…For five years, I gave the shortlisted candidates for our M.Tech (IT) entrance a short second test. In one of the questions, I would ask them to write something in English about their family, then rewrite the same thing in their mother tongue or in any other Indian language they knew. Invariably, people who wrote bad English also wrote bad Hindi, bad Marathi, bad Telugu, etc. My belief, therefore, is that poor writing is a result of a lack of mental discipline to write properly. Also, it is language-independent. If you’re good in one language, it means you’ve disciplined your mind to write well and carefully. Then you usually imbibe that discipline when writing in another language. Inadequate preparation on the topic may be one aspect, but invariably, lack of discipline and training in writing is the problem.
— Prof. Deepak Pathak, CSE, IT Bombay, Raintree, Jan-Feb 2011

How terrible I am at writing! It occurred to me first when I had to write and submit my undergraduate project in college. I had no issue talking about it to anyone who cared to listen. But I found it very difficult to put it on paper. This bad writing I am concerned about here is not about spelling and grammar mistakes — this blog has an unhealthy number of them — but rather how I wove my thoughts together. The same feeling popped up once again when I sat down to write my M. Tech. thesis. After spending 3 years (and counting) as a teaching assistant and reading many reports and writing a few, I can say with much confidence that I am not the only one who lacks the ability to write well-structured prose.

Indians seem to be at much more ease with spoken rather than the written word. They speak eloquently and to a great length with evident pleasure but their writing is often hasty and careless. I am aware that there is a vast number of Indians who cannot put written words altogether. But many others have the capacity, and my purpose is to comment on how they use and misuse it. There are of course first-rate poets, writers, and columnists but my intention is not to comment on individual talent.

We just excel at the spoken words. Anyone who belongs to that large and very ill-defined category called ‘public intellectual’ can speak at any length and on any subject at hand. The curious fact about them is that the speakers hardly refer to any note or reference and often talk without much application of mind. Also, they do not like being interrupted or corrected while they are talking. I am not sure whether they feel the same way should anyone correct their writing.

Here, I wish to share an experience of Andre Beteille when he gave lectures at two premier universities each of which was chaired by the vice-chancellor of the university concerned. The first lecture was at the University of Cambridge where the VC was a distinguished medical scientist. He introduced him briefly and, after he finished his lecture, also thanked him briefly. As they were walking out, he told Beteille that he had greatly enjoyed his lecture. When Beteille remonstrated that he was merely being polite, he quietly took out the notes that he took during lectures which ran into three pages: he had come to the lecture to listen rather than to speak.  At another lecture in the Indian university, the vice-chancellor arrived thirty-five minutes late while the speaker and audience waited. Having arrived late, he embarked on a lengthy and eloquent speech on the challenges facing the country and the need for teachers and students to rise up to them. By the time he sat down and Beteille began his lectures on whose preparation he had spent more than a month, it became evident that the audience had lost interest in it. As to taking notes, no self-respecting vice-chancellor in India takes notes at a lecture given by a mere professor.

Back in my village where literacy level is well below the national average, educated people are called ‘padhe likhe log’ (people who can read and write). For them, the ability of speaking is not impressive since all of them can speak at any length. For villagers, and perhaps to many others as well, speaking counts for little unless it is in English. Indeed, there is a peculiar attitude towards the English language, especially among the urban middle class. The command over the English language, which is very unevenly distributed among them, is not only a very important intellectual asset but also a yardstick to measure one’s social status. An Indian takes perverse pleasure in correcting and improving others’ English by which she establishes not only intellectual but also social superiority over others.

Perhaps lack of reading also hinders the growth of writing skills. It is also interesting to note that libraries in India are not only hard to find; they are also the least used on a per capita basis. Unlike many Western countries, buying and reading books for entertainment and pleasure is not in our culture. Indians prefer to buy a book only if it serves some specific purpose and has a long shelf life. I am of the view that one can not go very far in developing ideas without reading good books or conversing with thoughtful people. It is much easier to access the former than the latter.

Many believe that this lack of writing ‘good’ prose is due to the use of foreign language. If there is a problem with language then why do they use it; or chose to write at such immoderate length when the language is forced onto them? It is only a part of the picture as the experience of Prof. Pathak shows. Perhaps the most important reason is the lack of care and patience which is hard to notice while one is speaking.  This same lack of measure and discipline shows itself vividly in a written discourse which can easily be found in our judicial and in academic prose. I often read in the news that Supreme Court judgments often run into thousands of pages. Mr. Nani Palkhiwala had once observed that this clearly shows the Indian preoccupation with eternity and infinity.

By their very nature, writing and reading are solitary activities. Speaking, on the other hand, is a way of being gregarious. The Indian is gregarious by nature. He finds it very hard to be alone unless he is a sanyasi or a poet. From childhood, he grows in the company of others: relatives of uncountable denominations. He is never allowed to be himself and made to believe that being himself is a way of being selfish and arrogant. And as he grows in status in society, so do his visitors in number and variety.

I find myself perplexed by the inordinate amount of time Indian academicians can spend in meetings. When do they get the time to think and work on their ideas? I do not have any experience of academic life in the West but it is easy to notice the difference. Just look at the amount of time they put into writing. It rarely happens that an Indian professor prepares notes to make them available on his home page or to circulate in the classroom. In the West, it seems to be a primary activity among academics. Their home pages are filled with notes, information, and tutorials even though similar material is available outside. That much of writing is not possible without spending a significant time in solitude. It is not to say that academicians in the West do not spend time in committees and meetings but they must be aware of the time they need to be by themselves. Successful Indian academics like to complain endlessly about the time they have to spend on committees and meetings, but their complaints need not be taken seriously. They cherish nothing more than being surrounded by people before whom they can hold forth; what they cannot bear is being themselves.

The ability to write good prose does not emanate entirely from intelligence or the facility with the language. Writing is a solitary art that requires patience and care and a certain kind of emotional investment. If a person spent so much in being gregarious, she can not put a concentrated effort into writing. Of course, there are masters of both spoken and written words. These individuals are outstanding and therefore are not confined by the circumstances but can rise above them.

In engineering colleges, in which I have first-hand experience, this lack of patience and care is evident in the code or design students submit for their assignments. These erroneous designs and buggy codes, and their carelessly written reports which say little about the design or the implementation is of little worth. But they are accepted and graded. What is troubling is that even the most technically sound student writes hastily and with little care for the reader. Often her writing does not match her technical abilities. Contrasting this with my experience on many online discussion forums mainly located in the west; I was amazed to read carefully written and extremely lucid answers provided by academicians to questions posed. In these online communities, they are very strict about the style of writing and community standards, and they protect them jealously. It would not strain one’s credulity to believe that there is some difference in general orientation between cultures towards this very important academic activity as Prof. Andre Beteille puts it, ‘some cultures tolerate careless, vacuous and disjointed writing while others discourage it.’

Related Articles

1. http://www.paulgraham.com/speak.html