Reframing English Studies in India: Socio-Psycholinguistic Issues

The word «English» as a noun does not find a place singularly in the Constitution of India though the expression «English Language» finds a mention at fifteen places in the Constitution. English does not find a mention in the list of the Indian languages given in the eighth schedule of the Constitution. It is very cleat from this that the role of English in the Constitution has simply been envisaged as a means of communication for different purposes. It is also to be noted that the nowhere has it been specified that «English» stands for «British English» (or any other variety of English)²⁸ as a means of communication. It is an unwritten law/ convention for the custodians of English in India, the public service commissions, the university/college departments, the intellectual elites, and the authors that by English they understand «British English». The reason for this hegemony lies in the colonial hangover which is continued and glorified as «tradition». Though Braj B Kachru and his spouse Yamuna Kachru tried their level best to establish the identity of Indian English²⁹ as an independent variety of English their intellectually rich research-efforts neither got a support from the highly colonial Indian authors in English nor from the Indian academia. Little do the intellectual elites realize that it is the tradition of «intellectual slavery» that they have been cherishing and promoting. Whether this slavery springs up from historical positioning, ignorance, lack of synergetic language planning, lack of initiative and intellectual prowess or helplessness or some other factors is more a matter of common sense than of some deep research.

Most of the people who wish to join higher education in India need English language. People also see English as a passport to better jobs and better social positioning. Because of their ignorance, many of them do not make any distinction between English language and English literature. R N Srivastava in English, August says, «... I began to read English on my own. I had to, because English was compulsory for the Civil Services exam. So I read Shakespeare and Wordsworth and people like that, very difficult. It's still important to know English, it gives one ... confidence.'» (Chatterjee, 1988, p. 59-60) With the Government policy of taking higher education to the door-steps of people one finds universities and colleges in the remote corners of India. With this even English has also reached all the nooks and corners of the country. The teachers and the institutions either very subtly hoodwink or push the learners to join a course in English Literature. R N Srivastav says, «`That a young man in Azamganj should find it essential to study something as unnecessary as Hamlet, that is absurd, no, but also inevitable, and just as inevitably, if we behave ourselves, in three generations it will fade.'» (Chatterjee, 1988, p. 60) (emphasis added) Unlike the situation in Germany or Russia where a foreign student studies the language of the country in India a student has to study English for about 12 years before joining a university. Then the realization dawns upon him/her that (s)he is not sufficiently proficient in English to pursue a course satisfactorily. I wish if our teachers could just compare 12 years to one year of training to teach an alien language to meet the needs of the society.

While most of the foreign universities in the EFL/ ESL situation do not lay emphasis on literature in teaching of the second/foreign language, in India, it is almost mandatory to talk of dated authors like Shakespeare, Milton, Dryden, Wordsworth and the like. Most of the universities have been awarding degrees in «English» or «English Literature» after teaching almost the same content in English Literature. The course contents also consist of largely British Literature; there is hardly any paper dealing with teaching/ learning skills of a language. The result of this is reflected in the following sentence of a very senior teacher: «A student who writes ten pages about Hamlet's madness is unable to draft an application in English». This indicates to not only the quality of teaching but also to the misdirected effort of emphasising teaching English Literature in place of English Language against the spirit of the Constitution. Our over-enthusiastic teachers either fail to grasp the basic fact or they pretend to ignore the fact that learning of literature in any language is possible only after some basic proficiency in the language has been achieved. No wonder our post-graduates in English literature fail to deliver what is expected of them. A fictional account of Agastya by Upamanyu Chatterjee in his English, August is sufficient to prove my point.

For the development of ELT and related issues, to improve the standard of teaching of English and to undertake relevant research in field the Government opened a new Institute, Central Institute of English in 1958 with the mandate: «instructional, research and extension facilities in the teaching of English and foreign languages and literatures in India» (efluniversity). In 1972 it was converted to Centra l Institute of English and Foreign Languages³⁰. However, this did not deter other universities to change their policies of teaching and propagating English Literature on a very unusually large scale in an independent country. In other words, the cultural imperialism of English Literature has kept on spreading undeterred even in independent India. With the passage of time, it became English and Foreign Language University, a Central University. The phenomenon is so powerful that even EFLU came under its influence and it has emerged as a new centre of spreading and disseminating English literary culture, spreading the idea of «inherent superiority of the Western literature» and colonise the Indian mind-set further.

The governance of the country according to the colonial rules and colonial mindset is rubbing the salt to the wound. For example, the 1921 rules that govern the recruitment of teachers in a school/college affiliated to UP Secondary Board specify the minimum qualification as a graduate in English Literature though in matters of other languages it just mentions Hindi or Urdu or Sanskrit. It is to be noted that the job of a trained graduate teacher in a UP Board secondary school is to teach both English literature and English language. The situation has been prevalent and continuing since the days of Macaulay who designed a course of English literature for imparting training in English. All those graduates who take their graduation in English Language are denied a job opportunity as per the existing law and are put in a disadvantageous position. Nobody seems to have noticed this anomaly. While a course in English literature should have been replaced by one in English Language after independence, those who study English language are discriminated against. This also means that those who are competent to discharge his/her duties are declared technically unqualified to their peril. Some of such persons have been contesting cases in the High Court at Allahabad and a verdict is still awaited.

I have surveyed some of the English courses being offered in the universities located in similarly situated post-colonial nations in Africa and some Asian countries. Nowhere the situation is that bad; it is only in the South Asian countries which were once governed by Macaulay's writs that the situation is so bad. In the Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran etc every prescribed book and text is examined on the parameters of Islamist culture. And so are the lectures are monitored. To end the hegemony of the Core English here are some strategies:

• Decentre British/ Colonial literature (introduce muti-nationalistic texts)

• Decentre subject-object relations in the Eurocentric relation (introduce nonwhite, non-Christian, non-Anglo-Saxon authors)

• Decentre British/ Colonial culture (introduce multi-cultural texts)

• Decentre British/ Colonial English (introduce multi-lingual texts/ translations)

• Decentre British/ Colonial English authors (introduce authors from the New Nations)

• Decentre British/ Colonial Canon (introduce texts that were banned by the colonial masters)

• Decentre British/ Colonial Singular Texts (introduce appropriate comparisons e. g. compare Paradise Lost and Mahabharat)

• Decentre Literature (introduce the elements from culture/linguistics/folklore/ film-studies in the courses)

• Decentre Multinational Publishing Houses (introduce texts published by smaller publishing houses)

• Decentre the English Pedagogy (replace lecture method by discussions)

Decolonising Teaching Strategies in English Studies

If the reading lists in the university courses are any evidence, it is clear that Indian universities are Indian only in their location. There is hardly a book in the lists that does not come from either the US or the UK authors or the presses located there. In terms of syllabus, almost all the Indian universities have introduced papers on American Literature and New literatures like Australian/ Canadian/ Caribbean / Commonwealth Literature, Indian Aesthetics, Linguistics, and World Literature etc along with British Literature. But the reference books and the reading lists in these courses are full of Anglo-American critics. Again, even the canon of the texts is defined and set by Anglo-American critics. This also proves that not only the flow of knowledge is uni-directional i.e., from the West to the East but also that the Indian intellectuals do not show any sign of independent thinking and judgment. Again, even if some Indian names are there in the list, they hardly represent the Indian perspective. Thus, it may safely be said that all the recommended books represent the typical Western point of view. This tendency is indicative of either the absence of the Indian perspective or considering Indians as brain-dead. Let me illustrate this from an example. In Allahabad University there used to be a tradition of printing the Lecture Lists which comprised the list of the authors and works prescribed for detailed and non-detailed study, reference books, pattern of question paper and the topics of the lectures that the concerned teachers were supposed to deliver.

Let me zero down to the specific case of MA English, Previous, Paper-II (Survey of Poetry from Wordsworth to T S Eliot), 2011-12 (allduniv.ac.in) to illustrate my point. This paper deals with Romantic, Victorian and Modern Poetry (pp. 8-30), which are almost a rage with the Indian academicians. A look at the prescribed poems, books and lecture topics in the list gives the impression that this period of English Literary History had no connection with India, though Asiatic Society (1784) and India House (1905) had come into existence, Charles Wilkins's translation of Bhagavad-Gita (1785) and Hitopdesha (1787) had come out, many of the litterateurs of the period had their relatives in India (in the service of East India Company or later the British crown), the first War of Independence (1857) had already been fought, India had become a shining jewel in the British crown, and the poets of the period had composed poems related to India. The attempt appears to keep the students unaware of the fact that many of the poets in the period had been focussing on India «to become popular as the Empire became greater». There is neither a mention of Aurobindo's take on the Romantics nor of any Marxist critics. These poets were supposed to be taught without any axiomatic principles and irrespective of ontological and epistemological dimensions. It appears that a deliberate attempt was being made to create an impression that the British poets were quite apolitical, they lived in their ivory towers and worked in a very secluded atmosphere that was not vitiated by the contemporary political events.

Coming back to the above-mentioned Lecture List, only eight books³¹ by six Indians find a mention in the reference list consisting of 238 books (only for the paper in question), one each on Keats and Tennyson, four on T S Eliot and two on W B Yeats. Of these, two were by professors at Kolkata, three were by a professor who had settled in Canada, one by the one who had settled in the US and one was a revised version of the PhD thesis awarded by the University of Leeds, 1974. The Lecture List does not mention any book that has even a remote reference as to how India was stirring the British imagination, how an idea like Vedanta and how a book like Bhagvadgita were influencing the poets' sensibility and how the War of 1857 was being viewed by the poets³². The books on T S Eliot explore his work purely in Western terms, irrespective of the poet's Sanskrit studies. It may also be noted that even a book³³ on W B Yeats by an erstwhile teacher of the Department, does not find a place in the list though he³⁴ had been awarded a doctorate degree by Cambridge University perhaps because thesis/book explored Yeats' relationship with occultism, an idea closer to the Indian minds. In the List one also finds an edited book on W B Yeats which has wrongly been attributed to Ramesh Chandra Shah. The book, Yeats: Last Poems: A Casebook (London: Macmillan & Co, 1968), was edited by Jon Stallworthy and not Ramesh Chandra Shah. Shah's book (Yeats and Eliot: Perspectives on India, New Delhi: Associated Publishing House, 1983)³⁵, a PhD work completed in a «mufassil university», does not find a mention in the list. The story of the other papers is not different either.

This data needs to be analysed. Is it because of highbrowism, jealousy, ignorance, or slighting Indian scholarship/ subjects? What kind of attitude will the students display after studying in such an academic environment may be a subject of considerable reflection. Will the research being done in such an environment help Indians solve any of their problems? Indian scholars also need to reflect on the other side of the coin how much attention is paid to their interventions in the debates by the Europeans. Indian scholars in English or their interventions are rarely cited abroad. If one needs a proof, one may seek citation indexes which are available on demand these days. Such scholars are largely dumped forever as they belong neither here nor there. This is not something unusual; hardly any scholar from a second language is ever cited by the scholars from the first language. For those who are in India English will always be second language irrespective of their proficiency of the language and mastery of the subject.

Let me also contemplate on the economic fall out of the lecture lists. The Lecture List in question does not mention the publisher and the place of publication of the recommended books; these details have perhaps been avoided in order to save some space and reduce the number of pages in the lecture list. But my limited research says that of the 238 recommended books in Paper II, only five have been published in India; for purchasing other books the payment has to be made in foreign currency. If the course/ syllabus is replicated in 5000 odd PG departments of the country there will be a need of 5000 odd copies of the book even if one copy each is purchased by the libraries in the respective places. It is a huge amount to be spent just for one paper. This may be multiplied by ten papers that a university generally offers in a PG programme. No wonder Indian government often runs short of its foreign currency reserves. This is a huge cost in terms of investment and the net output. Again, in terms of the number of pages a student is required to study in this course in a second language situation, it is an unachievable task even for a good student for it requires to a reading speed more than three books (250x5^365= 3.424) per day. All over the world a difference between the second language and first language courses and their materials is made. Even their teaching strategies and course materials are different.

As one may note that lecture method has been hinted at in the Lecture List in question. Even CDC report suggests the use of this method of teaching. This method is teacher-controlled and follows an information-centred approach in which a teacher works as a role and sole resource in the classroom instruction. In this method, the teacher does the talking and the student is a passive listener. This creates dullness in the classrooms as the interaction between the pupil and teacher ceases to occur. Besides, this method presumes that only a teacher knows as he is knowledge/ information incarnate. This method is generally used in the religious discourses where the listeners are not supposed to reason and question. This is certainly not the best method for knowledge creation or if the students have to learn to argue. No coloniser/ imperial power wishes its colonies to produce thinkers and ask questions.

If viewed in this light, the lecture method suits a coloniser the best. In a free country we need to change this as fast as possible. The models already exist in the dialogue form that has been used so profusely in our Upanishads and other texts such as Charaka Samhita. I strongly feel that the teaching strategies in English Studies need an over-hauling and a drastic change in India.

Decolonising Research in English Studies

Though thousands of PhD theses have been awarded in this country and some of them are also available on Shodhganga portal (a digital repository of Indian Electronic Theses and Dissertations set-up by the INFLIBNET Centre, India) now for free download, they rarely find a mention in the reading lists. Even the degree awarding universities ignore their mention in the prescribed or recommended readings. One of the reasons is perhaps their poor quality; the other however, is that Indians do not generate debates from their own perspective. They generally, try to intervene in the debates that have a western origin. In the process, most often, they simply end up in rehashing the arguments already made by the Western scholars. I have several times tried to know from the scholars and their supervisors if they disagree with any scholar in the field of their research work. I am sorry to report that most of them have either feigned to understand the question or have ducked the question on one pretext or the other. In an interview for the post of Assistant Professor (English) in a prestigious PG College, in which I interviewed candidates for two days I tried to know from all the candidates as to what was their thesis, everybody was pointing to the dissertation. One cannot expect any argument from such scholars who do not make a difference between a thesis and a dissertation. Again, one rarely comes across citations to the Indian research works in the Indian theses. Is this ignorance of the Indian by the Indians themselves deliberate or contrived? The answer to my mind lies in the double standards that the Indian academicians practice one for awarding degrees (where they have to certify that the research work is an original contribution to the field, a privately held opinion in the form of a report which generally gets buried in the files) and the other for prescription in the courses (a public face). The chasm between these two reveals the duality of character of an Indian academician, which is not expected of a truly professional teacher/ researcher.

A look at the topics of research on the Shodhganga portal also reveals that the research interests of the Indian scholars have largely been moved by the important books and movements in the West. One can say that there have been some literary fashions in English studies, particularly research, as well. For example, a lot of research work has been carried out from the perspective of feminism. Similarly, the topics like magic realism, metaphor, post-colonial concerns, translation etc also emerged. The emphasis has been to make o ne's product saleable as is the case in the world of fashion. Very little effort has been made to explore the subject with a view to understand one's own self. Even the PhD theses that study «self» do not have any Indian perspective. The scholars in English seem oblivious of the fact that hardly has anywhere else in the world mote in-depth work on the philosophy of self been carried out. The outcome of ignoring Indian scholarship on «self» in a PhD thesis in English is that the worth of the work is recognised neither here nor there despite the fact a high degree has been awarded on it by a university.

There is hardly any effort to challenge the Western canons in the Indian research works. When I addressed a gathering of young teachers of English on this issue, they said it was not possible in case of English studies. Their presumption was that English Studies in India would always remain derivative; it is almost a conviction for them. In other words, English Studies in India will never be original and will not be able to contribute to the growth of this country in any way. The reason for such a normative answer from the young generation can be attributed to the fact that colonialism has seeped so deep into their psyche that they have lost their identity; they never think of overthrowing the colonial yoke as they consider it to be something normal.

In order to fulfil the requirement of «originality» sometimes the research supervisors and the candidates select some exotic topics like «Godwin's Shelley as Stable and Unstable Visionary and Prophet», «Rousseau's Wordsworth as a Visionary and Critic of Life» and «Un-Aristotelian Approaches to The Shakespearean Texts - An Inquiry into Possibilities and Practices of Poetic Drama and Dramatic Criticism». Who is Godwin's Shelley? One may be familiar with Timothy's Shelley but one can never be sure of Godwin's Shelley. Perhaps, the researcher means Shelley who was under Godwin's influence. If so, which works of Shelley will be the primary sources for research? The same criticism applies to Rousseau's Wordsworth. In absence of the proper identification of primary sources no proper research can be carried out. Having contradictory terms like «Stable and Unstable Visionary» in the topic means that a proper hypothesis cannot be framed. One is sure about Aristotelian approach to some issue/ subject but what are «Un-Aristotelian Approaches» in the third topic under consideration? It is difficult to specify and limit their number; can some good work may be undertaken in such a case? Sometimes the upcoming authors are selected for researches. But again, the insistence is there on studying them with Western perspectives. The authors too start writing to conform to the western parameters for they know that they will be judged on those parameters. This becomes a sort of vicious circle. One may argue that I have cited very poor examples from some poor universities. Yes, I accept the argument but is that not the reality of the Indian universities by and large?

The so-called leading Indian universities are also derivatives; they just happen to be more alive to the contemporary trends in the Western world because of their location and ample funding that gives them more opportunities to interact with the outside world. And, this is reason why a postcolonial research model is needed. Modelling our university research on the Western paradigms and prototypes is neither required nor is sustainable for any government or people. One may also say that the universities were good but the supervisors and the research candidates had been badly trained. I disagree here on the following counts: a) it is the job of universities to train whatever people are available; a teaching institution like a university is not required for a person who already knows well or is already trained meticulously b) India will not import researchers to do good research; we have to live with whatever we have and use them optimally c) the remark displays a racial attitude in the likeness of the former colonial masters' d) it were the people of this very country who had made this country great and they alone will do this country some proud e) they are the products of the same gene pool that has produced the best philosophical works and therefore I have great hopes from them. I, therefore, argue that if the colonial hang over is thrown out better research results may be produced in these very institutions. The poor quality of research from India may be attributed to the poor researches, poor motivation and poor training. It may also be attributed to wrong thinking and inappropriate strategies like colonial methods of research. The colonial mindset results in poor researches the issue in science and technology is a bit different because timing of research and cost involved in it become more important factors. It may be mentioned here that no path-breaking researches have been done in the field of science either, in the former colonies. In this background I hold that Indians need to have a relook at their relationship with English studies and they need to do considerable amount of research in various areas of scholarship. I cite a few examples which may provide some insights and models for decolonising Indian research in English Studies:

Topic: `Shakespeare's Kings: An Evaluation in the Light of Indian Idea of Kingship '

Areas of research: Shakespeare, Political Science, Post-colonial Studies, Comparative Studies, History of Education, Interdisciplinary Studies, Politics of Canonmaking.

Hypothesis: If Shakespeare is a universal author/dramatist, Indian idea of kingship should find a reflection somewhere in his corpus and his Kings should reflect Indian ideal of kingship. If the hypothesis is not proved the idea of Shakespeare's universality is a colonial myth.

Topic: `Antifeminism in the Plays of George Bernard Shaw '

Areas: Bernard Shaw, Feminism, Anti-feminism, Women's Studies, British Drama, Sociology/ Political Science, Canon of Feminism etc.

Hypothesis: Shaw had been intervening in the debates about women's rights during his times through his dramas. He called himself a disciple of Ibsen but in his plays, Shaw conforms to the Christian ideals of subordination of women by presenting a negative image of women. He therefore is an antifeminist in his approach towards women.

Topic: `A Critical Analysis of John Donne's Poetry in the Light of Shringar Rasa'

Areas: John Donne, Aesthetics, British Poetry, Comparative Literature, Indian Aesthetics, Postcolonial Studies.

Hypothesis: John Donne is widely considered to be a love poet; his poetry can be analysed in the light of Shringar Rasa, the love sentiment in Indian Aesthetics, with better analytical results. More than three strains of love with several subclassifications (like Shreya / preya) can be identified in his poetry; even the personas may be classified according to Nayak / Nayika Bhed which is closely related to Shringar Rasa, in Bharata's Natya Shastra.

Topic: `Vedanta and Christopher Isherwood's Spiritual Quest: A Study in Influence'

Areas: Christopher Ishetwood, Indian Philosophy, Vedanta, Bhagvadgita, British Poetry, Comparative Literature, Influence Studies, Postcolonial Studies.

Hypothesis: Isherwood came under the influence of Vedanta and lectured on Hinduism, translated Bhagvagita; this period acts as a dividing line between his earlier and later writings; there is a marked qualitative difference in the themes, attitudes and techniques before and after his exposure and his earlier writings; the development of his writing career and his perspective can better be understood in the light of the influence of Vedanta.

Topic: `Metaphor and Meaning in Indian Aesthetics (Riti or Alamkar Siddhant) and Western Literary Theory or Russian Formalism or Deconstruction'

Areas: Indian Aesthetics, Western Criticism, Stylistics, Linguistics/ Semantics.

Hypothesis: Acharya Vaman in his Kavyalankar sutravritti considers `riti' to be the soul of literature; he considers style to be the main distinguishing feature of a literary text. This idea was opposed by Kuntak (in his Vakroktijivitam) and Rajshekhar who consider riti to be an external element. Formalists hold that first, those features of literature that distinguish it from other language activities, must constitute the object of inquiry of literary theory; second, «literary facts» have to be prioritized over the metaphysical commitments of literary criticism, whether philosophical, aesthetic or psychological (Steiner, 1995, p. 16). Derrida holds that there is nothing outside the text. A comparative study of their ideas will yield to not only a better understanding of their ideas but may also provide clues for a comprehensive theory of metaphors (figurative language) and meaning. The study may help machine translators in improving their performance.

In the field of language also there is a lot of work to be done by the teachers of English. For example, the work of documenting the languages can be undertaken by these departments without much hullabaloo and paraphernalia a work that has been pending since 1928. The only official language survey in this country with appropriate collection of language sample was done by George Abraham Grierson during 18941928. These days Census Commission of India collects information about the mother tongues and languages known by the citizens of India. It is there only in the form of figures and statistics. Besides, the work is very slow. Only five volumes about their findings about four languages have also been published by them. A project of some millions of rupees was submitted by CIIL, Mysore. The initial work in the form of workshops was also started but it was abandoned because of some sort of the conflict of interest. Later on, G N Devy started his Peoples' Language Survey of India (PLSI)³⁶ under the aegis of the NGO, Bhasha Research and Publication Centre, Baroda. So far thirty volumes have been published. My question here is what has been the role of the Universities and Colleges in documenting the languages around them or their area of operation/ jurisdiction and analysing the collected data? There is hardly a district headquarter in the country that does not a have PG College with a language department in it. My suggestion is that English departments, along with other language departments, should come forward to undertake this work. This will fulfil a long need of having some authentic data to make a better language policy. This will make the Departments connect themselves with the people of their area of location. May be in the process they are also able to document local folklores, local histories and other useful pieces of information and some local pieces of wisdom to make their lives better.

Decolonising Research Methods in English Studies