![]() Ghazal was severely criticised for certain limitations. Hence, they favour nazm, or poem, in its various forms, such as free verse, blank verse and prose poem. The enjoyers of the modern Urdu ghazal cannot agree more, but there are many who believe that ghazal’s diction, imagery, traditional metaphors and ghazal’s form itself do not allow the expression of modern sensibility beyond a certain point. Then she draws a parallel between Urdu ghazal and country music and western music, citing the example of the “hero” of the country music, who, just like the “heroine” of Urdu ghazal, is not the “realistic depiction of particular social conditions” but an expression of emotional experiences which is “now entirely conventionalised for the modern enjoyers of the genre”. But of course I would never agree that it is ‘only’ words”. I argue from a wealth of evidence that the classical ghazal is indeed a game of words. ![]() Pritchett, a well-known critic of Urdu and professor at Columbia University, writes: “To me ghazal’s reliance on its wonderful networks of images and conventions makes it very clear that for most purposes, it is not derived from anything like actual social conditions of their personal and collective lives.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |