Anna Suvorova, a distinguished personality in the field of literature and art and a serious Russian scholar of Urdu, passed away at the age of 75 on November 24.
I have no idea how many Urdu-speaking people know about her. In fact, when I shared the news of Anna’s passing with some of my friends in the literary circle it appeared from their response that they had heard the name for the first time.
Thus, the newspapers had little information about her which is perhaps why there was no news of her passing anywhere.
In fact, there has been no reaction even from the people who were considered very close to Anna. However, she was remembered in some social media posts in Pakistan.
Leave aside common readers, prominent educational institutions in Lucknow and Delhi, where Anna had formed academic alliances in some way or the other, ought to have remembered her, but did not.
Though it is possible that only few people had heard or seen Anna gracefully speak Urdu in her Russian accent, there is no reason to believe that she was an unfamiliar name in our academic sphere.
Born in Moscow on January 11, 1949, Anna had engaged in academic activities at Lucknow University and Jawaharlal Nehru University apart from the School of Oriental Studies (SOAS) and the National College of Arts (Lahore). She was the head of the Asian Literature Department at the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Non-Russian readers like us know about the literary contribution of this scholar famous for doing fundamental and analytical research on Urdu literature in Russian language through English translations by translators like Osama Farooqui.
She was the second Russian Orientalist, after Ludmila Vassilyeva (although she was a contemporary Russian scholar and friend), whose work was more familiar among the people of the Indian subcontinent. Anna was not famous in India like Ludmila but in Pakistan she was quite a known figure.
A few years ago, I had read Anna’s book Muslim Saints of South Asia. That’s how I came to know about her for the first time. What I liked about her research was that she had collated the biographies of Sufis and cited lots of references.
I don’t have the book at hand currently, but in it she had even gathered and quoted Persian couplets which must have taken a lot of effort. The book left quite an impression on my mind.
But now that I am trying to look at Anna’s works sincerely, I remember a brief piece written by her titled “Iftikhar Arif: A Glimpse from a Distant Country” – a preface of the poetry collection The Twelfth Man by Iftikhar Arif, one of the leading poets of our times – in which comes across as an astute reader and critic of poetry. She wrote:
“A further aspect of Iftikhar Arif’s work may be termed ‘existential’. And this is the most universal. Always balancing on the knife-edge between life and death, hope and despair, love and emptiness, his poetry expresses the existential ‘homelessness’, the exile’ and ‘loneliness of a human soul in a world loaded with weapons of mass destruction.”
She further adds:
“Though deeply rooted in the classical tradition of Ghazal and the later Nazm poetry, Iftikhar Arif’s intellectual verse is too much of a child of our planet to belong to Urdu speaking readers only. The better the outer world comes to know his poetry, the more it will understand its miracle.
To me, Iftikhar Arif is not a rebellious poet. Being a philosopher and a sharp observer, he is preaching a stoic dignity of endurance as a protest. Sometimes this way is longer and harder than revolt.”
Anna Suvorova with Mushtaq Ahmad Yusufi Sahib and Iftikhar Arif. Photo: Facebook.
Here, literary experts will realise that it is not possible to present such a balanced opinion without assessing and observing the poetic language and finesse of a poet. In the case of Anna, it can be said with certainty that in one way or another, she was a diligent reader and critic of classic Urdu poetry.
In this connection, one might cite one of her prominent books Masnavi: A study of Urdu Romance though in almost every research/critical piece, she frequently appears to allude to Islamic culture and social as well as cultural studies of the Indian subcontinent. As a result, the streams of Sufi and Bhakti traditions are also a natural part of her academic work.
In this book, she has extensively discussed the physical along with divine forms of love and romance with special reference to Urdu masnavi. She also wrote in detail about the development, artistic behaviour and characteristics of this rare genre of Urdu poetry.
Anna has made every effort to make this book interesting, especially from the point of view of Russian readers. However, as a reader of Urdu literature, I find her excessively leaning towards Sufism and Islamic philosophy in this book as well as other writings. It seems she believes that despite the constraints of her perspective, her message is incomplete without it.
Besides, the masnavis of northern India from seventeenth to nineteenth century quoted in this book are not merely for the sake of perusing the works of poets like Mir Taqi Mir, Mir Hasan Dehlvi, Ghulam Hamdani Mushafi, Dayashankar Naseem and Nawab Mirza Shauq, but also for the purpose of becoming well-acquainted with the historiography of the period.
This is perhaps why the book offers a lot of vital information about lifestyle, customs and secular values as well as the historical and cultural environment of the period. She also discusses gender sensitivity, and with the help of commonplace examples, she highlights the patriarchal system prevalent at the time.
The poetry of love mystery and divine love has been rarely seen and read in this style, although Urdu critics like Shakeelur Rahman had laid the foundation of such studies with their work on romance and its aesthetics. Anna herself was a great admirer of Rahman, and keeping in mind the manner in which she talked about his studies, it would be right to say that Anna’s style of criticism is on the same lines as the criticism of Rahman in India.
Elements of folk traditions or folk style are subtly placed in both their works. However, while the style of criticism is similar, Anna’s work seems more influenced by the Islamic tradition or philosophy, whereas in Shakilur Rahman’s work, a comprehensive study of the Hindu pantheon is visible.
Comparing the two is not the aim here. But while reading Anna, Shakilur Rahman inevitably comes to mind.
Anna Suvorova with Intizar Hussain. Photo: Facebook.
Anna’s field of study includes Indo-Islamic culture which contains Sufi and Bhakti traditions. In addition, she has a strong interest in Urdu theatre, Urdu drama and dastan in Urdu language and literature. She even attempted to write the history of Urdu theatre and Urdu drama on the basis of texts of plays.
It is not surprising that she connects the concept of Urdu drama with Islamic beliefs, and in this matter her ideology appears dogmatic. She seems to be propagating her views more like an expert on religion and its philosophy than a literary scholar.
However one might view her ideology, there was some influence of Indo-Islamic culture on her personality as well. Perhaps that is why some people had recently specifically noted that Anna even preferred to wear shalwar-kameez as her attire.
In addition to literary works, she also wrote books on Lahore, Benazir Bhutto and Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Many people, who read her book on Lahore, called it an important text on cultural history and a major reason behind Anna’s popularity in Pakistan. Another prominent work of Anna is Widows and Daughters, a book focusing on six Asian women including Indira Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto and Sheikh Hasina, their rise to power and their status as women leaders.
While writing these books, Anna was perhaps also studying the political history of Asia, which is perhaps why she describes Mohammad Ali Jinnah as her most admired personality.
Most of Anna’s work, who was also awarded with Sitara-e-Imtiaz by Pakistan, is related to the country. It includes her contribution to Pakistani literature and culture.
Her book on the erstwhile culture of Lucknow is also a significant text. According to Russian scholar Ludmila Vassilyeva, Anna’s book on the history of Urdu culture is important not only from the academic point of view, but it is also interesting for the common readers.
Ludmila also calls her an expert in visual arts and painting.
It is claimed that Anna had translated the stories of many writers like Manto from Urdu to Russian.
A scholar of Modern Urdu Literature Alexey S. Sukhochov (1928-2000), who is known for his book Dastan Se Novel Tak, was the teacher of both Ludmila Vassilyeva and Anna Suvorova and their PhD supervisor as well. Alexey’s book on Makhdoom Muhiuddin is quite popular.
Talking about Anna and Ludmila’s initial education in Urdu, a teacher at Moscow University Professor Olgazhmovotova introduced them to books of basic Urdu language.
However, today after Anna’s departure, to look at her work is to see the cultural history of two countries, to understand their political and social concerns, to go through the secular values of Sufi and Bhakti traditions and to witness the glorious past of Urdu literature in terms of the linguistic exchange between Russia and the Indian subcontinent.
