By Swarnim Raj Lamsal
Whether it is for the autocratic family rule or for some important achievements (for instance, the establishment of Durbar High School or Nepal’s national newspaper, Gorkhapatra), regardless of the motive, the Rana Rule in Nepal is one of the most discussed and remembered periods in the Nepalese history. It is generally argued that, like Shaphalya Amatya, in the book Rana Rule in Nepal does, that this family rule can be divided into three phases: the first phase being of the establishment of the rule (1846-85); the second being of development of the rule and the ensuing tyranny (1885-1932); and the third being the downfall of the rule (1932-51) (13-23). A focus on the causes of the downfall of the regime would pinpoint that the literary writings of the period, instigated by the contemporary socio-political environment, had a smell of Anti-Rana predisposition. Whether by writing explicitly or implicitly (through the valorization of nature or self-expression in the romanticist sense) about the oppression faced by the commoners, the writings of the period helped to bring a transition from autocracy to democracy.
Historians like Rishikesh Shaha, opine that, Rana rule made Nepal “hermetically sealed off against the beneficent influences of modern life, thought and civilization” (241). Such sealing off would dramatically maintain the family rule because the Nepalese would not know what was going on around the globe. However, the same sealing off and consequent inability to “adjust itself to the regional and global changes in international politics following World War II” led to the collapse of the Rana regime (Shaha 247). To maintain their tyranny, Ranas would, now and then, suppress any revolutionary voices and, if needed, exile or kill the rebels. And as Shah notices, these rebels got the support of Indian National Congress and hence assembled the people in the name of democracy behind the King (247). Alongside the political efforts, Nepalese literature also gained an impetus of creating a rebel voice in writing. As such it created a mass awareness of the subjugation and autocracy they were undergoing and the awareness to change the status quo.
During this period, particularly, the poets were more active than writers of other genres. As Ramesh Shrestha quotes Yadunath Khanal in his book, the poets [like Dharanidhar Sharma, Mahananda Sapkota, Surya Bikram Gyawali, Siddhicharan Shrestha, Laxmi Prasad Devkota] had [political and revolutionary] consciousness, new meaning and dimensions entered into their symbols (106; my translation). Such kind of astute symbolism can be seen, in Gopal Prasad Rimal’s “Aamako Sapana (1943)”, for example, where he believes that revolution is undeniable and soon to “come spreading light like the morning sun; / at his waist you will see a weapon, / for his fight against injustice” (3-5; Trans. Hutt 75-6). For Rimal, the anti- Rana agitation would be an inevitable arm-fight but would bring a great light like the one that the sun bestows. The importance of such light is echoed in one of the poems (written around 1949-50) by Devkota as well: “Does the miser Jupiter of the heaven conceal fire / from us? / Do we have no Prometheus?” (qtd in Bandhu 233; my translation). Chudamani Bandhu, a well-known scholar of Devkota, interprets the above lines as ones which show the “lifeless life of Nepalese under the tyrannical rule [of the Ranas]” (233; my translation). Such life would demand a rebel like Prometheus, who could steal the fire of freedom and illuminate the life of Nepalese.
Moreover, Dharanidhar wrote similar poems where he would urge the public for a rebellion. As Amatya claims, one of his poems, “Jaga, Jaga”, for instance, appeals his comrades to “march ahead fearlessly along the path of progress and development” (60). These kinds of expressions show a high degree of rebellious forces and would have definitely created their impacts on the public, ultimately making the rise of democracy possible in Nepal.
The level of critique that comes from the poetry is also reflected in the stories of that period. Rana regime appears in one way or the other in the Nepalese stories, written in the contemporary period. According to Michael James Hutt, the presentation of this autocratic rule is one of the “themes that occurred with striking regularity” in most of the anthologized Nepalese short stories (177). Hutt further elaborates:
It [the Rana Regime] is remembered as a time of exploitation, censorship and oppression, but there is also a kind of nostalgia for the ostentatious grandeur of the age . . . [for instance, Bhavani] Bhikshu’s “Maujang Babusaheb’s Coat” (Maujang Babusahebko Kot, 1960), is a masterly analysis of the attitudes and beliefs of a senior Rana in the years after the fall of his family’s regime, in which an old coat comes to symbolize the glories of his past.
During the latter years of the autocratic Rana- government, many intellectuals and activists spent periods in jail, including most of Nepal’s leading writers. Bijaya Malla’s “The Prisoner and the Dove” (Pareva ra Kaidi, 1977) recounts a disturbing incident from prison life based on Malla’s own experiences. (187; italics in the orig.)
As Hutt explicates, the writings of certain prose writers were completely based either on the destructive and coercive forces brought upon the commoners by the Ranas, which finally led to the usurpation of the system or the nostalgia that the Ranas felt post their fall. Even though the dates of publication of these stories are a little far from the year of the downfall of the Ranas (1951), they show the extent to which Rana rule had affected the country.
The third phase of the rule also saw Balkrishna Sama’s some prominent stories. Though better known for the dramas he has penned, his stories are also reflective of the context he was living in. One of such stories is “Kaikai” (c. 1938), which Tana Sarma in his book Sama ra Samaka Kriti says is “a symbolical story . . . Adapted from the myths and folklores of our tradition, the story suggests that if war is what it needs for the peace and good values [including freedom] to be established, war must be done” (17; my translation). This comment contextualize Sama’s story in two ways: first, it shows that the time was of preparation of war against the despotic rule; second, it also links with another Anti-Rana reform: that of Arya Samaj.
Led by Swami Dayananda in India, this Samaj worked to “reinterpret Hinduism according to the ancient Vedas and campaigned against existing Hindu belief . . . The usual style of Arya Samaj leaders was to hold public meetings . . . to preach the idea of social equality” (Amatya 52). So, the idea of reinterpreting Hindu myths, clearly visible in “Kaikai”, is actually derived from this Samaj. Furthermore, as Amatya explains the Arya Samaj also helped to create a consciousness that equality can be brought only through organizing the disparate forces of the society (53). Consequently with the influence of Arya Samaj in the writings and the social beliefs, commoners gathered and the Rana rule was ended.
Also, the gatherings encouraged by the Arya Samaj allowed literary enthusiasts to gather up and write articles in journals and newspapers like Chand (monthly journal); Sharada (literary magazine); Yugvani (Anti-Rana weekly) among others. These periodicals produced multiple writings from authors like Siddhicharan Shrestha, Kedar Man Vyathit, and Gopal Prasad Rimal. Here they not only fostered the idea of togetherness and unity to topple the system but also focused on experiments. For example, Rimal brought the idea of “‘gadya-kavita’, literally ‘prose poetry’” (Hutt 19); meanwhile, Vyathit “waxed facetious in dubious mysticism and verbal jugglery” (Amatya 62). Again these experiments are also related to the then time.
Amatya explains: “These were new traits, the literary euphoria indeed aroused by Padma Shumsher’s liberal outlook which raised the prospect of the liberalization of the Rana regime. The literary style and contents of the writings of the period 1945-48 fostered this prospect” (62).
Thus, as the time changed, the liberty the authors felt also was different. Such liberalization in the period also brought another dimension of Nepalese literature: The age of Romanticism.
As Peter J. Kitson opines, one of the features of romanticism is that it writes “about the nature of the individual self and the value of individual experience” (328). This means that romantic writers try to write in the language of the commoners. Thus it would be no surprise that the romantic poets like Devkota, Siddhicharan employed jhyaure, the metre and theme akin to Nepali folk song (Hutt 19). However, as Hutt explains these changes can be also “regarded as a literary manifestation of the Nepali nationalism that eventually toppled the Rana autocracy” (19). Furthermore, as Abhi Subedi explains:
In spite of the Rana government’s attempts to keep Nepal secluded from the wise world Nepali people began to feel the importance of an individual and [their] rights to express [their] beliefs freely. Devkota’s poems make it clear that each self-conscious Nepali elite could assert [their] individuality and aspire for the establishment of liberal democratic institutions.
As Hutt and Subedi make it clear, the romantic poets were focused not only in assertion of individual freedom but also with the very assertion they tried to establish and institutionalize democracy.
Another obvious feature of Romantic poets is their emphasis of nature and their belief that it is only through a harmony with the nature that we can achieve a state of ‘unity of being’ (Kitson 328). Of course, the aforementioned poets wrote about nature and even thought nature, in Shrestha’s words, as their teachers (135). Devkota’s “Jhanjabir”, Vyathit’s “Indreni”, and Siddhicharan’s “Mero Pyaro Okhaldunga” are but some examples of such nature poems. However, implicit in these kinds of poems is a rebellious voice. According to Amatya, Devkota describes the then society as a place where “there was no justice and people [lived] in fear and suppression” (61). So we can safely assume that there was an intense lack of humanistic feelings and sense of unity. To do away with this, the romantic poets, as Shrestha notices, provided a humanistic sympathy and tried to dismantle all the dehumanizing forces [including the Rana rule] (137; my translation). As such, poems like “Ek Sundari Chyameni Prati” by Devkota were published.
Furthermore, even “Mero Pyaro Okhaldhunga” can be interpreted as having Anti- Rana feelings and it was indeed done as exhibiting the desire to be free from the Ranas, as Hutt points out, because of which Siddhicharan was subject of scrutiny for the rulers (58). For example, these lines:
In the beauty of your verdant green,
in the coolness of your heart,
this poet spent his childhood,
laughing, playing, wandering the glades,
my beloved Okhaldhunga (1-5; Trans. Hutt 58)
This can be interpreted as description of a land (though here specified by Okhaldhunga), which is full of innocence (“childhood”) and where one is free for expression of emotions (“laughing, playing, wandering the glades). Such land is a sharp contrast to the situation in the contemporary period as exhibited by Devkota, in the aforementioned quote in Shrestha’s book. Thus even those poems which seem to be completely descriptive and nostalgic of nature have a political and rebellious tone in them.
Either through direct manifestation or through a symbolic exhibition of the desire to breathe free and hence to topple the repressive rule through romantic ethos, the literary writings of the last phase of the Rana rule had Anti-Rana tendency almost as a Master theme. Influenced by the contemporary events like Arya Samaj, awareness from international events of revolution and mass gatherings, the writers also edited and became part of scholarly journals, newspapers and magazines. All these factors worked together to bring a halt to the 104-year long dictatorship and darkness of the Ranas, thereby showing the power of writing as well. From the observations made above, we can also safely assume that the literary and socio-political history are always in the magnetic field of each other i.e. they are intertwined.
Works Cited
Amatya, Shaphalya. Rana Rule in Nepal. Delhi: Nirala Publications, 2004. Print.
Bandhu, Chudamani. Devkota. 4th ed. Kathmandu: Sajha Prakashan, 2067 [B.S.]. Print.
Hutt, Michael James, trans. “Aamako Sapana”. By Gopal Prasad Rimal. California: U of California P, 1991. Print.
—, trans. “Mero Pyaro Okhaldhunga”. By Siddhicharan Shrestha. California: U of California P, 1991. Print.
—, trans. and ed. Himalayan Voices: An Introduction to Modern Nepali Literature. California: U of California P, 1991. Print.
Kitson, Peter J. “The Romantic Period, 1780-1832”. English Literature in Context. Ed. Paul Poplawski. Delhi: Cambridge UP, 2010. 306-402. Print.
Pradhan, Kumar. A History of Nepali Literature. Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, 1984. Print.
Sarma, Tana. Sama ra Samaka Kriti. 5th ed. Kathmandu: Sajha Prakashan, 2050 [B.S.]. Print.
Shaha, Rishikesh. Modern Nepal: A Political History, 1769-1955. Vol. 2. Delhi: Manohar Publishers, 1996. Print.
Shrestha, Ramesh. Nepali Kabitako Prabriti. 2nd ed. Kathmandu: Sajha Prakashan, 2049 [B.S.]. Print.
Subedi, Abhi. “Nepali Literature: A Critical Survey”. Nepal: Perspectives on Continuity and Change. Ed. Kamal P. Malla. Kathmandu: CENAS, 1989. 423-44. Print.
[Swarnim Raj Lamsal (1993) is a Nepalese writer and researcher. A post-graduate in English literature from Tribhuvan University as University Topper, he teaches at St. Xavier’s College, Kathmandu. He takes a keen interest in the study of myths and folk literature, has published several creative and critical works in Nepali media.]