A Ghazal and its Parts: A Closer Look at Ghalib’s Naqsh Faryādī
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11409493
Abstract:
All of us who read Ghalib know that his dīvān begins with “naqsh faryādī hai kis kī shokhī-e tahrīr kā/ kāghazī hai pairahan har paikar-e tasvīr kā.” It was the traditional practice to begin a dīvān of classical poetry with a ḥamd or poem in praise of the Creator. But, is naqsh faryādī a hamd? This paper examines some important threads of the discourse commentary on this famous ghazal. It also tracks Ghalib’s editing of this ghazal intending to go forward with new perspectives on the ordering of bayts (two-line verses) in the ghazal. It is an exercise in scrutinizing a ghazal for the coherence of the theme through a careful study of the arrangement of verses. While working on the progression of ghazals in Ghalib’s dīvāns, I was struck by changes in the ordering of verses. This generally happened when new verses were added, or verses were deleted. I was also fascinated by how Ghalib cherry-picked verses from two or three ghazals in the same meter and rhyme (ham tarh) and made a new ghazal. I compared the old ghazals with the newly minted one— what was going on in Ghalib’s mind as he moved verses around? Was there something deeper in the editorial process, beyond simply removing verses that could be regarded as ‘heavy’ or ambiguous, even meaningless? I am raking up an age-old discussion here: is the ghazal a (whole) poem qua poem? Or, in other words, does the ghazal have a semblance of specificity as implied by theme, images or allusions?
Works cited / Notes:
Maulana Imtiyaz Ali Khan Arshi, Divān-e Ghālib, New Delhi. Anjuman Taraqqi Urdu Hind, (second ed.) 1982. (A dīvān is a collection of poems arranged in alphabetical order by the radīf (refrain). A poet was considered to be a sahib-e dīvān if he/she had a collection of poetry with radīfs representing nearly all the characters of the alphabet. It is traditional to begin a dīvān with a poem in praise of God.)
Alessandro Bausani. “The Development of Form in Persian Lyrics.” East and West; New Series 9, 1958. P 145-53.
Michael C. Hillman. Unity in the Ghazals of Hafez, Minneapolis and Chicago, Bibliotheca Islamica, 1976
T.S. Elliot. On Poetry and Poets, New York. Farrar, Strauss, 1957, p66.
Divān-e Ghalib, Nuskhah-e Shirani, Lahore, Majlis-e Taraqqi-e Adab, 1969, p.2
Frances Pritchett, “The Meaning of Meaningless Verses, Ghalib and His Commentators,” A Wilderness of Possibilities, Urdu Studies in Transnational Perspectives, ed. Kathryn Hansen and David Lelyveld. New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2005. 251-72.
All of Ghalib’s letters that address literary issues are collected in one volume titled ‘Ūd-e Hindī, ed. Saiyyid Murtuza Husain Fazil, Lahore, Majlis Taraqqi Urdu Adab, 1967.
Shamsur Rahman Faruqi, Tafhīm-e Ghalib, p20. Kamal al Din Ismā‘il Isfahani (1172-1237) was a celebrated poet especially known for qasīdah
Faruqi, p.21.
Faiz Ahmad Faiz, Mata‘-e Lauh-o Qalam, Karachi. Maktaba Daniyal, (third edition), 1983, p. 62-63
Divan-e Ghalib 1826, Nuskhah-e Shirānī, p.1
Frances W. Pritchett: A Desertful of Roses
Jain, p 61. “Jo mizhah jauhar nahīñ”. According to Jain, “that person, whose eyes do not have the perception, his claim that that he is capable of seeing the wonders of the world is false. His vision is scattered dreams seen in the state of non-being (‘adam).” I find Jain’s explanation forced because the two lines don’t come together.
Princess Shirin was the wife of King Khusrau. For details of the Shirin-Khusrau-Farhad romance as penned by the twelfth century Persian poet Nizami Ganjavi, see:
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ghalib/texts/txt_chelkowski_1975_nizami.pdf
Jahan Ramazani, “Lyric Poetry: Intergeneric, Transnational, Translingual,” JLT 2017; 11(1): 97-107.
Jonathan Culler, Theory of the Lyric, Cambridge, MA 2015.
