Transcript of MHD 4 CHAPTER 2 सामाजिक यथार्थ के परिप्रेक्ष्य में अंधेर नगरी | PART 2 | ANDHER NAGRI | IGNOU

Hello friends, welcome to Tiwari Classes. In today's video, we'll examine the significance of Bharatendu Harishchandra's play, Andher Nagari, in the context of political and social reality. Through the play, Andher Nagari, we'll also understand Bharatendu's perspective on the then-current political system. Finally, we'll explore Bharatendu's national consciousness. This topic is going to be very important from an exam perspective. It's best to watch the entire video to ensure you're fully clear on the concepts related to it.

You know that Bharatendu was born in 1850 AD. And the first freedom movement , known to us as the Military Rebellion , took place in 1857. Right? Bharatendu was seven years old when this rebellion occurred. Right? Consequently, he had heard stories of the brutality of British rule and witnessed it to some extent himself. Right? He said he was seven years old. Due to his sharp intellect, thoughtfulness, and concern for the public good, he understood that for the benefit of the country and the welfare of its people, it was essential to adapt traditional cultural beliefs, faiths, and customs to suit the times.

That is, to update them according to the times. And for this, two tasks were necessary. First, the public had to be made aware of their social flaws and character weaknesses, and then the political and economic exploitation by the British state had to be ended. In other words, both were essential. First , one had to correct one's own flaws. One's character weaknesses had to be corrected. Social flaws had to be removed, and secondly, the exploitation by the British state had to be ended.

His travel experiences also gave him insight into the political, social, and cultural situation of the country. He considered public awakening essential and attempted to awaken the common people through his literature. By Bharatendu's time, the British had established their dominance over the entire country by adopting their policy of divide and rule. This British policy was a very dangerous one. They incited the country's own people to fight among themselves, and they ruled. Right? The native princely states were mere puppets in their hands. Their policy of economic exploitation led to the nation's wealth going abroad. Various taxes were being imposed, which was crushing the people. Right? Natural disasters, epidemics, and famines, which occurred annually, also left Indians extremely poor and miserable.

Because of British civilization, their ostentatious lifestyle, their literature, and their terrifying rule, the people here began to view their own civilization, their literature, their culture, their religion, and their philosophy as inferior. A sense of inferiority was growing within them. Right? So, when we start viewing our own civilization and culture as inferior, progress is impossible. Right ? What will happen first? We must be proud of our values and culture. Only then can we do something to protect them. Meanwhile, for the first time, India was politically united. That is, during or after the 1857 Revolution, wasn't it the first time Indians showed unity and raised their voice against the British? Isn't it? Even though the 1857 Revolution didn't achieve significant success for Indians, it certainly fostered a sense of unity among them. At the same time, ease of transportation also brought people from different parts of the country into contact. They exchanged ideas, and provincial boundaries were also broken.

A sense of national unity began to sprout among the people. All sections of society were dissatisfied with the policies and actions of British rule. There was widespread discontent among the princely states, the kings and nawabs of the princely states, entrepreneurs, capitalists, industrialists, the educated middle class, and artisans. In other words, people of all classes were upset and dissatisfied with British rule. Isn't it? The British, who had come from across the seven seas, always considered themselves foreigners. They never tried to integrate with the local people and life like the Muslims. They always considered themselves superior and more civilized. Isn't it? As a result, the gap between rulers and ruled widened, and Indians began to develop a sense of nationalism, a desire to free themselves from the clutches of foreign, heretical, and unjust former rulers. Isn't it? This is why Indians never truly understood the British as their own, nor did they.

Isn't it? So, this is how a sense of nationalism was awakened in Indians, right? A sense of freedom from these foreign rulers began to develop. They understood that the British had come here to rule, economically exploit the people, and plunder the country's wealth and take it abroad. Despite all this, the people were paralyzed and inactive due to the cruelty, ruthlessness, and terror of foreign rule. They were demoralized. They were helpless and powerless, relying on God.

Isn't it? That means, despite knowing everything, people remained silent out of fear. Isn't it? They were silent out of fear. They were inactive. What are writers like in this period of declining Indian national pride? They were sitting indifferent. Bharatendu recognized the responsibility of a writer and, while depicting the true state of his era, also made the public aware of its decline, so that they could recognize their plight and its root causes and consciously strive to free themselves from it. It's true that Bharatendu long harbored a conflict between loyalty and patriotism. This is also a topic in MSD 2, where it's asked how Bharatendu's conflict between loyalty and patriotism persisted. So, after 1857, when the East India Company was in power, and now it's directly in the hands of the British government, isn't it? So, when Queen Victoria came to power, she made grand promises, didn't she? Many Indians felt that good times had arrived, didn't she? And at that time, Bharatendu also felt that

perhaps some improvement might be coming in the country. Because even the native kings didn't want the best for the country. They too were constantly fighting among themselves. So, who developed this sentiment? Bharatendu. That's why he sang songs of devotion to Queen Victoria and said, "The British rule is full of joy and comfort." Isn't it? But he was neither a sycophant, blind devotee, or bard, nor a fervent revolutionary striving to overthrow British rule from India. Isn't it? What I mean to say is that he wasn't a blind loyalist in this way. Isn't it?

Gradually, he began to understand that the British never wanted the welfare of Indians. Their only aim was their own benefit. Isn't it? But he didn't immediately launch a revolution against the British. What was he doing? He wanted to bring about social change. He wanted to awaken the people of the country so that everyone could understand what patriotism is and what we should do to achieve it. He was a true patriot and a constant well-wisher of the people. This personality of his is reflected throughout his literature, especially in his plays. Bharatendu had complete knowledge of the native princely states and their rulers. He knew that the kings, nawabs, landlords, and talukdars were all lame, cowardly, and luxurious. They were exploiters of the people and were bent on destroying the country by wagging their tails like dogs before the British and growling and barking at their subjects. Isn't that so? When they approached the British, they immediately began to flatter them. Isn't that so? They

swaggered like dogs, but when they came to their own people, they became lions and roared. Isn't that so? So, this would inevitably lead to the country's destruction. Isn't that so? He wanted to awaken a spirit of rebellion against them by introducing readers to their dark deeds. Bharatendu is credited with being the first to give voice to national sentiment in Hindi plays. The text presented here, "Andher Nagari," is what we call both a play and a farce . Isn't that so? So, in "Andher Nagari, " he exposes the corruption of British rule and the pervasive bureaucracy, the corrupt judicial system, economic exploitation, and the arbitrary governance of the rulers. The king in this farce represents the foolish, alcoholic, conscienceless, and corrupt rulers of the then-native princely states. Through him, Bharatendu indirectly points to the cruel, selfish , and unjust policies of British rule.

The police, the law, bribery, the judicial system, and the arbitrariness depicted in "Andher Nagari" were even more prevalent in British-administered territories. The British made the laws and imposed new taxes. At times, the author openly denounces and criticizes the British rulers by name. Terms like "Sahib,""Hakim,""Vilayat," etc. are used to refer to the British. In this farce, the gram seller and the powder seller Govardhan Das, all of them, speak so simply in their songs that listeners immediately recognize their goal and allude to the British.

Exploiting the country economically and enriching it by plundering its wealth was the goal not only of the East India Company but of the entire British Empire. When power changed hands, meaning when power passed from the East India Company to the British, even when Victoria became the Empress of India, the British policy of plunder remained unchanged. The British rulers continued to destroy India's agriculture and industry as before. By imposing new taxes, they left the people utterly destitute and helpless. In the farce " Andher Nagari," Ghasiram, the gram seller, says at one point, "The rulers impose a tax on everyone who eats gram.

" Isn't it? "Tikus" refers to tax here, isn't it? Government employees were looting the public by taking bribes, and the British government, pursuing a policy of imperial expansion, was busy destroying the native states by annexing them. That's why it's said, " Churnan Sahibs," whoever eats them, swallows the whole of India. Isn't that an important term? Similarly, the British were effectively implementing a policy of destroying the nation's unity and integrity by creating various kinds of discrimination within the country.

To ensure this success, they had cultivated an army of sycophants, feudal lords, educated people, and religious leaders. They kept them in line, sometimes through allurement and sometimes through fear. Through them, they oppressed and exploited the Indian people, turning them into landlords. There were many kings and princes who were also exploited. In contrast, upright, honest, capable, and gentlemen were ignored, despised, and even punished. Alluding to bribery, the man in charge of the powder says, "Whoever consumes the powder, immediately digests double the bribe." So, the word "all the officials" here implies that bribery is rampant in every government department, office, court, police department, and excise department, and justice is strangled. During British rule, the sole purpose of law was to strengthen the British rule in India, to protect their supporters and stooges , and to enforce justice on their misdeeds. They enacted laws designed to terrorize and silence India's independence activists, patriots,

freedom fighters, newspapers, intellectuals, writers, and literary figures. The police, law, and courts were all engaged in this task. This " Andher Nagari" is a small-format play with six scenes. Therefore, there was no time to present a comprehensive picture of society in full detail. Isn't it? Meaning, it was impossible to describe it in full detail. Nevertheless, the first three scenes of the play, the market scene, most notably the one depicting the reality of contemporary society. From it, we get a glimpse of the market environment , the vendors, the customers, their language and accent. On the other hand, we also gain insight into the discrepancies prevalent in governance, society, and the economy. There are hints elsewhere as well: of societal ills, economic distress, exploitation, the hypocrisy prevalent in religion, laziness, and inertia. Isn't it? This allusion is so powerful, and the satire so sharp, that it strikes like Kabir, infuriates. Isn't it? This infuriates the reader, inspiring them to reflect

and awaken. The confectioner alludes to the casteism, untouchability, and discrimination that have pushed the country into decline. And he says, "A confectioner has 36 communities, brother?" Isn't it? Similarly, the character flaws of Brahmins and Vaishyas have also been thoroughly examined. Isn't it? The caste Brahmin tears apart the Brahmins 'religious beliefs. They say, "Take caste, take caste, lion caste, give me a penny.

Give me a penny, and I'll sell my caste right now." For a penny, I'll turn a Brahmin into a washerman, and a washerman into a Brahmin. For a penny, I'll make whatever arrangement you ask. For a penny, I'll turn a lie into truth . For a penny, I'll turn a Brahmin into a Muslim, for a penny, a Hindu into a Christian. Anything will do. For a penny, I'll consider sin as virtue. For a penny, I'll make a lowly person a grandfather. Vedas, religion, dignity, truth, and greatness are all about money. This shows how far the Brahmin caste, considered the epitome of wisdom and knowledge in that era, had fallen.

They were willing to sell their ideals, principles, dignity, traditions, nobility, life values, honor, and prestige, all under the lure of money. Thus, through the caste Brahmin, Bharatendu embodies the harsh reality of his era. Exposing the flaws of the moneylenders, the powder seller says that all the moneylenders ate the powder, which allowed them to skim their deposits. The moneylenders, who suffer from the disease of indigestion, ate the powder, which clearly explains this. It's clear that the moneylenders, by lending money at high interest rates , were dishonestly sucking the blood of the poor. Despite being uneducated, uneducated, and foolish, the moneylenders enjoyed themselves with the power of money. In just two lines, the author illustrates the reality.

Isn't it? The rulers impose double taxes on everyone who eats. Isn't it? What's the point of doubling everything they do? Taxes. It's clear that Bharatendu is referring to the British tax policy, which was causing the collapse of Indian industries, including the muslin production of Dhaka, the pottery of Nashik, and the indigo plantations. Government officials, police, and court officials were extorting bribes, while moneylenders and merchants were filling their coffers by charging exorbitant interest on loans. The moneylenders were busy embezzling people's savings by ostentatiously declaring their own bankruptcy. Not only in "Andher Nagari, " but also in his plays "Mukri" and " Bharat Durdasha," Bharatendu exposed the British policy of exploitation and attempted to awaken the public. At that time, not only the common people but even those who considered themselves elite and intelligent were trapped in superstitions. This is evident in the final scene of the play. The Mahant declares that whoever dies in this

auspicious moment of literature will go to heaven. Isn't it? So, the minister, the police officer, and the king all appear to be competing to be hanged. Isn't it? Bharatendu was neither a pessimist nor an atheist. He was an optimist about the future and had complete faith in his countrymen. Thus, by depicting the hanging of the king in the final scene of "Andher Nagari," he has on one hand expressed his anger against the British rulers and on the other, has offered solace to the people of India, immersed in the darkness of despair. He has offered a ray of hope that this dark night in Indian history will soon end. A new dawn will come.

The people will be freed from this vicious cycle and breathe a sigh of relief and peace. Therefore, "Andher Nagari" is a play that highlights the author's progressive social, political consciousness, and patriotism, and provides a sense of the reality of the era. This is why Bharatendu is called the pioneer of a new era in literature. So, that's all for today's video. If you enjoyed the video, please like and share it. If you're new to the channel, you can also subscribe. Thank you very much for staying with me for this video .