule like other nationalists of his age. Still
over time he began to realise that India could actually benefit in terms of education and by exposure to Christianity.
He was constrained to write in English, a language available to both sets of readers i.e. British as well as Indians
which served to keep him away from both sets of readers. Roy was the first important bilingual Indian writer to write
in English in the nineteenth century as mentioned in ‘A History of Indian Literature, VolumeVIII’ by Sisir Kumar
Das. Between 1817 to 1820, apart from writing ‘Defence of Hindu Theism’, Roy translated an abridged version of
the Vedas, the Kena, the Isa, the Numdaka and the Katha upnishads into English as well as into Bengali. In the same
way, he used Bengali and English both in his campaign against idol worship and Satipratha and the ill treatment of
widows in Hindu society, as well as his criticism of the Christian missionaries. He also translated his own major
writings of Bengali into English. It was imperative for him to use English broadly for his writings as his writings
represented a continuous conversation with both the intelligentsia of Britain and the intelligentsia of non-Bengali
communities of India. Except in his translations, Roy’s English prose is powerfully pofemical. Bruce Carlise Robertson
has noticed in his article ‘The English Writings of Raja Rammohun Roy’ the evolution of Roy as a writer in English
reflects not only his growing confidence in the causes that he expoused, but also his deepend facility in the fluency
of the language he used. Roy was specially at home with English writing by the last decade of his life during which
he authored some of his most significant pamphlets including two “Petitions against Press Regulation”(1823) drafted
by him and signed along with him by his supporters. Roy’s letter to the imperial masters in 1823, pleaded for western
scientific values, and not simply for English as the instruction medium. Ram mohun Roy advocated western education
and social change and was a promoter for the translation of the Hindu Shastras into the vernacular (Bengali) as well
as the promoter of Bengali journalism. He made great efforts at translating English scientific and literary texts into
Bengali as well. Such diversity enabled him to have a comprehensive view of the developments in India. The passing
of a government ordinance in the same year suppressing the freedom of the press occasioned petitions about press
regulations. He argued in the first petition that was addressed to the Governor-General that,
“Every good ruler, who is convinced of the imperfection of human nature and reverences the Eternal Governor
of the world, must be conscious of the great liability to error in managing the affairs of a vast empire; and therefore
he will be anxious to afford to every individual the readiest means of bringing to his notice whatever may require his
interference. To secure this object, the unrestrained liberty of publication is the only effectual means that can be
employed.”
Through this Roy criticised the intolerant attitude of the rulers. Definitely there would be a gap between “the
External Governor of the World” and the “Good Ruler.” After the rejection of the petition and the passing of the
Press Regulation Ram mohun Roy addressed another petition to the King-in-Council. In this petition, he counsels
his addressee “If your Majesty’s faithful subjects could conceive for a moment that the British nation, actuated
solely by interested policy, considered India merely as a valuable property and nothing but the best means of securing
its possession and turning it to advantage, even then it would be of importance to ascertain whether this property be
well taken care of by their servants..... therefore, the existence of a free Press is equally necessary for the sake of the
Governors and the governed.” The words “even then” signifies the callous intentions of the British rulers.
Side-by-side, his attempts at reforming Indian society by weeding out some of the corrupt or we can say evil
customs of Hindu society went on unabated. In this way he founded Brahmo Samaj in 1828, which was the first

6
attempt of its own kind to revitalise Hinduism in nineteenth century. In the year 1830, he sailed for Britain as the
ambassador of the Mughal Emperor who conferred on him the title of Raja where he published his “Exposition of
the Practical Operation of the Judicial and Revenue Systems of India” which was a remarkable document for its
indictment of the drain of wealth from India under the rule of British and its complicity in the structures of local
economic exploitation. Before his death, during the last year of his life, Roy wrote a short autobiographical sketch at
his friend’s request. This autobiography is of great importance as the pioneering exercise in Indian English writings
in a genre that flourished and flowered in many directions during the coming century which became a basis of self-
expression of a person, at once colonised and free enough to think differently.
Q. 3. ‘Despite being a multilingual country, English has a very secure future in India’. Would you agree?
Give a well argued answer.
Ans. India is a vast country inhabited by people speaking different languages. Languages has, therefore, been a
very controversial issue right since India became free. Different political leaders and educationists have been
expressing different opinions on the subject. Even today the issue remains as unresolved as it was half a century ago.
English was introduced in our schools and colleges by the Britishers. It gradually took firm roots in the soil of
our hand. India is a vast country. English played an important role in the freedom struggle. The contribution of
English in this respect cannot be undermined. It was believed that after the departure of the English from India,
English would also be discarded. But, in reality, this language has continued to occupy an important place in the
country. It was laid down by our Constituent Assembly that Hindi, our national language, would replace English
within 15 years. All felt that the common language of the country must be some Indian language. But circumstances
took such a shape that English had to be recognized as the second official language of the country.
India is trying to become a powerful nation in all spheres. The economic, social and political life of the nation
is to be changed. It is an uphill task. Progress is possible only if the people of India freely interact with their
counterparts in other developed countries of the world. The world is becoming smaller day by day. People in other
countries are making rapid progress in numerous fields of knowledge. English is our life-line of contact with the
outside world. It is an important bridge for the traffic of thought between the East and the West. English continues
to be an important language used by computers and commercial establishments in major parts of the world. In India
too it continues to be a mark of education.
Advanced knowledge in various science and the latest researches can come to India through the medium of
English. We cannot read every book through translations in Hindi or in any other regional language. By depriving
ourselves of this language, we shall be missing the glorious works of Shakespeare, Shelley, Keats and Byron. English
has a literature of love and freedom, nature and adventure. Even some renowed Indians have produced their best
work through the medium of this language. Authors like Nehru, Radhakrishnan, Aurobindo Ghosh, Mulk Raj
Anand, Sarojini Naidu and Gandhi wrote their books in English. In fact, English is an important international
language.
Regional languages have not yet fully developed. Some universities have taken steps to develop the regional
languages fully. But it will take a long time before regional languages are in a position to replace English. Recently,
some Southern states in India have been expressing fears regarding the imposition of Hindi on them. The Government
has assured them that English would continue to say and to be used along with Hindi. English is, therefore, essential
for national unity. There is little doubt that English has come to say in this country as an important language. Almost
every new private school being opened in the country is an English medium school. English has come to be recognized
not only as a mark of education but also as a mark of status and prestige.
The lovers of English will, however, have to accept a subdued place for English in the changing state of affairs.
It is being increasingly realized that English should be developed and taught more as a library language than as a
language of refined literature and rich thought. Moreover, English can no longer continue to remain the only language
of opportunity. Only recently the Central Government allowed the use of regional languages as medium of examination
in all competitive examinations for class I and II posts. This shows that English may never have its pre-1947 status
in times to come. It will, however, have to be used along with Hindi and the regional languages of the country for all
times to come.
Q. 4. Critically examine Said’s Orientalism as the key to understanding Postcolonial Studies.
Ans. Said defined Orientalism in different ways to make its meaning and concept clear. He gives us mainly three
definitions and it would be better if we analyse each definition thoroughly to know more and more about Orientalism.
To state the initial meaning of Orientalism he states:

7
 “A nyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient–and this applies whether the person is an
anthropologist, sociologist, historian, or physiologist–either in its specific or its general aspects, is an Orientalist,
and what he or she does is Orientalism.”
In the above definition, we can note a number of disciplines which Said have included in the study of Orientalism.
He also indicates their intercreativity instead of separate identities. So, in this way, various studies including study of
mankind, the study of origin, about the development and structures of communities, past studies with the study of
languages share a lot but have differen knowledgee structures. According to Said, in the orient subject academy
classifications should be ignored. He also tries to define Orientalism by breaking the academic limitations.
Now let us go through the second definition of Orientalism by Said:
“Orientalism is a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between “the
Orient” (and most of the time) “the Occident.”
Through this definition, he moves forward to the broader aspect of the academy. It not only includes the nature
of knowledge but also it includes the study of survival also. The measurements of the study of Orientalism has no
boundings, no limitations and a wide opening for authors from different fields such as poets, novelist, philosophers,
political theorists, economic and imperial administrators.
In the first definition, Said violated the boundaries of academics and politics and in second definition it broadened
the aspects of Orientalism. The third definition which is placed in historical and materialistic context, is related to
the power of world, authority and control.
“Taking the late eighteenth century as a very roughly defined starting point Orientalism can be discussed and
analyzed as the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient-dealing with it by making a statement about it,
organizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, setting it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style
for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient.”
The main feature of Orientalism is its constitution of the West and its dealing with the domination of Orient.
By definition, it is clear that a corporate institution is a group of people doing many tasks in distinct areas but
work as the single body. To give shape to the Orientalism, Said has used Foucault’s idea of communication which is
forming a field which is capable of uniting different kinds of materials as study area. Apart from all these definitions,
Said tries to give one more definition to describe the unlimited scope of Orientalism. He describes/defines it as “a
distribution of geographical awareness–an elaboration not only of a basic geographical distinction, but also of a
whole series of ‘interest’–a certain will or intention to understand–By clarifying his arguments he concludes–
“Indeed, my real argument is that Orientalism is–and does not simply represent a considerable dimension of
modern political intellectual culture and as such has less to do with the Orient than it does with “our” world.”
As the word ‘demystifying’ means to explore, to remove the false conception or to go through the myths about
something Said also removes all the conceptions of authority under Orientalism. Under Orientalism, a huge number
of disciplines, experiences, innovations and power groups work with each other. To show the effective working of
Orientalism, Said has used the idea of cultural hegemony of Gramsci whose thoughts or we can say whose analysis
of society highlights the differences between the civil and political community. According to Gramsci, with the help
of voluntary affiliation such as schools, families and unions, the civil society is formed. With our personal interests
we can enter in these institutions, without any suppression or domination. Civil society as well as cultural leadership
forms the culture and it is in one way or the other is related to each other. Cultural leadership comes into being with
the phenomenon of the domination of some cultures over the other. To show the production and maintenance of
Orientalism in the historical, social and political context, Said refers to the Gramscian idea of the cultural hegemony
of the industrial West. Said finds out the main point which give definition to the European culture as “the idea of
European identity as a superior one in comparison with all the non-European peoples and cultures.” Europeans want
to recognise the other over whom it can put its supremacy in a clear binary of “us” against “them” gave rise to the
Orientalism. In fact, the binary of self/other is not unchangeable, it is flexible. The power of longevity of Orientalism
is of “flexible positional superiority.” Due to this method/strategy it is made possible to have a number of relationships
and working among the West and The Orient in which West ever gains superiority. Pointing toward the historical
conditions (which gave the cultural superiority). Said explains the Europe’s distinct ascendancy from the late
renaissance to the present. The eco-political conditions as well as the Orient allowed different persons presentation

8
in the Orient as well as to say something about it i.e. to acknowledge about it with a little protest from the Orient
itself.
Orientalism’s appeal for language is situated in the area of occupation, disciplines and institutions. Orientalism’s
linguistic appeal is capable of enlisting the various people such as “the scientists, the scholar, the missionary the
trader, (or) the soldier” who normally are not seemed to be in relation to each other. Although it is clear that the
trader as well as missionaries were followed by the soldiers during the process of imperialism with the East India
Company, and religion and business had got the safe entry in the army of colonies (imperial areas), the thought about
their working with each other to reach to the common/similar goal of Orientalising is somewhat new and unusual
and thus appreciable. Said has documented and enlisted the coming up theories of mankind as well as of the universe
in anthropology, sociology, linguisticcs, race and the history. These one have been discussed in detail in the post
colonial theory. The post-colonial theory has further analyzed these disciplines in terms of the functioning of the
disciplines and the theories which have emerged from their ‘academic research’ as well as it also has justified all
while maintaining their existence as pure and apolitical scholarship. All these theories have emerged from the civil
society and that’s why they explain “Western hegemony over the Orient during the period from the end of the
eighteenth century.” Said is not at all bothered with the different institutions such as army, the police and the central
bureaucracy although they all form the political community and work through domination. To study the authority of
Orientalism, Said has used strategic location and strategic formation. Here the Said’s line of argument is also traced
in order to follow the relations between the shaping up of the disparate sectors having contribution in Orientalism as
a discourse.
Q. 5. Discuss the Dalit and the Feminist Canon in India today.
Ans. In a situation which differs from literature to literature and region to region, Dalit literature can’t be a
theory of aesthetic in that situation. We all know that Dalit literature is a literature believing in self-awareness, and
is written with specific goals and objectives. The canon construction is very important in the process of evolution of
the literature. Dalit literature has maintained its status. While taking the concept of evaluation of Dalit literature by
mainstream critics few questions came in mind related to (1) its evaluation with the aesthetics (2) different methods
and above all what to write and how to revise. Let us try to solve them.
As Dalit literature is always kept in different category, it faces different challenges. From the time Dalit literature
has got acceptance (1950s) it always has been criticized for giving painful end. On this the Dalit critics answer that
if there can be a happy ending then why not sad ending. As pleasure, pain is also a part of life. And on the use of
mundane (dullness) Dalit critics raised the question of the significance of form over context. According to them if
the context causes pain then the form is secondary. Dalit critics have gone through the writings of both Dalit writers
as well as non-Dalit writers. According to some critics, Dalit literature lacks language skills as well as the aesthetic
skills because of the reason that they have not undergone cultural development. For this the Dalits retort back as if all
non-Dalit produce art work. They mean to say that the cultural development is nothing to do with aesthetics. According
to mainstream non-Dalit critics Dalit literature’s anger is false and expression of grief ugly and absurd. Limbale
quotes Ambedkar to prove that they are wrong. According to him, the Dalits were the quite, gentle, obedient and the
humblest one of all the creatures and they are not in need of learning about humanity. They have rage and anger in
them only for the reason that they have been suppressed by all and have not been provided basic human rights. So
their rudeness is very natural. Dalit authors had been suggested to leave the negativity, anger. Now the question
arises about the evaluation of Dalit literature. There are two types of opinions regarding this even among non-Dalit
critics. One group is in favour of the application of canonical critical tools with the rules and principles of criticism.
They argued that art should be justified with art and the other thing which is different from it should be known as
false conception. Also they argued that the values in art are everlasting and unchangeable. So the Dalits literature
must be examined on these grounds. They also charged the Dalit literature for its univocal expression, filled with
anger, its autobiographical form and ugly use of language.
On the other hand, second group puts a big question mark on the judgement of Dalit literature on the basis of
everlasting value which raises the questions regarding everlasting nature of values. The Dalit authors agreed with
the second group. According to them, the dominating canon had become outdated and was not fit for the evaluation
of Dalit literature. According to them the function of critic is to examine, to point out faults and to show the justification

9
of the work/writing which is being analysed. Many points should be undertaken while criticizing a work. Dalit
authors had a feeling that they were not rightly evaluated.
The mainstream Hindi writer Kashiram Singh said while arguing against the Dalit identity for literary production
“You don’t have to be a horse to write about a horse.” To this the Dalit writer Ompraksh Valmiki says.
“Yes, you can write about the horse, his external contours, his canter and neigh but when at the end of the day the
same horse, having done his share of labouring, exhausted and hungry, stands tide to a post in the stable, what can
you write about how he feels or what emotions he harbours towards his master or about his inner pain.”
The issue here is not of reality but the personal experience which cannot be imagined. This is one of the reasons
of the attention towards the meaning of word Dalit. By Dalit we get the picture of the downtrodden, tortured,
exploited, hated, deprived etc. In the context of the horse stated already, the literary thinking is clearly divided into
two different sections on the concept of Dalit author. One belongs to the established canonical position, traditional
Savarna (A high caste) who thinks that there is no need to be a Dalit to write Dalit literature. According to them,
many of the mainstream authors have written about the oppressed, downtrodden, poor. According to them, there
should not be any special literature in the name of Dalit literature, in fact, it should be included in Gramin Sahitya as
Dalit also normally belongs to village. Dalit, do not agree with it. According to them, they have to live out of the
village not in the village. They know about the terms like humiliation, rejection, hatred, deprivation etc. much more
than anyone else. According to them only the person who has undergone all these feelings like untouchablity, humility,
dejection can describe them the best, so the Dalit literature must be written by a Dalit instead of anyone else. None
other than a Dalit author can justify the Dalit literature. According to different authors, Dalit literature has different
features.
According to some, Dalit literature is the literature of experiences which shows the mirror of Dalit society/
community. Dalit literature points out about the condition and position of Dalit. Not only this, Dalit literature normally
contains sensitive, scientific and meaningful content. Dalit literature is also considered to have scientific and arguing
attitude. Dalit literature is a mirror of protest against caste, race, creed and tribe and it has human liberty as its central
point. All the Dalit workers agree that their literature must possess
1. Acceptance of Ambedkar’s philosophy on the issue of freedom and liberty.
2. Belief in the Budha’s atheism and non belief in the soul, his rationalism and his opposition of hollow
ritualism.
3. Opposition to the Varna system, casteism and communalism.
4. Support for brotherhood and not separaticm.
5. Commitment to freedom and social justice.
6. Commitment to social transformation.
7. Opposition to capitalism.
8. Opposition to feudalism and Brahmanism.
9. Opposition to hegemony and domination
10. Disagreement with Ramchandra Shukla’s definition of the epic.
11. Rejection of traditional aesthetic standards.
12. Partisanship for a Varnaless and classless society.
13. Opposition to Linguistic Chauvinism and Sexism.
In this way, Dalit authors wanted to form a literature filled up with all the qualities of a good literature. Besides
this they wanted to inform the masses about the condition of Dalits and through these writings they tried to get a
status and recognition in the society. They wanted to be treated as common man but not a downtrodden, rejected and
deprived one.
Undoubtedly, the literature is a revolutionary movement which causes social transformation. Dalit literature is
influenced by casteism and racialism. Without getting deep into the wide area of Dalit movement we can’t think or
know about Dalit literature. The reason behind this is that Dalit movement is a political as well as social movement
with its eyes aimed at revolution. Dalit aspects are revolutionary in nature with the reformative element. Dalit
movement wants social transformation with the help of social justice, dignity, economic progress, brotherhood,
friendship, support and the existence in which there are equal rights for Dalits. Dalit literature produces all these

10
objectives. Dalit movement didn’t take place at the same time, rather it took place in different areas at different times
with different shapes and forms which were based on the leadership and historical and sociological limitations of the
particular area. For example we can have the two areas–Maharashtra and Hindi belt. According to Marathis the first
movement in Dalit literature was held in 1950s and the beginning of first Dalit Movement was from Maharashtra as
a revolutionary phenomenon. On the other hand the Hindi belts saw the Dalit movement and awareness a little later.
Dalit movement was here reformative by nature. Dalit writings in Marathi were inspired by the ideas of Jotirao
Phule and B.R. Ambedkar. They were touched by the village life, and were used as a tool of transformation with the
help of folk tales, theater, drama, meetings etc. These transformations were the result of a grassroot movement. The
activist poet Daya Pawar through songs put the feeling of awareness in Dalits about their condition and status in the
society. As he knew that Dalits were uneducated, so he made his songs a medium of communication and awareness.
It was the hard fact that at that time Dalit needed a systematic transformation not simply social reforms. The reasons
behind the Dalit movements, began in Bombay first, were:
1. Dalit began their education with British
2. Bombay being main commercial center, was a place of cultural exchange from all over world, ancient and
modern as well.
Dalit Literacy movement had two important historical contributions:
1. A cultural tradition through songs, poems, folk dances, musical instrument was provided to Dalits which
fulfilled their cultural needs and aspirations.
2. Under the leadership of Baba Ambedkar and his successors, it provided the background for the Dalit movement.
Under the guidance of these leaderships, some of the educated Dalits came in the field of writing and literature.
In this way, the movement of Maharashtra grew up and demanded political participation on the basis of their education,
struggle, unity and literature as well.
As compared to the Maharashtra and Marathi literature, the Hindi belt was rather slow in developing an awareness
in Dalits despite in this region Dalits were in the worse conditions and were being exploited for centuries. Here the
literary voices were very few and often suppressed by the threats from those in powers. Dalit awareness was still in
the process of reform. They wanted to develop a leader like Ambedkar for Dalit communities. But to their bad luck
they didn’t get support from their own communities. Dalits did not challenge the caste hierarchy but demanded
abolition of discrimination on the basis of caste. This was the reason for its not becoming a liberation movement. On
the other hand, Maharashtra’s movement was revolutionary. On that side, Ambedkar had a scientific and
transformational approach with education, struggle and unity as weapons. It made crucial difference to literary
production and to the movement in the Maharashtra and the Hindi belt areas.
A critic is the person who points out faults or assess es literary or artistic work. Same is the case with a feminist
literary critic. Feminist criticism of the nineteen seventies is undoubtedly and essentially harsh, active and a strong
verbal and written attack. In addition is the fact that in 1980s by the development of different literary theories
feminist criticism got affected. Not only this, it also changed its direction away from that of the male writings of the
world. It became aware of the fact that in the writing field women are invisible whereas the history of man is the
symbol of history of civilization. Feminism then came forward to make the women’s position visible from the
margins of history to the present. We can also see that feminism brings the suppressed narratives to women’s
experiences into light. Critic doesn’t only assess the literature of women, but also highlights the goodness hidden in
them. In 1980, the Anglo-American literary world carried the job of formation of canon of the female writing. For
this purpose, women writer’s achievement had to be made prominent who had been neglected. Radical feminist
theory fulfils the requirements of moral and political agenda. It took a stand that was ideological and revolutionary
and brought changes. It affected the society and made improvements in the thoughts of the people. The work of the
feminist critic is thus to identify the deficiences of the text. The critic identifies the work for gender equality and
resistance to patriodchy. A literature that can serve the cause of the movement i.e., the liberation of the women.
Cherie Register says that literature must do one or more of the following
“It must serve as a forum for women; help to achieve cultural androgyny; provide role models; promote sisterhood
and augment consciousness raising.”
In a male dominated society, a woman’s place is negligible. To get the position and to highlight the importance,
to give the proper place to women the feminist movement was started. Feminism is the name given to a movement
supporting equal rights for women. For centuries, in books we read about the unequal position of women in the

11
society and the problem due to them. Both men and women have suggested solutions to this. Some of the writers
have written about women’s education, equality, marriage and discussions over them. Mary Wollstonecraft in 1792
wrote “A Vindication of the Rights of Women”, which discussed the writers like Milton. Pope and Rousseau. John
Stuart Mill in 1869 wrote, “On The Subjection of Women,” “The Origin of the Family” (1884), “Women and Labour”
(1911) by Olive Screiner. In 1949, Simone De Beauvoir wrote the landmark treasure “The Second Sex” in which he
discussesd about the male attitude towards the female literary works. Although women have been writing since long
but it got its shape and recognition in 1960 with the feminist movement. The feminist movement gave a true recognition
to the women writers and was concerned with aspects like:
1. It examined the representations of the women in literature and questioned the manner of these representations.
2. Questioned the circumstances and authority.
3. It positioned itself to combat the ideology that existing images of women propagated in the society.
4. It recognised the mass media as the most appropriate means of changing altitudes towards women.
There is the normal thinking that all women writings are feminist as they are written by women. But to be a
feminist writer it is not enough to be a women, she should have some qualities to be known as a feminist. There are
a number of conditions for a literature to be called a feminist. Because of the emergence of feminism, a criticism
gives importance to the literature in which there is free involvement of women without the legal, social or political
boundations. In the words of Cherie Register, literature must do one or more of the following:
1. It must serve as a forum for women;
2. Help to achieve cultural androgyny;
3. Provide role models;
4. Promote sisterhood and argument consciousness-raising.
In the absence of any fixed definition of a female aesthetic, we have to be very careful in choosing/deciding the
ways in which a literature can be feminist. To know the case in which a literature can be feminist, let us go through
the evolution of the canon.
Firstly, we have to know about the existence of writer of feminism in Indian English. Many writers claim that
they have written with full enthusiasm but the gender is accidental and their writings are not affected by being male.
Even then there are some causes confined to the women or they are neglected by men. The female aspect is normally
in a problem where the women are dominated by male. The male dominance of women and its rules generated the
similar reactions from men as well as women. With the masculine standards there are a number of successful women
writers of Indian English writings. Women have been writing in the male dominated society since long time but they
got recognition in 1960 in America where the feminist movement took a definite shape and widened its scope. After
that the feminist thought wasn’t restricted only to the social science or humanities but to each and every form of
educational study. Its impressions could be seen in every corner after 1960. The feminist trend saw that the literature
provides role models of acceptable feminine conduct and aspirations. The feminist movement of 1960 had ‘literariness’
from the beginning as it had focused on the following points:
1. It examined the representation of women in literature and questioned the mode and manner of the construction
of those representations.
2. It saw the essentiality as crucial to put a question mark on the situations, authority and purpose of constructions.
3. It combated the ideology propagated by the existing models of women.
4. It recognized the mass media as the most appropriate means of changing attitudes towards women.
In the 1970, the central point to know about feminist writing and thinking was to investigate and express the
system of dominance of male over female. Feminist literature tried to expose and explore the thinking of men and
women who stressed on gender inequality for a long time; special attention was on the male writers who were
forming typical and influential models of women.
In fact, feminist literary writing in India is largely in the form of critical analysis of literature, history and
society. In the Indian terms, we have to rely on the definitions and perspectives given by Anglo-American traditions.
n n

12