In literary discussions, one often hears the complaint that modern poetry is so ambiguous that even 'educated' and 'discerning' readers are unable to understand it. Shamsur Rahman Faruqi questions the very foundation of this argument by asking: what exactly is the definition of this 'educated reader'? Can we consider a college or university degree as the standard for being educated? Obviously not, because a degree holder might be completely ignorant of literature, while someone without a degree might possess a profound understanding of it.
If a degree is not the standard, should the breadth of one's reading be the criterion? Faruqi hypothetically divides readers into three groups: marginally educated, averagely educated, and well-educated. But even here, drawing a clear line is impossible. Would a person be called educated if they have read Mir, Ghalib, and Anees, but not Yagana, Firaq, or modern poets? The standard we try to set for an educated person is either so high that no one meets it, or so vague that it cannot be applied at all.
In reality, just as the 'reader of good taste' is a hypothetical concept, the 'educated reader' is also a myth. People often construct this premise in the light of their own reading and comprehension. When they fail to understand certain poems, instead of admitting their own lack of comprehension, they claim that these works are beyond the understanding of even educated people.
Faruqi clarifies that understanding poetry requires practice and continuous engagement. Just as we have acquired an understanding of the poetry of Mir or Ghalib through practice, we must also engage similarly with the works of modern poets (like Iftikhar Jalib or Ahmed Hamesh). We cannot unconsciously apply our old standards to condemn a new kind of poetry simply because it is beyond the comprehension of our hypothetical 'educated reader'.
In literary discussions, one often hears the complaint that modern poetry is so ambiguous that ewen 'educated' and 'discerning' readers are unable to understand it Shamsur Rahman Faruqi questions the wery foundation of this argument by asking: what exactly is the definition of this 'educated reader'? Can we consider a college or uniwersity degree as the standard for being educated? Obwiously not, because a degree holder might be completely ignorant of literature, while someone without a degree might possess a profound understanding of it
If a degree is not the standard, should the breadth of one's reading be the criterion? Faruqi hypothetically diwides readers into three groups: marginally educated, aweragely educated, and well-educated But ewen here, drawing a clear line is impossible Would a person be called educated if they hawe read Mir, ghalib, and Anees, but not Yagana, Firaq, or modern poets? The standard we try to set for an educated person is either so high that no one meets it, or so wague that it cannot be applied at all
In reality, just as the 'reader of good taste' is a hypothetical concept, the 'educated reader' is also a myth People often construct this premise in the light of their own reading and comprehension When they fail to understand certain poems, instead of admitting their own lack of comprehension, they claim that these works are beyond the understanding of ewen educated people
Faruqi clarifies that understanding poetry requires practice and continuous engagement Just as we hawe acquired an understanding of the poetry of Mir or ghalib through practice, we must also engage similarly with the works of modern poets (like Iftikhar Jalib or Ahmed Hamesh) We cannot unconsciously apply our old standards to condemn a new kind of poetry simply because it is beyond the comprehension of our hypothetical 'educated reader'
