CHAPTER -1

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF COMPARATIVE LITERATURE

Comparative literature involves two literatures. It transports literary materials

from one language to another. The scope of this literature is broader than that of single

literatures and even national literatures. It transcends the narrowness, provinciality and

parochialism of national and general literatures. Hence it broadens the horizon of

literatures all over the world and gives us a cosmopolitan view and develops international

outlook. Bijay kumar Das defines comparative literature as “it is a comparison between

two literatures and does not have an independent status. Comparative literature analyses

the similarities and dissimilarities and parallels between two literatures.” (1)

Rene Wellek and Austin Warrren have rightly drawn our attention to the origin of

‘comparative’ literature in the following words:

Matthew Arnold translating Ampere’s use of ‘histoirecomparative’, was

apparently the first to use the term in English(1848)........................ the

formal comparison between literatures-or even in movements, figures, and

works-is rarely a central theme in literary history, though such a book as

F.C Green’s Minuet, comparing aspects of French and English eighteenth.

century literature, may be illuminating in defining not only parallels and

affinities but also divergences between the literary development of one

nation and that of another.” (46)

Comparative literature is a study in terms of comparison and contrasts of

similarities and dissimilarities of literatures and cultures and countries more than one in

order to contribute to the mutual appreciation of literary experiences of various people.

A comparative study of literature transcends national and regional boundaries. It reveals

common approaches and similarities in ideas, irrespective of time, land and language. It

helps in promoting understanding among the people living in different parts of the

country and speaking different languages by fostering national unity. Henry H.H. Remak,

an eminent American comparatist defines the term comparative literature as “the study of

literature beyond the confines of one particular country, and the study of the relationships

between English literature on the one hand and other areas of knowledge and belief, such

as the arts (e.g painting, sculpture, architecture, music), philosophy, history, social

sciences (e.g. politics, economics, sociology), religion , etc., on the other”(ed.

Subramaniam, N: I)

As Rene Wellek says that the comparative method is common to all types of

literary study and the comparatist does not stop with comparison. He analyses, evaluates,

explicates and theorises. Comparative literature, says he, “will study all literature from

an international perspective, with a consciousness of the unity of all literary creation and

experience”. (Wellek: 19)

work that compares.” Such a comparison could be in terms of structure, style or the

philosophic vision. A study in comparative literature ought to lead us to a more

comprehensive and adequate understanding of the works and their authors. Mainly it

seeks to study interactions between literatures written in various countries in various

languages. Comparative literature is a literary discipline and ought to be recognized as

the most important academic activity of the present era, in which the East and the West

are merging and unifying the world into a single whole.

According to V.Sachithanandan, “Comparative literature, as it is practised today,

is an interdisciplinary subject, a comprehensive study of literature transcending national

and regional boundaries.” (1)

R. Mummatchi says that the object of comparative literature is essentially

the study of diverse literatures in their relations with one another. There is

a unity of outlook as the writers in different languages derive their

inspiration from a common source and face more or less the same kind of

personal experience. The roots and inspiration of various literatures have

been much the same and the mental climate in which they have grown up

has been similar. (4)

Comparative studies helps in discovering and establishing the universals within

the structure of human imagination. K. Chellappan says, “Comparative literature would

not only lead to an enhancement of literary appreciation and evaluation but also to the
 4

discovery of a universal theory of literature. The comparative method as a method of

studying literature brings out the unity in diversity.” (75)

Dr. T.P. Meenakshisundaram talks of “the delight and enlightenment provided by a

comparative study of great writers who transcend the local and the temporal, grasp and

vivify human life in all its complexity and thus appeal to men of all times and climes.(v-vi)

Max Mueller said: “All higher knowledge is gained by comparison, and rests on

comparison.” R.S. Pathak says:

Comparative studies can be of immense value in imparting what Bosanquet

calls ‘training in enjoyment’ and in freeing the mind from the shackles of

provincialism and literary myopia. Such studies will bring back the

unintterupted perspective which is so essential for literary study and

research of wide dimensions

(Dhavan. R.K. : 27)

Comparative literature, says V. Sachithanandan, “aims at liberating literature from

narrow linguistic boundaries, tries to unify the literatures of the world into one organic

whole and thus intends to establish the unity of humanity.” (1)

R.S. Pathak says: “Probably, no other country can afford a better opportunity for

comparative studies than India. India has been a multilingual country night from the

beginning. This linguistic multiplicity resulted in a wonderfully rich and varied literary

heritage. (Dhavan R.K.: 31)

In the present context the term Comparative Literature is confined to English-

Tamil literary relations inaugurated by the publication of ‘The Impact of Western

Thought on Bharati’ (1972) published by Annamalai University under the guidance of

Meenakshi Sundaram, the multilingual scholar.

With a hope that comparative literature builds bridges across the countries, this

thesis makes an attempt of comparing Scott with Kalki as historical novelists. Both of

them were men of letters who distinguished themselves as historical novelists. Like Scott

Kalki was a dignified personality. Both of them were great thinkers and great writers

who evinced keen interest in the cultural heritage of their respective countries. Like Scott

Kalki was a great adventurer. Both of them were known for their patriotic zeal.

According to Seccombe, “No one has ever made his own land more beautiful or more

blowed than Sir Walter Scott”. This statement of Seccombe may be fairly applicable to

Kalki also. Both of them were voracious readers of legends. Scott’s familiarity with the

Scottish landscape and social life is similar to Kalki’s familiarity with the landscape of

Tamil Nadu and social life. Their patriotic fervour and spirit of adventure in addition to

their historical knowledge and human psychology and their abundant interest in the past

glory of their respective nations prompted them to produce world-class historical novels.

Age cannot wither the charm of their novels nor custom stale their infinite variety.

According to S. Thothadri there are only a few similarities between Scott

and Kalki as historical novelists but there are vital differences between

them. He says that Scott and Kalki are poles apart in their approach to life

and literature. Their attitude to history is strikingly different. Scott has

definite views about the historical novel but Kalki has none. Scott believes

that the historical novel should deal with the customs and manners of the
 6

people but Kalki has a negative attitude in the sense that a novelist should

write independently without preconceived notions. Scott is a realist

whereas Kalki is an idealist and a romanticist. Scott’s novels reflect the

class struggles inherent in the social structure. Kalki denies their basic

concept and chooses to portray only kings and princes. In general Kalki

lacks the stark realism of Scott. His historical novels take the readers to a

dream-world. (Thothadri S.:l-14)

Thothadri’s criticism on the comparative study of Scott and Kalki is polimical in

nature. Thothadri seems to be unaware of the fundamental principles of comparative

literature.
According to G.J. Samuel comparative literature takes into account not only

similarities but also dissimilarities. Besides, the social milieu of these two writers (Scott

and Kalki) are more or less the same; both have written historical novels and both are by

nature romantic. Hence it is absolutely wrong to come to a hasty conclusion that certain

writers should not be compared with certain other writers since their social outlook

slightly differ.

Another Marxist critic K. Kailasapathy does not approve of the comparison

between Kalki and Scott. He distinguishes novel from romance and argues that Scott has

written historical ‘novels’ and Kalki has written ‘romances’. Scott is unique as a realist;

Kalki detests realism. He suggests patronizingly that it would be appropriate to compare

Kalki with Walpole (Tamil Naval Ilakkiyam.:! 15)

A superficial reading of Scott and Kalki and Marxist parochialism account for this

biased criticism and hasty conclusion. Scott and Kalki as historical novelists blend the

features of romance with novel. As Alexander Welsh remarks, romance stresses incident

and novel, character, (The Hero of the Waverly Novels: 14) Scott defines romance in

the essay on “Romance” contributed to the Encyclopaedia Britannica as “fictitious

narrative in prose and verse; the interest of which turns upon marvellous and uncommon

incidents,” and defines the novel as “a fictitious narrative, differing from the Romance,

because the events are accommodated to the ordinary train of human events and the

modem state of society” (qtd. loan Williams, Sir Walter Scott on Novelists and Fiction:

1) Eventhough Northrop Fry regards the romance and the novel as two forms of fiction

he admits that pure examples of either form are never found. So there is hardly any

modern romance that could not be made out to be a novel and vice versa.

Romance and novel are the part and parcel of the historical novel of Kalki and

Scott. Both of them are the masters of the art of blending romance with history and facts

with fiction. So, there is enough justification for comparing Scott with Kalki as great

historical novelists.

Kalki wrote three major historical novels namely P.K., C.C. and P.C., Eventhough

they are in novel form they are epic in nature. They deal with the Pallavas and Colas

who ruled over Tamil Nadu during the seventh and tenth centuries respectively. Kalki’s

is indepth analysis of history, politics and art and culture of Tamil Nadu during that

period is indeed remarkable. It was an age of Hindu religious revival. According to K.V.

Rangaswami “C.C. will be acclaimed, even on a superficial study, as a brilliant historical

romance... So judged, a permanent place will be accorded to it in Tamil prose

literature.” (C.C. Introduction : xxvii)

Kalki depicts the ages of Colas and Pallavas in a realistic manner reflecting

the people’s customs, arts, painting, music, dance and tradition as if talking

about the people of his own time like Scott. P.K. (Dream of Parthipan) is

the first of a trilogy, which covers the reign of Naracimma Pallavan. The

narrative revolves around the struggle of the Pallava Emperor to enhance

the prestige of the Tamil flag. Known for his patronage of the arts,

Naracimma Pallavan took great interest in creating the remarkable shore

town of Mamallapuram, with its famous shore temple and the monolithic

Rathas. He restored to Hinduism its elements of love and compassion. He

succeeded in wiping out the extremist cult of Saivism, which believed in

human sacrifice. In P.K. these historic facts are woven around a

remarkable narrative, filled with thrill, suspense and romance.

(Venkataraman, M.S. P.K.)

P.C. is Kalki’s majestic historical romance-a masterfully woven epic of fact and

conjecture set against the backdrop of tenth century peninsular India under the Chozha

kings. The setting is brought to life with unforgettable descriptions of the corruptions of

high office, its acceptance or rejection, the political ambitions and personal motives of

the rulers, and their impact on the ruled. (Karthick Narayanan. C.V., P.C.)

Kalki’s historical novels were first serialized in his journal Kalki before they were

published in book form.

RK. was serialized from October 16, 1941 to February 10, 1943

C.C. was serialized from January 1, 1944 to June 30, 1946.

P.C. was begun on October 29, 1950 and concluded on May 16, 1954.

The Tamil Nadu Government has made the writings of Kalki a national property.

The selected novels of Scott namely I., K., W., H.M, and ITT., deal with the

history of England and Scotland. I and K deal with the Middle Age and the Elizabeth

Age respectively whereas W., H.M, and B.L., deal with the eighteenth century of

Scotland.

Scott’s first novel W (1814) deals with the Jacobite rising of 1745. “It is a period

to which no Briton can look back without the strongest emotions and the most anxious

interest” (The British Critic, N.S. ii, 1814, p.190). Scott has able to formulate the

background from the memories of the living people whom he has met in Scotland. These

typical English elements with Jacobitism, the last medieval movements, in Europe,

became the main theme and the most Scottish element in his whole work. He used it over

and over again in Guv Mannering (1815); The Antiquary (1816); Old Mortality (1816);

The Heart of Midlothian (1818); and Rob Roy (1818).

“W has claims also to be called the first political novel” (Lamont, Claire W

Introduction xv) because W shows us men in relation to the affairs of the nation.

H.M (1818) is one of the most artful of Scott’s romances. It deals mainly with

Scotland and recreates a past epoch of Scottish history. Thomas Crawford regards this

novel as a domestic ballad epic in prose. It impressively brings together three of Scott’s

main recurring interests: Nationality, Religion, and Justice.

B.L (1819) is a tragic love story. It depicts the conflict between feudalism and

modernism shortly after Scotland’s Union with England in 1707 ‘in naked, almost

melodramatic terms’ (Daiches). According to Lockhart it is “the most pure and powerful

of all tragedies that Scott ever ‘penned’ It presents a panorama of Scottish life in the

early eighteenth century. As the review in Blackwoods declared: ‘It is the only true

romance of the whole set: - in purpose, tenor, and conclusion - it is a pure and

magnificent tragical romance’ (qtd. 342). Tennyson regarded it as Scott’s best novel.

Emerson regarded it as Scott’s highest achievement.

I (1820) is one of the most popular novels of Scott. Lockhart observes that the

publication of I marks the most brilliant epoch in Scott’s history as the literary favourite

of his contemporaries (369) but he is not prepared to place it, “on the same level with W,

Guv Mannening and ELM (368)

K another English novel “was an immediate success”. (Ernest Rhys). It owes its

immediate success to its brilliant evocation of the sixteenth century England, the masterly

portrait of Queen Elizabeth and the tragic fate of Amy Robsart. Above all, it lays bare

the moral depravity of man and his fierce struggle for power and influence which lie

hidden under the glittering splendour of the merry England.

The novels that deal with the history of Scotland are considered to be more

significant so far as Scott is concerned because Scott himself says in Wi “There is no

European nation which, within the course of half a century, or little more, had undergone

so complete a change as this kingdom of Scotland” (W. xxv. 340).