The Man Who Wrote the Indian and Bangladeshi National Anthems

The man is Rabindranath Tagore, the man whoremains relevant, he remains multi-faceted, he
linked West and East. But like so many that wentappeals to Hindu and Muslim alike, both India and
before him, and indeed many that came afterBangladesh using his poetry for their national
him, he may very well have being completelyanthems. Tagore is so complete, so ancient,
overlooked by the Western world. He was born inperhaps too much so for the popular, throwaway,
Calcutta in 1861 into a very wealthy andall the rage fads which the West so loves to
prominent family, his grandfather had built a hugegorge itself on. Tagore is etched from the
financial empire, controlling much of what went oncenturies, drawn from the winds of time, he was
in Calcutta. His father was a religious scholar andwell versed in ancient Sanskrit and Hindi texts,
reformer, his progressive ideas were endemic ofpossessed a solid understanding of Islamic
the Tagore family, all were forward thinking, alltraditions and was comfortable with early Persian
attempted to combine their traditional Indianliterature. I think Tagore did not hold the West's
culture with Western ideas.attention, because he was unquantifiable, he was
Tagore, writing in the language of the commondifficult to box, indeed, the West's analysis of him
people of Bengal was to link the two worlds, itis simply as an Eastern mystic, which in my
was to come late in his life when a book of hisopinion is a lazy and boring analysis.
poetry landed in the lap of a certain WB YeatsTragically, even his early patron and one of the
who thought the words incredible. Such aWest's greatest wordsmiths to have ever dipped
vindication, can move mountains, Yeats made himthe quill, turned upon Tagore to some extent,
the next best thing, writing the introduction toYeats castigating a perceived narrowness and
Gitanjali (1912), Tagore was handed the Nobelrepetition. Perhaps, it was the very fact that
Prize the following year, the first non-WesternerTagore was simply Tagore and nothing else that
to be honoured. Don't get me wrong, he earnedgot on the wick of the illustrious scholars of the
it, he deserved it but he would have being simplyWest. When they first discovered him, they
by-passed by the West if had not being foradmired his naturalism, his ability to write without
Yeats' realisation of his greatness. Yet almost asigniting or scorning, there was no invention, he
quickly as the West picked him up, they droppedwas in sync with the world. This is not the normal
him, he is no longer much read in the West andway of a writer, indeed it goes completely against
has being out of fashion since the 1930s. But notthe grain, did they hate him for what they
in Bengal, not in India, not in Bangladesh, whereperceived as his lack of effort or for the fact
they have not forgotten his genius.that it was not what a writer should be or indeed
It's the mistake of the West, not Tagore's, heis?