=== |
FWP:
SETS == IZAFAT; KA/KE/KI
MOTIFS == SWORD
NAMES
TERMS == AFFINITY; 'MEANING-CREATION'; METAPHORHere is a textbook-perfect example of elegant use of the izafat construction, and further evidence of how the ka/ke/ki set can do almost (though not quite, since it can't join adjectives, and it can't be optional) everything that an izafat can do. In effect, here's what we have:
in X is A of B of C
[with the] Y of D of E of FIn this case the izafat between 'sword' and 'blood-scattering' is an adjectival one; but the principle remains the same. And to top if off, there's even one more occurrence in 'with the Y' [ke se rang , with se short for jaise]. If we changed the verse to replace the ka/ke/ki constructions with more izafats, there wouldn't be even the smallest change in the meaning.
Now we fill in a couple of those izafat slots with kaam (which surely is the most crucially multivalent single word in the whole ghazal repertoire), meaning 'work' and 'desire' and 'throat', and with the similarly multivalent havaa , meaning both 'breeze' and 'desire'. Then we fill in a couple more slots with the fundamental metaphor 'rose' and the versatile 'wave', and throw in the even more versatile 'color, style' for good measure. How could we not have a kind of indefinitely ramifying tree of possibilities?
Ah, but what we have, according to SRF, is a 'treasury of mysteries' [ganjiinah-e asraar]. And there is the glory of Mir and the other great ghazal poets. The structure of this verse is such a grammatical monoculture that any student who learned the meter system could replicate it, and could link together an impressively indeterminate and obscure-looking set of izafats. But anybody who has read much mediocre classical ghazal poetry quickly learns that such a chain of abstractions is usually just a big yawn. It's TOO indeterminate, too potentially unlimited, and too pretentiously uninspiring to really hold our attention and make us invest a lot of mental work in it.
Mir and Ghalib, however, can make us work and work and cudgel our brains-- because they grab us, they tantalize us, they make us feel that if we can only get to the center of the maze we'll be richly rewarded in some way that we can maddeningly glimpse but can't quite pin down. We are willing to work for rewards, and do they ever reward us! Among their rewards are verses like this one-- complex but not too abstract; mysterious, alluring, even compelling.
A small personal recollection: When I first began to analyze and learn the meter system, and also to study Ghalib systematically, I had a great urge to create a verse of the kind I so loved in Ghalib. So I did, and it was a verse of multiple hooked-up izafats very much like this one (and metrically impeccable of course). With false modesty, but great inner pride, I showed it to SRF. He was silent for a minute, and then politely asked, 'But what does it mean?' Somewhat huffily, I told him a few of the lofty thoughts that had been captured in it: 'That's what it means!' After another small pause he said, friendlily but firmly, 'No, it doesn't mean that. It just tries to mean that.' Oof! I went home and began to think further about things. Of course, 'he's Ghalib, and I'm not'; but why not? How does he do what he does? That question became one of the keys that helped to unlock the real 'treasury of mysteries', the riches of ma((nii-aafiriinii , of 'meaning-creation'.