‘The Triple Stream’ ¹

The man in the street, the ‘common man’ as he is usually called, has uncommon shrewdness. Weeks before the White Paper on constitutional reforms was published, humble individuals in crowded third-class compartments and in inconspicuous corners of country buses foretold, amidst peals of laughter, that the White Paper was going to be perfectly blank even as the "Round" Table had resolved itself into a big Zero. Such popular judgments on contemporary events often enshrine the truth, in a somewhat exaggerated form. In this instance, there was no exaggeration at all, for, the combined labours of astute Indians and of more astute Englishmen resulted in a constitutional monstrosity of which no one need feel proud. It would not be true to say that the scheme is disappointing, because no Indian nationalist of any hue expected anything great to emerge from a conference which Mahatma Gandhi and the Congress had not blessed. Nor need we curse it as being unworthy of England: England has consistently blundered in all her dealings with ‘subject’ nations. It is not in her nature to yield an inch of ground unless it should prove inevitable. The apparent ebb in the nationalist movement has emboldened the British Cabinet to insult the intelligence of India by drafting a scheme which even moderate politicians will not look at, in its present shape. As for the Congress, it will not touch the White Paper with a pair of tongs, even if the tongs were six thousand miles long. One leading Congressman, when asked to express his opinion, declared that he preferred to devote his time to more important matters!

During the week that has elapsed, the document has been assailed by every section of political thought in India. Some of the Provincial Councils have condemned it; they have suggested alterations which will transform it beyond recognition. Public opinion is rapidly crystallizing into certain well-defined formulas. Briefly, they are these: - The conditions laid down for the inauguration of the Federation are such as to put it off indefinitely. No time-limit has been set to the period of transition, nor any provision made for the automatic expansion into Dominion Status. The Army will continue to be an army of occupation, without the slightest control on the part of the federal ministry and legislature. The Services will be subject, in the main, to the Secretary of State; they will enjoy the privileges and immunities which have all along been a hindrance to the growth of real self-government. The Governor-General and the Governors are invested with powers, executive, financial, and legislative, manifestly inconsistent with the most rudimentary form of democracy. From start to finish, every line of the White Paper breathes distrust of Indians. It is not a document which seeks to transfer power from British to Indian hands. Its main purpose seems to be to devise ways and means of preventing such transfer.

As Mr. Kelkar pointed out, no useful purpose will be served by making constructive suggestions with a view to improve the scheme. It is drawn up in a spirit of defiance of Indian opinion. Its sole result will be the setting up of an autocracy of which the Governor-General will be the head, and the permanent Services the limbs. No Governor-General can conscientiously discharge the responsibilities imposed on him unless he is a superman. No individual statesman can be so good, so great, and so utterly impartial that he can safe-guard the manifold interests committed to his care, without depending upon the permanent heads of departments. In a word, the White Paper represents the triumph of Conservative die-hardism; the safe-guards and reservations are demonstrably in the interests of England, and contrary to the interests of India. And unless the most progressive elements in the public life of England and India come together at this crisis, the political development of India will receive a setback for several decades.

The idea of an all-India federation was put forward by some of the Princes at the first Session of the Round Table Conference. Since then, there have arisen acute differences of opinion in their own ranks about the desirability of federation with British India, and the terms on which individual States should come into the scheme. The White Paper leaves the States free to determine for themselves whether they will or will not execute the Instruments of Accession, though the hope is expressed that a large number of States would find it advantageous to execute them. The federation is to be between the Provinces of British India and the Rulers of Indian States. The States’ subjects are nowhere in the picture. In both Houses of the Federal Legislature, the Rulers will be represented by their nominees. The future Indian Federation will be debarred from interfering in the internal administration of the States, except to the extent that the Rulers have voluntarily parted with a portion of their power. The Rulers will owe allegiance not to the Federation, but to the Crown as represented by the Viceroy. This, in effect, means the continued domination of the Political Department which the Rulers find so irksome. But their prestige required that they should put greater trust in such an agency than in a federal Ministry composed of their own countrymen of the front rank, and possibly having some of their own Order serving on it. Under normal conditions, democratic ideas ought to percolate into the States and bring them into line with the rest of India, but such a consummation is inevitably delayed by the scheme of the White Paper.

By courtesy of the Star Publishing Trust we are enabled to publish in the present number of Triveni a radio talk by Mr. J. Krisnnamurti. We welcome him back to India after an absence of two years. He is perhaps the most widely travelled Indian of our time. Wherever he has gone, large numbers of men and women have gathered round him and listened to his message of Freedom and Truth. To a world groaning under the dead-weight of tradition and ancient usage, he speaks of the glory of individual uniqueness. He would resolve all conflicts by the harmony between the emotions and the intellect, for "between love and reason is the poise of understanding." He is not concerned with the flag-waving, drum-beating nationalism which creates the confusion of division. He is opposed to all organised religon; to organise Truth is to step it down. He has no use for priestcraft, for ceremonies, for set prayer all these, from his point of view, are wholly unnecessary. Truth is a trackless land, and everyone must tread it by his own innate strength, unaided by any outside power. He claims to have achieved, to have ‘become one with Life’–the Beloved. He tells us that everyone can achieve likewise, not in a distant future, but here and now.

Krishnamurti seeks no disciples, invites no homage. He is full of love and tenderness, but these are impersonal. He gives his love "as the flower gives its scent" to every passer by. In his splendid isolation there is not "the ache of great loneliness." One may agree with Krishnamurti or disagree. But it is impossible to ignore this marvel of a man, this poet-prophet of the New Age.

Mr. G. Venkatachalam's articles on Sthanam Narasimharao in the last Triveni has given rise to an interesting controversy in the columns of the Kistna Patrika, the leading Telugu Weekly. Owing to the urbanity and refinement of the Acting Editor of the Patrika the discussion has been maintained at a high level. Mr. Venkatachalam, while paying a tribute to Mr. Narasimharao's unique talents as an actor, raised a wider issue,–the artistic impropriety of men appearing in the roles of women. The Patrika does not deny the ease and charm which women could impart, if they appeared in those roles. But, asks the Patrika, if art is not a mere imitation of nature and if the triumph of dramatic art lies in the creation of an illusion, why should not men appear in women's roles or women in men's roles? It might impose greater strain on the actor or actress, but that would not detract from the quality of the art displayed.

On the Telugu stage, Kopalle Hanumantharao of Guntur, Jaggaraju of Rajahmundry, Vasudevarao of Bangalore, Sanjivarao and Parupalli Subbarao of Bezwada, and Sthanam Narasimharao and Tungala Chalapathirao of Tenali, have distinguished themselves in their impersonations of women. In an earlier generation, three of the eminent leaders of modern Andhra–T. Prakasam, K. Nageswararao and Desabhakta Venkatappayya–won similar distinction. Since the return of Mr. T. Raghavachar from his European tour, he has definitely set his face against what appeared to him a relic of barbarism. Under his guidance, Srimathis Annapurnadevi, Padmavathi Devi, Dr. Varada Bai and a few others are making their appearance on the stage. It is not our purpose here to discuss the far-reaching effects on our social organisation of this innovation on the South Indian stage. Possibly it is not so much of an innovation, so far as the professional stage is concerned; the actresses of the Surabhi Theatres have always played women's roles and sometimes those of men too. The question is not whether nature has endowed women with gifts which ought to be utilized for the advancement of art. On that there is very little difference of opinion. The present discussion centres round the specific questions:

Firstly, is there any inherent impropriety, from the artistic point of view, in specially gifted men appearing as women?

And, secondly, does such appearance adversely affect their normal personality, even in the case of first-rate artists for whom art is an impersonal expression of their creative genius?

We are willing to throw open the pages of Triveni to a discussion confined to these questions. We invite people interested in the subject to take part in the discussion.

It is usual for groups of litterateurs in every province of India to gather once a year, for establishing personal contacts amongst themselves and to survey the progress of literature in all its branches. Such Conferences were held last December in Maharashtra and Karnataka under the presidentship respectively of His Highness The Maharaja Gaekwar of Baroda and Mr. D. V. Gundappa of Bangalore. At the beginning of this month the younger literary men of Andhra met similarly at Berhampore, with Dr. C. Narayana Rao as President. An important feature of these gatherings is the recitation of poems and songs composed during the previous year. This enables the audience to judge the value of recent additions to the provincial literature. A high standard is set for literary productions in each language. But it is time we took a further step. Fraternal delegates ought to be invited from other linguistic areas, who will speak about the progress of their literatures, and also give appropriate recitations, with translations wherever possible. In this way, the literature of one part of India becomes better known in other parts. The communion of kindred souls, the sympathetic study and appreciation of the best in the sister-languages, and the eventual evolution of a federation of cultures, are the objects to be kept constantly in view. Two or three poets of one province may spend some months of the year in another province, meeting the poets, artists and scholars, collecting folk-songs and studying important cultural movements. Every language of India should be enriched by translations from other languages in the neighbouring provinces. We trust these ideas will commend themselves to literary groups allover India.