Yeh Qissa Kya Hai Maani Ka
By Nasir Abbas Nayyar
Sang-e-Meel, Lahore
ISBN: 978-9693534093
292pp.

Literary critic and broadcaster Zameer Ali Badayuni had it right, perhaps, when he said that “this is the era of theorisation. We are so much engrossed in the process of theorisation that [Critical] Theory has almost been alienated from application. It seems that, now, theory is all.”

These remarks were made in Badayuni’s foreword to his book Jadeediyat Aur Mabaad-i-Jadeediyat [Modernism and Postmodernism].

But it is difficult to agree with what he said, in the same vein, that it is the reader whose ‘act of reading’ makes the text sustain, and it is the reader who ‘creates’ the meaning. It follows that the meaning is not something that is an innate part of a text; rather, it exists outside the text.

Badayuni then goes on to say that the extraneousness of the meaning is at loggerheads with the author’s intended meanings and this creates a fragmentation, which disintegrates the meaning. As a result, a text may have as many meanings as the number of readers it has. In other words, every text may have innumerable interpretations, as every reader can draw his or her own meanings.

Deconstructionist theory tries to describe the relation between text and meaning and suggests that a text can actually mean quite different from what it apparently does: it can have plurality of meaning. And this is what deconstructionists, such as Algerian French philosopher Jacques Derrida, say. This is somehow connected with the concept of intertextality, which, if put simply, means that the meaning of a text is influenced by the other texts invoked during its reading in the mind of a reader.

Nasir Abbas Nayyar is a scholar whose style is becoming clearer by the day, as his newest book, applying modern critical theories to Urdu literature, proves

But what appeals more — at least to this reviewer — is what some critics have said about the era of theorisation: the elusive applicability of all these theories that emphasise plurality of meaning.

There is a big question mark as to how these theories apply practically to oriental literature. When it comes to Urdu literature, it seems very difficult to fully apply these theories and they can offer very little help in interpreting classical texts.

Of course, Badayuni has applied Western literary theories in several of his pieces, analysing Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib, Mir Taqi Mir, Saadat Hasan Manto and Allama Muhammad Iqbal. But the interpretations offered by him and some other theorists occasionally seem too farfetched and out of context.

This is not to say that these Western critical theories or modern critical concepts are totally irrelevant to us. But many — especially students of Urdu literature — have often been struck dumbfounded by what these theorists write, as they define concepts in their usual circular and convoluted way, with alien-sounding vocabulary that is sometimes a literal translation of some unheard of English terminology, rendering the text critical gobbledegook.

Nayyar has proved that modern Urdu criticism is not totally divorced from meaning, and meaning is very much a part of today’s Urdu critical works.

Some students even complain that the new critical discourse is simply beyond comprehension. The reply to this, though made half-jokingly, is that you may have your own interpretation and ‘create’ your own meaning, as these theories allow plurality of meaning, so go and apply these theories on themselves first and see if they mean anything at all.

Jokes aside, there are some scholars who write in an unambiguous way on new critical theories. Nasir Abbas Nayyar is one such scholar and one feels his style is becoming clearer by the day, as his newest book, Yeh Qissa Kya Hai Ma ani Ka [What is the Saga Behind Meaning], proves. He has tried to apply modern critical theories to Urdu literature and the result is quite interesting.

Nayyar connects the poetry of Majeed Amjad and Ali Mohammad Farshi with some modern critical and philosophical theories. Juxtaposing new critical theories with the works of modern-day writers such as Shamsur Rahman Farooqi, and veterans such as Maulvi Deputy Nazir Ahmed Dehlvi, Nayyar has not ignored the local milieu and the historical backdrop against which these writers’ works were created. So his book is an endeavour, as the title suggests, to understand the meaning of meaning in a modern as well as local way.

In fact, Nayyar is among those few critics of Urdu who are well-versed with modernist and postmodernist critical and philosophical theories and he has been writing on them all along. Yeh Qissa Kya Hai Maani Ka is a collection of articles and, aside from theory, it discusses on the one hand the art and thought of Manto, Hasan Askari and Saqi Farooqi, and on the other elaborates genres such as the short story, novel, naat [poetry in praise of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)] and the modern Urdu poem.

Nayyar has proved that modern Urdu criticism is not — as claimed by some — totally divorced from meaning, and meaning is very much a part of today’s Urdu critical works, that is, despite the plurality of meanings. It also proves that meaning is not something that exists in a text’s exterior; it is very much part of the text and can only be understood in its context.

Nayyar has been opening up new vistas of understanding for the modern reader, highlighting aspects of Urdu literature from a different point of view and we hope he will continue in this endeavour, despite a section of critics and readers who somehow cannot agree with alternate views.

The reviewer is former professor, Department of Urdu, University of Karachi; former chief editor of the Urdu Dictionary Board, Karachi; and now heads the National Language Promotion Department in Islamabad. He can be reached at drraufparekh@yahoo.com

Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, December 18th, 2022