“Did you notice how many times Bare Mian (the old man) used ‘I’ in his conversation? Such a self-assertive and egoist the guy is! This was the sudden outburst of a young writer who took me to see a senior Urdu literary critic. I was astonished, not at his remark, but at the untruth of his statement—an untruth, at least from my perspective. The conversation of the senior writer appeared to me quite normal, as did his use of the first-person singular while referring to himself. It was in Bihar, India, and, surprisingly, to me, all but the ‘egoist guy’ of my young friend seemed to be falling out of the norm, as in the process of referring to oneself, each of them was using “we” instead of “I"—the latter was indeed non-existent in their vocabulary, almost a taboo. For me, a cultural shock in the domain of language.

A personal pronoun is, as we all know, a common grammatical category, but it changes its semantic content and weight when it leaves its primary sphere and enters the realm of rhetoric. In other words, it changes its function and fundamental meanings in different situations and in various socio-cultural contexts. In addition to its rhetorical function, it is in literature that this grammatical category is enormously exploited in order to create special meanings and certain effects.

We take two of Ghalib’s couplets and their translation into English by Frances Pritchett and Owen T. A. Cornwall.

The bud began to bloom again; today I saw my heart

turn to blood—and found it lost.

(Guncha Phir Laga Khilne, Aaj Ham Ne Apna Dil

KhooN Kiya Hua Dekha, Gum Kiya Hua Paya)

Oh, we know the truth about Paradise, but

To keep the heart happy, Ghalib, this idea is good.

(Ham Ko Maaloom Hay Jannat Ki Haqeeqat, Lekin

Dil Ke Khush Rakhne Ko Ghalib Yeh Khayal Accha Hay)

In both couplets, Ghalib used first person plural for his ‘protagonist (s)’. Why, then, have the translators translated it in the first example as ‘I’, whereas they preferred to retain it in the second one?

Well, we know that literature is a discursive practice, and further, it employs many rhetorical tactics. In other words, a literary work is not, unlike journalism, for example, devoted to communication (Iblaagh), but ideally, it is meant for expression (Izhaar). And, in some cases, if not always and everywhere, expression takes precedence over communication—a method that affords a literary text a polysemy that is not to be found in other forms of writing that are aimed solely at communication: journalism, historical narratives, academic articles, etc. This applies more to poetry, but it does imply here that poetry or other literary genres make recourse only to pronouns or their different and dramatic and strategic placings or re-placings in the text to achieve a certain expressivity. There are many different ways and means, but the use of a pronoun is one of the chief methods to elicit a special rhetorical effect and to generate a pleasant ambiguity that lies open for interpretation differently in various situations and socio-cultural contexts. For that reason, French linguist Émile Benveniste called pronouns “shifters”.

Apart from its rhetorical effects and its semantic layers, a pronoun defines the narrative strategies in fiction, as after one has the story line in one’s mind, it is perhaps the most crucial thing to decide which pronoun is to be taken for the planned protagonist. Here, selecting a pronoun is to select the point of view or voice of the narrative. Further, personal pronouns in a fictional narrative help create a sense of continuity and coherence in the story. They may be used to refer to the characters in the story in many different ways.

First-person pronouns, such as "I" and "we," are generally used to tell the story from the perspective of one of the characters or a group of characters. Alternatively, one can use third-person pronouns, such as "he," "she," and "they," to tell the story from a more objective point of view.

The first-person point of view is used when the narrator is a character in the story. This point of view creates an intimate connection between the reader and the narrator, allowing the reader to experience the story from the character's perspective. Second-person point of view is used when the narrator addresses the reader as "you", and it is less common in fiction. This point of view can create a sense of immersion for the reader, as they are directly involved in the story. The novel "If on a winter's night a traveler" by Italo Calvino is written from the second-person point of view. The reader is addressed directly as "you" and is taken on a journey through a series of unfinished novels, each with its own unique plot and characters. Similarly, the Pakistani English novel "The Reluctant Fundamentalist" by Mohsin Hamid is written in a frame narrative structure, where the protagonist is recounting his story to an American stranger he meets in a café in Lahore, Pakistan. The protagonist addresses the American directly as "you" throughout the novel as he recounts his experiences living in America and his eventual disillusionment with the American dream.

Third-person point of view, with the personal pronouns "he," "she," "it," or "they", appears when the narrator is an outside observer. This point of view is customarily used in fiction, and it allows for multiple perspectives and a wider scope of the story.

As for the use of "I" in literary discourse, apart from referring to the first-person point of view, it can serve several rhetorical purposes. For example, an "I" can create a sense of immediacy and intimacy between the speaker or narrator and the reader. Further, it can help in establishing a personal connection and conveying the speaker's or narrator's thoughts, feelings, and experiences in a more direct and authentic way.

Then, the use of "I" can elicit a sense of subjectivity or even bias. When a speaker or narrator uses "I" to describe his or her experiences or opinions, it can signal to the reader that the perspective is subjective and influenced by the narrator’s own background, beliefs, and values. "I" can also be used to challenge or subvert traditional literary conventions and destabilize the boundaries between the speaker, the author, and the reader, blurring the lines between fact and fiction, reality and imagination. For example, in some stories by Manto and Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi, not only did the writers employ I-pronouns and first-person points of view, but they also entered the story worlds with their real names.

However, just because a character is narrating a story in the first person does not mean that the author is speaking through that character. In fact, skilled authors are often able to create a distinct and separate voice for each of their characters, allowing them to speak and think in ways that are unique to their personalities and perspectives. Many of N.M. Rashed’s narrative poems and the majority of Pitras Bukhari’s humorous narrations have been written from the first-person perspective. Both authors warned their readers against mixing the “I” of the writings with the writers’ persons. Rashed, especially, was quite displeased to see how some critics had confused the traits of the characters in his poetry—who, in some instances, were hedonists and even antisocial—with the poet’s life.

An autobiography is generally expected to be written in first-person narration. But there is a possibility, and indeed, there are certain examples when a personal life story is written in the third-person singular: "he or she. For example, poet Nida Fazli’s two-volume autobiography was written in third-person narration.

Referring back to the “I” of our literary critic from Bihar, it is important to note that every “I” does not necessarily stand for an egoist personality. This misconception emerges from the similarity, indeed, an interchangeability in some cases, of the pronoun “I” with the ego of a person, though in Urdu one uses ‘Anaa'. an Arabic pronoun that denotes ‘ego’ to differentiate it from the common "I." Interestingly, in German, there is only one word for both the grammatical “I” of the first person and ‘ego’ in the psychological or psychoanalytical sense.

Faiz is essentially a “we-type” poet; he almost never uses the first personal singular in his poetry. Even in his personal life, as it is evident from his biographies and interviews, our poet, despite being a native Punjabi, was prone to use “we” instead of “I”, which was not a common practice, especially among his writer colleagues and contemporaries hailing from non-Urdu-speaking regions. This strategy serves a double purpose: Firstly, the non-employment of “I” excludes egoism or unpleasant self-assertion. Secondly, the use of “we” affords his poetic statements an aura and feel of companionship, collegiality, and camaraderie that is in accordance with esprit de corps: the common spirit and inspiring enthusiasm of the progressive movement he was a part of.

On the other hand, Seemab Zafar, a brilliant representative of the younger generation of contemporary Urdu poetry, works mostly within the paradigm of “I and thou”. Second and third-persons at times bob up in her ghazals, but overall, they may be taken as two different variations of "thou". The third personal plural, however, is almost a rarity in her pronominal preferences. Jewish philosopher Martin Buber has told us in his much-quoted philosophical work "I and Thou" that the I-Thou relationship was the way in which we related to other human beings, or to God. In that mode, we encountered the other as a unique and valuable individual, rather than as an object to be used or manipulated. The use of "I" and "thou" serves multiple purposes in Zafar’s poetry, but mainly, it creates an intimate and personal tone that emphasizes the relationship between two individuals. This method, however, does not necessarily exclude other social relationships, though it does put an accent on the relationship between the "I" and the "thou." And paradoxically, in this way, the relationship between two individuals can represent a broader theme or idea that extends beyond just their personal connections. For example, in one of her ghazals, which has, unlike the convention of the genre, a thematic sequence and unity, Zafar uses this technique throughout in such a way that the “I” of the speaker-protagonist transcends the poet’s personal self to embrace women in general—as a collectivity, and correspondingly, the “You” of her addressee is elevated from a particular, single male individual to men in aggregate.

In summary, our writers have different perspectives on the use of personal pronouns in their writings as well as in their lives. Some of them view pronouns as powerful tools for storytelling, while others believe they should be used sparingly. Similarly, they have multiple purposes for using personal pronouns. That is, their use is determined by many different factors: genres, situations, contexts, etc., and with a different use, a pronoun may change its semantic load. Ultimately, the choice of using personal pronouns is up to the individual writer and his or her intended effects.

Dr Aftab Husain is a Pakistan-born and Austria-based poet in Urdu and English. He teaches South Asian Literature & Culture at Vienna University. All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author