What is Odia literature?

Sailen Routray

The Big Book of Odia Literature is indeed big, at 672 pages, in addition to 50 pages of front matter that includes a 32-page-long editor’s note. The volume has selections of bhasha literature from the sociolinguistic region of Odisha produced across seven centuries, from the 14th to the 21st. It covers four literary forms: poetry, play, short story, and essay.

There are 2 plays (one from the 19th century and the other from the 20th), 30 short stories, and 23 essays, all translated from Odia to English. The poetry section has English translations of 44 Odia poetical works by 43 poets. Additionally, there are 38 poems from the following languages: Sambalpuri-Kosali, Sanskrit, “Sandha” (sic), Santali, Kui, Oraon, Mundari, Kisan, Kharia/Khadia, Sadri, Kondh, Paraja, and English.

Such a selection gives rise to the obvious question: What is Odia literature? Is it literature written in the Odia language? Or is it literature produced in the administrative unit of the Indian State called Odisha? Or is it literature from regions that historically have had some percentage of Odia-speaking peoples?

This is a knotty question that can have multiple answers, each as valid as the other. But all the answers must share the quality of consistency in terms of how Odianess is defined and, based on this definition, the criteria for selection of the languages, literary forms and texts. Does the current volume satisfy this criterion? Let us examine.

The assumption behind the selection of texts in The Big Book of Odia Literature seems to be that all people within the geographical boundaries of the Odia nation (now squarely identified with the State of Odisha) are Odia, irrespective of whether they are Odia-speaking or not. This criterion, however, is not made explicit in the editor’s note.

And, so, one wonders: Why are Bengali and Telugu literatures excluded from the volume? The speakers of these two languages are significant linguistic minorities in the State. It is also not clear why from languages such as Santali and Sanskrit, only poetry makes the cut; other forms of literature have also been produced in these languages in the region of Odisha.

The short story and essay are modern literary forms in Odia literature. These two, selections of which are primarily from the 20th century, take up more than 60 per cent of the pages. Similarly, more than 60 per cent of the poems from the Odia language included here are from the 20th and 21st centuries. 

The rest of the five centuries of continuous and fecund literary production has been squeezed into a relatively smaller space. The few translations of premodern bhakti poetry that have been included are of one particular kind: devotional songs from the sagun bhakti tradition (involving worship of deities with attributes and forms, such as Vishnu, Rama, and Krishna). 

There is another important tradition of devotional songs in Odia: the gyana-bhakti parampara (literally, knowledge-devotion tradition), where the focus is on gaining personal knowledge of the deity through yogic sadhana (practice). Not a single song/poem from this premodern tradition is selected. 

Also excluded are important poetic forms from the premodern literary canon, such as the Chautisa (a popular poetic/performative form in which each line/stanza starts with a consonant of the Odia alphabet and has themes ranging from eroticism to bhakti and spiritual instruction) and the Koili (an ancient form of song in which the poet purportedly addresses the koili, or cuckoo).

The Big Book is not big enough to include many important modern literary forms in Odia, including the autobiography, biography, and travelogue. The editor’s note does not explain why these forms, which have become increasingly popular over time, do not find a place in the book. Such choices made in an anthology are, of course, the editor’s prerogative. But in the absence of any explanation of rationale from the editor, readers are left baffled.

The quality of the translations is uneven. There are no editor’s notes explaining whether the translations were commissioned afresh for this volume or whether they are from pre-existing works. Many of the translations are evidently old. For example, the inspired translation by Jayanta Mahapatra and Madhusudan Pati of a section of Gangadhar Meher’s poem “Tapaswini” is an old one. Identifying the pre-existing translations and providing details of the publications they appeared in would have pointed readers to these texts and acted as an introduction to Odia literature in English translation.

Even with all these caveats, an anthology like this deserves to be widely circulated and read. If it starts a conversation about the translation of Odia literature in English or what counts as Odia literature, that would be a welcome diversion from the stale debates around linguistic asmita (pride). Hopefully, the volume will also lead to renewed interventions in criticism and translation of literary forms beyond the essay, the short story, poetry, and drama.

Note: This review was first published in the magazine Frontline on November 15, 2024.