On Writing the Literary History of Indian Fiction in English
Abstract
Way back in the forties of the last century, Rene Wellek raised a pertinent question which has set the minds of literary historians thinking: “Is it possible to write literary history, that is, to write that which will be both literary and a history.” The present article proposes some directions in which such an attempt could go. Let us realise that literary histories get written again and again; there cannot be just one literary history of a nation or a period. The extreme view would be that we need no literary history since its objects are always present, echoing Eliot’s well-known dictum that the whole of literature of Europe from Homer has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order. They are eternal and so do not have a history in the usual sense. Such a view ignores the simple concept of literary evolution in arts though it may sound abstract. The real problem is how to provide a framework for such a literary history.
References
Chaudhuri, Amit, ed. The Picador Book of Modern Indian Literature. London: Picador, 2001.
Crane, Ronald. S. Critical and Historical Principles of Literary History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.
Hartman, Geoffrey. Toward Literary History (1970).
Naik, M.K. A History of Indian English Literature (1982).
Perkins, David. Is Literary History Possible? Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1992.
Rene Wellek. The Fall of Literary History. 1973.
Rushdie, Salman, ed. The Vintage Book of Indian Writing. London: Vintage, 1997.
Spencer Dorothy. Indian Fiction in English. An annotated bibliography.
New Literary History. Johns Hopkins University.
