Literary Criticism in Indian English Literature: A Case Study of M. K. Naik

INTRODUCTION

Like 'Indian Literature in English', the term Indian Literary Criticism likewise needs explanation. It would be, in this manner, practical to characterize the importance and extent of Indian literary criticism before we continue further. One regularly comprehended significance of Indian literary criticism is that it is the control of assessing the structure and status of particular works inside a tradition of writing. In his book, The Adventure of Criticism, K. R. Srinivasa Iyengar cites the meaning of criticism from a well-known word reference as "Criticism is the art or demonstration of evaluating the nature of literary or artistic work by an examination of its benefits and deformities". Iyengar further statements T. S. Eliot who says "Criticism... should dependably declare an end in view, which, generally, gives off an impression of being the clarification of works of art and the remedy of taste" (1985: 3). A general meaning of literary criticism is that it is the control of assessing the structure and status of particular works inside a tradition of writing. As it were, it is the way toward gathering points of reference, recognizing or legitimizing them as standards or benchmarks of execution and estimating by these standards the work close by. The gauges by which a critic estimates a work of art are not in every case fundamentally and simply literary; they are adapted and controlled by his social legacy and the literary tradition to which he has a place. On the off chance that this is what is associated with the procedure of criticism, at that point literary criticism in India ought to be established in her past culture and philosophy, and its local characteristics ought to reflect accentuations of Indian philosophy and feel in the entire procedure. However, the Western effect on the Indian personality has made it incomprehensible for any Indian critic today to work inside the antiquated - Sanskrit tradition of criticism alone. An Indian critic is, in this way, compelled to incorporate his very own tradition with the Western tradition. We live in the time of criticisrp when literary and critical theory have turned into a part of the scholastic order. Literary criticism currently offers such a dumbfounding assortment of theory and practice that it is practically hard to discover an exit plan. Rene Wellek says "the present, age might be genuinely viewed as the time of criticism" (1963: 334). The gigantic learning work that occurred particularly in the initial three many years of the present century and the resulting opening up of new skylines in different departments of learning prompted the advancement of various critical hypotheses/patterns/developments/approaches/ideas/schools, for example, Marxist Criticism, Psychoanalytic Criticism, The Russian Formalism/Organistic Formalism, Myth and Archetypal Criticism, Linguistic and Stylistic Criticism, New Criticism, Chicago School, Bakhtinism, Structuralist and Post-Structuralist Criticism, Deconstruction, Feminist Criticism, Reader-Response Criticism, Anxiety of Influence Criticism, New Historicism, Colonial and post- Contextualism, Eschatology, Narratology, Modernism and post-Modemism, Multiculturalism, Realism/Neorealism and different types of post-modernist "isms". Numerous critics in twentieth century are spooky by the inquiry - Is there no closure as far as possible of isms? Is there one ism that will never observe an end? Certainly not. While examining these different patterns in literary criticism, Rajnath watches "These patterns in the West have their disparities, their responses and counter-responses, yet in the Indian setting, they may seem alike, as they have been commonly acknowledged as new molds in criticism" (2004 : 296). Indian critics have reacted in different approaches toward the Western advancements from New Criticism, Reception Esthetics, Phenomenological Criticism, Existentialist Poetics and different sorts of hermeneutics and Marxist criticism to feminist, post-Structuralist, post-Modernist and post-Colonial hypothesizing : through the methodologies of retention, adjustment, expansion, correlation, obstruction and nullification while Indian English critics, with not very many exemptions, have been amazing copies of their Western counterparts, driven as they are by the weights of the telling worldwide critical talk of which they expect themselves to be partners. Maybe one should recognize the critical ventures being made as part of a simply scholastic interest situated frequently towards vocation advance and the genuine endeavors at perusing, rehashing, decontextualizing and scrutinizing Indian writings, patterns and traditions, generally done in Indian dialects and on occasion in English. With this concise information of the back of mind let us see and follow the improvement of literary criticism in Indian Literature in English. In the first place, the sources of Indian English Literary Criticism were not explicitly literary but rather social. Such a criticism was practiced by Raja Rammohan Roy, Rabindranath Tagore, Sri Aurobindo, Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and a large group of others. The Indian English literary-critical tradition takes its introduction to the world from a specific bi-lingual sensibility that commanded the Indian literary critical scene after the appearance of the British. The Eighteenth century was the Renaissance time for the development and advancement of such a tradition. The main products of this bi-lingual sensibility were conveyed by the preachers themselves for the most part British, utilized in the administration of the East India Company, as interpretations into English of Indian sacred writings and other sacrosanct writings. This likewise included verifiable and religious records of India. Etymologically the word criticism is gotten from Greek word signifying 'Judgment'. It is an excerise in capacity of criticism. It isn't as straightforward as it shows up in light of the fact that we have a large group of clashing perspectives, hypotheses and definitions. Reason for such decent variety draw out the multifaceted nature of nature of criticism. Critics differ in their frame of mind, scholarly pre-occupation, biases and inclinations. A critic with religious convictions and a lot of moral qualities will hold a view steady with his stylish appreciation. Theory of criticism is likewise firmly associated with the theory of poetry. This thusly is associated with the soul of the age. The scholarly and moral condition in which an artist, a live will have impact on their disposition and character. Subsequently we see an adjustment in criticism visa vis improvement, social and conduct sciences – mental, sociologic, monetary musings bringing out new way to deal with criticism. Marxism offered ascend to Marxist theory of literary criticism. Existentialism after World War II represents existential criticism. Literary criticism is the play of psyche on the work of literature and in posing inquiries and noting them. The reason for existing is better understanding and valuation for the joy. Request causes us contemplate literature. Along these lines is developed a theory of literature. The request might be coordinated towards a particular work of literature and unmistakable characteristics might be analyzed. The issue, way, procedure and language are evaluated. Certain standards might be framed and literary work tried against them, with reference to other comparable works of literature. Hence, peruser is helped by critic in development of thought of literary legitimacy. The undertaking of author is encouraged all the while. Both aimless recognition and aimless issue finding are awful. Criticism is the investigation of forming and expressing right judgment upon the esteem and value of works of literature. It is just through criticism that scholarly thankfulness and clear understanding winds up conceivable. M. K. Naik holds a one of a kind position among the critics of the twentieth century. He was a standout amongst the most extraordinary scholarly people of his age and he had a present for clear, intense and well suited articulation. He was additionally an exceptionally flexible essayist. For his critical work, he decided on numerous types of literature. He was famous in them all. He started as a critic of impressive guarantee, however later formed into a splendid author and captivating writer. He was additionally an unobtrusive and all

incredibly decent talker. Individuals who were at first alarmed of his keenness and learnedness were enchanted by the delicacy of his way, the sweetness of his voice and the lucidity and magnificence of his words. He considered as a part of his companions a large number of the well-known men of his day. Scarcely any scholars in any age have been so all around cherished, and by such a large number of. With this foundation at the back of the psyche;, let us consider Naik to be a critic and system of breaking down the work of art. age and he had a present for clear, compelling and well suited articulation. He was likewise an extremely adaptable author. For his critical work, he settled on numerous classes of literature. He was prominent in them all. He started as a critic of significant guarantee, however later formed into a splendid writer and interesting writer. He was additionally an unpretentious and all around educated critic regarding literature. He applied exceptionally extraordinary impact on his peers through his discussion and writing. Naik was an especially decent talker. Individuals who were at first startled of his keenness and intellect were enchanted by the tenderness of his way, the sweetness of his voice and the clearness and magnificence of his words. He considered as a part of his companions a considerable lot of the well-known men of his day. Scarcely any essayists in any age have been so very much adored, and by such a significant number of. With this foundation at the back of the psyche;, let us consider Naik to be a critic and method of investigating the work of art.

The investigation, study, and assessment of individual works of art or literature just as the plan of general methodological or tasteful standards for the examination of such works is called as Literary Criticism. From the most punctual long periods of literary history, criticism has been a noteworthy part of literary theory and practice. A retrogressive look over the historical backdrop of criticism in the light of numerous speculations is valuable. The mimetic theory is normal for the criticism of the old style age, with Aristotle as its extraordinary expounder. Horace presented the possibility of guidance with delight and the impact upon the group of spectators in the center was vital to his perspective on art. From Horace through the majority of the eighteenth century, the down to business theory was predominant, in spite of the fact that the neoclassic critics resuscitated a genuine enthusiasm for impersonation. In the meantime, the facts demonstrate that criticism theory, it might be said the most normal for the sentimental frames of mind. At the point when Wordsworth calls poetry "the unconstrained flood of incredible inclination" the artist has moved to the inside. Presently the poet‟s creative mind is another power on the planet and a wellspring of remarkable learning, and articulation is the genuine capacity of art. Starting in the nineteenth century and getting to be predominant in the twentieth has been the "ballad essentially … composed exclusively for the poem‘s purpose," as Poe communicated it. Structure and structure, examples of symbolism and images, turned into the focal point of the critics worry, for the work of art is seen as a different universe. Be that as it may, expanding enthusiasm for brain research has kept the contemporary critic additionally mindful of the way that the crowd capacities in the work of art, and perspectives on the legend ebb and flow today will in general take the artist back to a focal position and in the meantime to an incentive regarding the group of spectators reality the artist talks through his or her prototype examples and pictures from the racial obviousness. These perspectives on criticism will enable us to outline history of the criticism. Criticism is a term which has been connected since the seventeenth century to the depiction, avocation, investigation, or judgment of works of art. There are numerous manners by which criticism might be grouped. A portion of the more typical groupings are given here, as valuable to M. H. Abrams‟ separation among the major critical hypotheses as mimetic, logical, expressive, and objective. One basic polarity for criticism is Aristotelian versus Non-romantic. In this sense, Aristotelian suggests a legal, consistent, formal criticism that will in general discover the estimations of a work either inside the work itself or indistinguishably connected to the work; and dispassionate infers a moralistic, utilitarian perspective on art, where the estimations of a work are to be found in the convenience of art for other and nonartistic purposes. Such a perspective on dispassionate criticism is restricted and in part off base, however the individuals who hold it point to the avoidance of the writer from Plato‟s Republic. Basically what is implied by the Aristotelian-Platonic polarity is a natural extraneous partition. A detachment between relativistic criticism and absolutist criticism is additionally regularly made, in which the relativistic critic utilizes any or all frameworks which will help in coming to and explaining the idea of a work of art, though the absolutist critic holds that there is one appropriate critical strategy or set of standards and no others ought to be connected to the critical undertaking. A standout amongst the most prominent endowments of English instruction to India is composition fiction, for however India was likely the wellspring head of narrating, the novel as we probably am aware the structure today was an importation from the West. Fiction has come to be the most well-known literary mode of articulation today for Indo-Anglian scholars. Books have been, and are being distributed in twelve Indian dialects, and furthermore in English; and the corresponding impact between the novel in English and the novel in the provincial dialects has been preferably progressively personal and purposive over such impact in the fields of poetry or drama. Also, this has, obviously, been encouraged by the similar case with which a novel (as unmistakable from poetry or drama) can be made an interpretation of starting with one then onto the next of the numerous dialects current in the nation. When contrasted with different fonns of Indian writing in English, state drama, poetry, exposition, Naik's commitment to Indian English Fiction is more prominent. He has not just overviewed the advancement of Indian English Fiction, yet in addition endeavored exceptional creators like R. K. Narayan, Mulk Raj Anand and Raja Rao; the critical articles are distributed in the recognized diaries. In addition, he is the sole specialist on Anglo-Indian Fiction. The ongoing commitment is the distribution of the grounds novel - Corridors of Knowledge (2008). Naik, in his meeting, has communicated his sharp and unique enthusiasm for Indian English Fiction. As Naik's commitment is more prominent, the specialist might want to approach by making the divisions of his work with the goal that the best possible consideration would be given and nothing remains out inconspicuous. The critical articles are distributed in the national and universal recognized diaries. Naik appears to have taken a great deal of torments again to distribute these as books, for example, Dimensions of Indian English Literature, Studies in Indian English Literature and so on. Not surprisingly, Naik starts his paper with the assistance of a citation, very significant to the title and the evaluation of the work. As indicated by him, "About H. Hatterr is a troublesome book which does not loan itself effectively to translation, chiefly in such a case that the art of the epic artist is one of 'purposeful enhancement' Hatterr's art seems, by all accounts, to be one of conscious perplexity." He himself admits that his 'self-portraying' is written in a "language intentionally intended to beguile the larger part, entice them to start speculating, and deciphering our genuine float, and moral story, what the heck we mean : seek after our significance on cleared shake of disarray" (1987: 1). The trouble of the book has been brought up by various critics. K. R. Srinivas Iyengar says, "There is, obviously, G. V. Desani's All About H. Hatterr (1948), a novel that stands apart" (1984: 329). Iyengar draws our consideration towards the 'continuous flow strategy for portrayal. Leela Gandhi brings up the self-portraying component which riddles the perusers. She watches "About H. Hatterr bears the hint of. Desani's unrealistic life" (2008: 212). In this way, the novel is very perplexing in topic and method. The epic is perused and translated on various dimensions - it is without a moment's delay the comic personal history of an Eurasian unconventional; the account of his genuine mission for understanding the significance of life; a social annal uncovering parts of white, Eurasian and Indian character; an important endeavor to mix Western and Indian story frames and an astounding presentation of an apparently unlimited complex virtuosity expressing itself in verbal fireworks of a few kinds. Naik's critical sense could be seen in various features of his writings. At times, the titles are perplexing and convincing and now and then the articles open with literary citations. This time we have Aristotle's citation : Man as 'a political creature'. This fits the nineteenth and twentieth century Man outstandingly. Late, he tosses a surge of light on the advancement of the political books written in different dialects of the world. Naik is one of only a handful couple of early critics who reacted to the entire fictional yield of an author, and particularly two noteworthy writers like Mulk Raj Anand and Raja Rao. He sees Anand's fiction as revolving around the subject of encounter among tradition and innovation, a topic which he considers as the distractions of the modem Indian essayist. The work looks at how the author has met fluctuated victories and disappointments in his art.

Of the four noteworthy types of Indian English literature, viz., Poetry, Fiction, Prose and Drama, the circumstance is totally genuine with regards to poetry in English. Now and then, we don't have the writings of Indian poetry in English; now and again, the works of even our significant artists are not effectively accessible; poetry is distributed in little releases; poetry being one of the slowest selling things for the book shop. Furthermore, the readership of Indian poetry is little and a part of that readership must be of those perusers who like to peruse either their very own poetry or the poetry of their dear companions.

time to choose the best out of the ballads composed during these years and distribute them as collections. Naik has accomplished incredible acclaim through the moving and significant workmanship in the field of fiction, genuine, poetry and drama. Like the prior two volumes, Perspectives on Indian Drama in English (1977) and Perspectives on Indian Prose in English (1982), Perspectives on Indian Poetry in English (1984) incorporates two sorts of articles – those assessing the whole work of real artists and schools and those endeavoring escalated printed investigations of remarkable ballads like Savitri, Gitanjali, and Jejuri. The last exposition on "The Achievement of Indian Poetry in English" is an endeavor: at assessment on the lines of comparable papers on Drama and Prose in the previous volumes. In the opening of his examination, Naik made a hard investigation of the critical material accessible on the sonnet. Different critics like Rajeev Taranath, Meena Belliappa, Christopher Wiseman, Chetan Kamani have been noted and their perspectives on "Night of the Scorpion" have been broke down. Four unmistakable demeanors are strongly separated in the ballad. The first is the traditional, prevalent Indian (Hindu-Buddhist) perspective on it, which is an inquisitive blend of mysticism, confidence and superstition. This view is spoken to by the workers. Oppositely restricted to this view is that spoken to by the dad, "doubter, realist". For him a scorpion-chomp is only a case for the work of test medication, "powder, blend, herb and half breed." He even pours a little paraffin on the nibbled toe and puts a match to it.

To cite M. K. Naik : "If Indian Writing in English is the Cinderella of literature in English, Indian drama in English has dependably been, alongside criticism, one of the twin Cinderella of Indian writing in English" (1977: 180). What Naik might want to pressure is that Indian English drama has not been so lucky as some different parts of Indian writing in English. As we probably am aware, the Indian English fiction and the Indian-English poetry have set up themselves as worthy structures; of writing and western researchers like William Walsh, H. C. Harrex, H. M. Williams, Dieter Reiemenschneider and a few others have perceived and commended them all things considered. Be that as it may, the Indian drama stayed pretty much in a condition of hibernation until scholars like Rabindranath Tagore, Sri Aurobindo, T. P. Kailasam, A.S.P. Ayyar, Bharati Sarabhai and Harindranath Chattopadhyaya showed up on the sound adversaries to those being written in territorial dialects and holding out an expansive based intrigue to the majority. Despite the fact that the present-day Indian dramatists in English, for example, Asif Currimbhoy, Girish Kamad, Badal Sircar, Lekhan Deb, Gurucharan Das, Vijay Tendulkar and Mahesh Dattani appreciate a late spring atmosphere and better prospect, it will be quite hard for them to rub shoulders with specialists of other previously mentioned literary structures. Naik has his very own style of exhibiting the things. Above all else is the absence of living auditorium in our nation. As we as a whole realize that not at all like poetry or fiction drama is a composite art including the 'constant connection among drama and theater'. As a class drama can never appropriately prosper without its sufficient introduction in the theater. Alluding to the uniqueness of drama as a literary structure, Naik watches "Drama is a composite art where the composed expression of the writer accomplishes total artistic acknowledgment just when it turns into the verbally expressed expression of the on-screen character on the stage and through that medium responds on the brain of the crowd. A play, so as to convey imprudence and become a living dramatic encounter, in this way needs a genuine theater and a live group of spectators" (1997: 180-181). Most likely, this contrast among creation and execution demonstrated a noteworthy hindrance in the blossoming of Indian English drama. What Naik has watched is that drama is a composite art and it requires for its prosperity different adornments as the dramatist, the stage, the entertainer, the group of spectators, and English language. Naik's arrangement of "points of view" developed the corpus of Indian English literary criticism. Volumes are dedicated to poetry, fiction, drama and true to life exposition. Naik's own initial paper in every volume displays a thorough overview of the field. He additionally uses the event to criticize the critics.

Indian English Literature thrives through the commitments and manifestations of such huge numbers of stalwarts including increasingly more in shifted structures like novel, poetry, story, exposition, drama and so on. Be that as it may, there is one more field of Indian English literature the essential assignment of which is to bring before the forthcoming perusers advantages and disadvantages through making a decision based on clear arrangement of criteria. Diving profound into positives and negatives the people engaged with critics. Naik makes a compact endeavor to think about the whole scope of Indian English poetry, from its beginnings upto the year 2000. It contains general study of periods and schools; assessment of conspicuous periods; investigation of extraordinary lyrics, long and short; and thought of noteworthy issues, for example, Alienation and Indianness in regard of Indian English poetry. Naik's compilations of critical expositions have completed a great deal to encourage an atmosphere of criticism in India. He has altered in excess of ten volumes of critical expositions by different hands, on various literatures; a gathering is committed to The Image of India in Western Creative Literature, another to American fiction, and a third to poetry in English. His arrangement of "Viewpoints" developed the corpus of Indian English Literary Criticism. Volumes are given to poetry, fiction, drama and genuine composition. Naik's own basic paper in every volume exhibits an extensive study of the field. Naik's criticism is recognized by his careful grant, and his insight into Sanskrit literature and poetics. His introduction, with each reference painstakingly commented on, can go about as a helpful manual for any scientist who needs to catch up his examinations. Be that as it may, he wears his intelligence delicately. Naik has set up himself as one of the main critics on Indian writing in English and included another 'measurement' to critical methodologies with every one of his critical work.

1. B. K. Das (2007). Twentieth Century Literary Criticism. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Distributors. 2. Belliappa K. C., ―C. D. Narasimhaiah (2004). Towards a Common Poetic for Modem India‖ in Indian Literary Criticism in English: Critics, Texts, Issues, edited by P. K. Rajan. New Delhi : Rawat Publications, 2004. 3. Das B. K. (2007). Twentieth Century Literary Criticism. New Delhi : Atlantic Publishers and Distributors. 4. Day, Gary (2008). Literary Criticism a New History. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2008. Print. 5. E. V. Ramakrishnan (2004). ―From Statement to Suggestion: The Relevance of Krishna Rayan as a Critic‖, in P. K. Rajan (ed) Indian Literary Criticism in English : Critics, Texts, Issues, Jaipur : Rawat Publications. 7. Leitch, Vincent B. (2011). The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York; Norton, 2001. Print. Bronner, Stephen Eric. Critical Theory a Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford UP, 2011. Print. 8. M, K. Naik (2006). Indian English Poetry : From the Beginnings Upto 2000. New Delhi: Pencraft International, 2006. 9. M. K. Naik and S. Mokashi-Punekar (eds.) 1997. Perspectives on Indian Drama in English. New Delhi: O.U.P. 10. M. K. Naik (1985). Dimensions of Indian English Literature. New Delhi: Sterling, p. 132. 11. M. K. Naik (2006). Indian English Poetry : From the Beginnings Upto 2000. New Delhi: Pencraft International, 2006, P. 180. 12. M. K. Naik (2006). Indian Poetry in English : From the Beginnings Upto 2000. New Delhi: Pencraft International. 13. M. S. Kushwaha (2008). ―The Unheard Voice : An Apology for Indian Literary Criticism in English‖, in O. P. Budholia (ed.) Seeds in Spring : Contemporary Indian English Poetry, Drama and Critics. New Delhi: Adhyayan Publishers and Distributors. 14. Mohit K. Ray (2002). Studies in Literary Criticism. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Distributors. 15. P. P. Raveendran (2010). ―Toward a New Critical Paradigm : Meenakshi Mukherjee and the Indian English Critical Tradition‖, in P. K. Rajan (ed.) Indian Literary Criticism in English : Critics, Texts, Issues. Jaipur : Rawat Publications. 16. Rajnath (2004). ―Literary Criticism in the New Millennium‖, in P. K. Rajan (ed.) Indian Literary Criticism in English : Critics, Texts, Issues. Jaipur : Rawat Publications. 17. Saintsbury, George : A History of English Criticism. Adinburgh and London: William Blackwood and Sons Ltd. Print.

M.A. in English sharmashikha10294@gmail.com