I BEGAN MY WRITING CAREER IN 1941. I WAS EIGHTEEN.
I did not begin my long journey with a short story. My first writing was what is called literary criticism. In fact, all along the way, I did various kinds of writing with mixed luck. I did write a play, but unanimously, it was considered a failure. Twice I tried to write a novel, but after a few chapters, I did not know where I was going. I did not take that road. I took the road of the short story and there I found myself. There readers found an author of some note.
I did some critical writing, something of a travelogue, and wrote stray memoirs not an autobiography but something diverse and interesting. All this was liked by the common readers and discerning critics. Yet, in the long run, only my short stories will remain, if any of my writing is to remain at all.
Before I talk about the stories in some detail, one or two things must be made clear. I developed slowly. In the beginning, there were a lot of influences on me. It was indeed in late 1953 that I found myself. Thereafter there was no looking back, no stagnation. What kind of stories do I write? All kinds indeed! A well constructed story with a plot and absolutely loose – you may call it shapeless-stories, all are, good enough for the readers, even the most demanding readers.
How many stories have I written? Well over 270. I will have to check up with those who have done their PhD thesis on them. There are three such. I will not be surprised if there would be more. On all accounts I do deserve this.
What are these stories about? Of course life, life seen in a web of incidents, life seen in a moment, life seen in an emotion, life seen in a thought, all separately, sometimes all of them rolled in one. How is this to be decided? Why decided? Just go on writing. That's what I have done and will continue to do. A man nearing 90. Does it look odd? I find it exhilarating.
According to common belief, I took time to find myself as an author. That is supposed to have happened ten or twelve years after I began writing. But once that happened there was no going back. I then wrote what could be called (not by me) Shantaram stories. According to one school of critics, these stories were lyrical, symbolic, subtle etc as stories like 'Squirrel', 'Rain in Summer', 'Tiger Tiger' are supposed to be. I was and still am considered a serious writer. Ironically, the first state prize I got was for my collection of humorous stories. Today I will not claim to be a humorous writer. Certainly I will claim a sense of humour, less ironical, more introspective, more reflective as in 'Fake Tale'.
The points I want to emphasis are mainly two. In the first instance, though considered a modernist, my relation with my roots is steadfast. Stories like 'Father', Radhabai', 'Dust' and the like will easily bring out this fact with emphasis. They have in full measure the feel of the earth. They may even be called earthy. Yes, earthy they are but certainly not mundane. They have some definite idealism, herd idealism, one might say. They certainly are of action. My perception of women, never sentimental, never over-critical has attracted readers and my respectful attitude towards fighting, self-respecting women, whether they are commoners or cut above the rest, is generally regarded as a special feature of my sensibility.
What about the formal aspect? I am aware of it but not obsessed with it. In my opinion, short story is a form that gives the writer maximum freedom. That is its strength and also its weakness. It is no use comparing it with a novel. Neither of them is superior or inferior, each has its strengths, along with its infirmities. To think of these two modes of writing in any other way is either partisan or ill-informed. The length, the content, the structure and such other constituents afford the writer (and the reader also) freedom which calls for careful vigil. The distance between the sublime and the bathetic can be and is very nominal. I have borne this in mind very scrupulously as will be seen in the stories like 'Fake Tale' and 'Drink'.
What should be the length of a story? The answer lies in the name short story itself. The word 'short' here is not decorative. There can be endless debate on this point. I, for one, would go with Edgar Allen Poe ('The Philosophy of Composition'):- a short story is meant to be read in one sitting. The details of this statement are not to be found in discussion. They are found in common sense. What are its themes? Anything. Sky is the limit. This also could be said about the art of story telling. Here I would emphasis the word 'art'. That way I have traveled thus taking and giving pleasure. I hope this is what these stories will do. The taste of the pudding... Let us not think of 'eating', let us think of 'experiencing'. 'Experience' cannot be defined. It is to be taken. The readers should 'take' these stories. I hope they will get much, even more than that.
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist