`I am not the end'

Interview with D. Jayakanthan

D. Jayakanthan, who started his literary career when he was a member of the undivided Communist Party of India (CPI) in the 1950s, wrote powerful stories not only about the horrible living conditions of the downtrodden, but also on the finer aspects of their life. The stories disturbed his middle class readers, as perhaps any good story should do, and aroused their consciousness about the plight of the poor. After a few years, he turned his focus to middle class life and wrote, with equal ease, about its peculiar problems. Meanwhile, following differences with the party leadership, he left the CPI, though he retained his image as a Left-leaning writer for several years. Later, when he was seen to be increasingly leaning on Indian metaphysics and turning to spiritual issues for story themes, Marxist critics said that his turn to the Right was complete. However, recently Jayakanthan went on record stating that he was still a Marxist. "Once a communist, always a communist," he told a newspaper. In an interview he gave S. Viswanathan, he said that there was no inconsistency in being a Marxist and a spiritualist at the same time. Excerpts:

You started writing as a teenager in the 1950s. Now after more than 50 years in the literary field, do you think that you have achieved a sense of fulfilment?

Yes, of course. Generally I do not compare the present with the past. Even if I do so I find some pleasure, because there are many changes. Changes are there all around me, everywhere - changes for the better in many cases and, maybe, for the worse in some. A lot of developments have taken place. Fifty years ago, when I started writing, poverty was very common among the people. Sufferings of the people were much more. The uneducated and unlettered were in larger numbers. Writers then were few. It was a different India. So, we could see different types of people. If I say anything about them now, the present generation will find it difficult to believe. We speak of only Mahatma Gandhi now. There were many more Mahatmas in every walk of life.

And now, it looks a bit different. Maybe some spiritual stagnation is destined to happen. When developments, ambitions and opportunities grow, the quest for spiritualism and a desire for spiritualism perhaps become less. So what? Spiritualism, after all, is not something related to religion or God; it is very much in the realm of man. It concerns people's ways of life. All may not need to have this quest for spiritualism. But, at least, for the so-called artists, editors and rulers, those in charge of the state, this quest is essential. When such a quest for spiritualism is absent in these sections and they become corrupt, it is really disastrous. Hopefully, the situation will change. It is for the writers to create the confidence that no evil is permanent. I have attempted to do this through my writings.

How would you describe the contemporary literary scene in Tamil?

No. Sorry. I am neither a good critic, nor an avid reader. Moreover, only the future can judge the present. And that is only proper. Anyway, I see many trends in present literature, some of them may be right and some wrong; a few of them may soon outlive their purpose. But, the scope for a better future with a better literary atmosphere is very bright. And that will begin from me. I am not the end. Just as we all evolved from [Subramania] Bharati, many more will evolve [from me]. Every generation can look for a renaissance, with confidence.

A significant development on the Tamil literary scene today is the translation of several works from English and other languages into Tamil. It is really good. But translations from Tamil into English or other Indian languages are few and far between. This is despite the fact that Tamil today can boast of writings worthy of translation. How do you find this situation?

All this depends upon the need [for translated works]. Perhaps Tamil readers feel the need for such translated works more than others. The same kind of interest in Tamil works may be absent in other countries and other States. But then, you cannot expect English readers to read all your novels. It is simply your greed. Why should they? See, for instance, [Rabindranath] Tagore is known all over the world for only Gitanjali. However, some selected works may deserve translation. And, such translations do take place. It will be good if more Tamil works get translated into other Indian languages. That is also going on, though not to the desired extent. I hope that the Jnanpith Award may open up more such possibilities. However, what is more important is that there should be greater interaction between the peoples speaking different languages. Even if there is no such interaction, let there be no clashes.

You started writing as a communist. Then you left the party. Some of your later stories showed your inclination towards spiritualism. You said in a recent interview that you continue to be a Marxist. A few months before the collapse of the Soviet Union, you wrote a small booklet titled, "Will communism lose?" ...

The Soviet Union was not the sole representative of communism in the world. What happened in the Soviet Union was only the rise and fall of a nation, or the re-construction of it. That has nothing to do with communism as a principle. Marxism is a philosophy that will survive.

You know what is the strength of communism? We saw recently how Saddam Hussein was tortured and humiliated by American soldiers. The moral aspects of the United States' occupation of Iraq are still being debated. Can the United States attack Fidel Castro? Will the Americans dare do it? Did not we see that the U.S. apologised to Vietnam? Or, can they dare touch China? This is the moral strength of the communist regimes... We understood Marxism and socialism in the light of Indian philosophy. What made Bharati visualise the need for communism to benefit the 300 million people of India even before the October Revolution was complete in 1917 and communism became a reality in the Soviet Union? That came from Indian roots, from Indian philosophy.

You find no contradiction in being a Marxist and a spiritualist at the same time?

Karl Marx himself was a spiritualist in a Hindu sense or from an Indian philosophical point of view. Spiritualism, like Marxism, is nothing but humanism of the highest order: both are in the service of the people. I remain a communist, though I am not a member of any of the communist parties. I had to leave the party because of differences with the leadership over the party line on certain issues.