Analysis Of the Gazal

Hello Friends,

According to I.A.Richard,

“For him the real value of a poem lies in the reactions and attitudes it creates, and whether or not it is conducive to greater emotional balance, equilibrium, peace and rest in the mind of the readers. For him, the value of a work of art lies in its power to harmonize and organize complex and warring human impulses into patterns that are lasting and pleasurable.” In the view of New Critics, all such considerations are extrinsic and they come in the way of the appreciation and evaluation of a work of art as it is in itself.

I.A.Richard says that, Poet can used either scientific or emotive use of language. Its only from last several use, scientific use is informed.

In the scientific use of the language, the difference in reference is fatal (a failure) but in the emotive language it is not so. In the scientific use of language, the references should be correct and the relation of references should be logical. In the emotive use of language, any truth or logical arrangement is not necessary – it may work as an obstacle. The attitudes due to references should have their emotional interconnection and this has often no connection with logical relations of the facts referred to.

Richards goes on to examine different uses of the word ‘truth’. In the scientific use, the references are true and logical there is very little involvement of arts. Richards says that the term ‘true’ should be reserved for this type of uses – the scientific use. But the emotive power of the word is far too great for this. The temptations are there for a speaker who wants to evoke certain attitudes. So Richards goes on to consider the connotations of the word ‘truth’ in criticism. In literary criticism, the common use is ‘acceptability’ or ‘probability’.

Lyrics- Tamara anhi aaj Pagala Thavana

તમારાં અહીં આજ પગલાં થવાનાં, ચમનમાં બધાંને ખબર થૈ ગઈ છે.
ઝુકાવી છે ગરદન બધી ડાળીઓએ, ફૂલોની ય નીચી નજર થઈ ગઈ છે.

શરમનો કરી ડોળ સઘળું જુએ છે, કળી પાંદડીઓના પડદે રહીને,
ખરું જો કહી દઉં તો વાતાવરણ પર તમારાં નયનની અસર થઈ ગઈ છે.

બધી રાત લોહીનું પાણી કરીને બિછાવી છે મોતીની સેજો ઉષાએ,
પધારો કે આજે ચમનની યુવાની બધાં સાધનોથી સભર થઈ ગઈ છે.

હરીફો ય મેદાન છોડી ગયા છે નિહાળીને કીકી તમારાં નયનની,
મહેકંત કોમળ ગુલાબોની કાયા, ભ્રમર – ડંખથી બેફિકર થઈ ગઇ છે.

પરિમલની સાથે ગળે હાથ નાખી- કરે છે અનિલ છેડતી કૂંપળોની,
ગજબની ઘડી છે તે પ્રત્યેક વસ્તુ, પુરાણા મલાજાથી પર થઈ ગઈ છે.

ઉપસ્થિત તમે છો તો લાગે છે ઉપવન, કલાકારનું ચિત્ર સંપૂર્ણ જાણે,
તમે જો ન હો તો બધા કહી ઊઠે કે; વિધાતાથી કોઇ કસર થઈ ગઇ છે.

Analysis of the poem:

At the very first reading or rendering, this Gazal gives artistic pleasure to us. But after studying I.A.Richard’s New Criticism/Practical Criticism, I have found some exclusion and problems and also try to apply the different theories in this Gazal.

તમારાં અહીં આજ પગલાં થવાનાં, ચમનમાં બધાંને ખબર થૈ ગઈ છે.
ઝુકાવી છે ગરદન બધી ડાળીઓએ, ફૂલોની ય નીચી નજર થઈ ગઈ છે.

In this very first line, poet uses paradox to describe his feeling of lightheartedness as in very shorter time lover is coming to meet. Poet is much curious and pleased to meet lover and says that even nature has come to know about lover’s coming and also ready in lover’s welcoming. All branches have also nodded down their head and flowers have also take a look down in adoration of lover. It gives pleasure to read but is it is possible to believe that nature also have a sense of knowing someone’s coming also welcomes in a particular way? Elementary question is that do branches have neck or flowers have eyes to look down to admire someone? It seems that poet gratifying only by telling a lie.

શરમનો કરી ડોળ સઘળું જુએ છે, કળી પાંદડીઓના પડદે રહીને,
ખરું જો કહી દઉં તો વાતાવરણ પર તમારાં નયનની અસર થઈ ગઈ છે.

Here, reader can get the idea about beloved’s delicacy which is compared with bud’s shyness and bud is looking behind the petals. Does there is any curtain between bud and petals and does bud shy? The problem is that would it be fair to say atmosphere can be influenced by someone who is still not come? Would it be possible for nature to get influenced by human being? It also symbolizes master-slave relation between bud and petal! Does master-slave relation exists also in between this? If nature get influenced by humans in a way as poet is describing, we must say that thousands of people in the world are waiting for the beloved throughout the world in a day, then all branches and flowers are near to touch the earth and each and every bud seems like piping but in our day to day life we do not find flowers, branches and but like this!

બધી રાત લોહીનું પાણી કરીને બિછાવી છે મોતીની સેજો ઉષાએ,
પધારો કે આજે ચમનની યુવાની બધાં સાધનોથી સભર થઈ ગઈ છે.

Transformation of water into blood! Seems quite interesting in reading! The very initial thing is that how can aurora enshroud the pearls? What one feels while walking on the pearls happiness/pain? I think any common human being feel pain while walking on the pearl. Now problem is that does poet’s lover is superhuman or anything else or poet glorifying by fakeness to beloved? The very second line “યુવાની બધાં સાધનોથી સભર થઈ ગઈ છે” If we just try to look at from Fraud’s point of view it also symbolizes poet indirect lust for sex also.

હરીફો ય મેદાન છોડી ગયા છે નિહાળીને કીકી તમારાં નયનની,
મહેકંત કોમળ ગુલાબોની કાયા, ભ્રમર – ડંખથી બેફિકર થઈ ગઇ છે.

This line gives slight smile to us during first reading. Poet says that even oppositions/competitors have left the game as if they were frightened after watching lover’s eyes. Here my point becomes stronger and right as I mentioned earlier that poet’s lover supposed to be supernatural or to have uncanny features otherwise why competitors should left the ground otherwise they haven’t any kind of connection with poet’s lover. As poet seems like throwing arrows in air from the very first line, Does Roses have body? If yes then beetle and rose both are natures and have causation relation between both! If no then there isn’t raise the question of biting rose?

પરિમલની સાથે ગળે હાથ નાખી- કરે છે અનિલ છેડતી કૂંપળોની,
ગજબની ઘડી છે તે પ્રત્યેક વસ્તુ, પુરાણા મલાજાથી પર થઈ ગઈ છે.

As we are reading this poem, we come to know that either poet is unaware about anatomy of nature (trees, birds, flowers, branches etc.) or by telling a lies after lies wants to praise lover’s beauty. As we know that natural components have never features of human body. Here one can surely find that poet hasn’t left abstract things also. Have you ever seen air or smell? Let it go, have you ever seen bud, smell or air having neck or hand? Poet is talking almost about abstract things or feeling that “પુરાણા મલાજાથી પર થઈ ગઈ છે. What is that thing which goes beyond this PURANA MALAJA is also not poet revealing then how can we believe upon him? Again noticeable thing is the treatment of paradoxical language. Poet praises only beauty and seems that beauty is only superior; it seems like white people rule over the black where people behave as thing rather than human being.

ઉપસ્થિત તમે છો તો લાગે છે ઉપવન, કલાકારનું ચિત્ર સંપૂર્ણ જાણે,
તમે જો ન હો તો બધા કહી ઊઠે કે; વિધાતાથી કોઇ કસર થઈ ગઇ છે.

These lines shows superiority of someone but that superior personality has not really power or superiority as poet treats him as best picture of painter. At this very last we come to know that poet love is concrete love and don’t seem immortal. We should ask to poet that HOW DO HE FEEL IF SOMEONE CALL HIM AS PAINTING OF PAINTER? It talks about dominant power & suddenly he goes towards the praising because poet put beauty in each and every object of the nature. Poet says that in any form of lover’s existence, poet has to confess importance or value of lover’s presence because poet has no idea and center without beauty.

Hence, I can surely say that this poem just talks about praising lover with the use of different elements of nature. Besides this, it also can possible that poet wants to be immortal through admiring beloved’s beauty and delicacy. It doesn’t matters to poet whether it is appropriate or not!

Thank you.