Vivasme, Thanks for the link. That was really a good read. Although I am not a good reader to know about all the references cited, I understood the argument. I do not believe in the segregation of art and politics. But at the same time, I also don't believe in amalgamation of these two. These two can live together, serve each other without losing their individual identity and characters. I also don't believe in the notion of art for art's sake. In my view, this is a totally hypocritical and non-sense. If an artist indeed has created an art for art's sake, he would not display, publish, release or distribute it. If he does, then it was never for art's sake; it was for the consumers of art. Admit it, damn artist. When you create something for other than yourself, you naturally have an accountability, if not a responsibility. Now, I do not believe in a grand set of guidelines for artists provided by the elites. I rather believe in open and free lenden (trade ?) between the producers and the consumers of art. Call it the capitalism of art. Yes, I believe in it. I do not believe in the socialism of art (a system of grandly guided art). Because I think the capitalism of art eventually serves the purpose of the socialism of art. How ? Well, this way. An artist is also a consumer of art. When he creates an art for himself, we can trust, he will not be guided by the latest trends in the dirty market or corporate equivalent interest of art. I think we can not ask for more than this at this stage of our civilization. As I said at the beginning, I don't believe in the segregation of politics and art. In other words, I do not believe in apolitical art. I think, as a matter of fact, the idea of apolitical art is more political than politics-insensitive art, because it serves to a certain political interest ý particularly in a time of social unrest. I am glad to see DP ji did not call for apolitical literature. What he is saying is literature should be one step ahead of [partisan] politics. It's indeed so. ********** I do have a thing or two to say about the state of Nepali literature at this of unrest and conflict (athough I am not qualified). I am not making a sweeping generalization by saying so, but I am generally disappointed to see profound stories of suffering and pain made mere news materials by the writers and reduced to rhetorical materials by the poets. I am not questioning the ability of our writers and poets. But I am questioning their courage- not against the power, but against themselves, against their fear of encounter with the ugliest things in their naked state. There are so many unbearably ugly stories, degradation and suffering going on, our artists have chosen to turn them into bearable news items and rhetorics and they are in a mode of survival, rather than in a mode of living and fighting. Looks like they are waiting for the war to end to begin their fight. *********************** Zombie, The precursor of Ghazal is Qasida (raja-maharaja haru ko stuti kavita) that came to Muslim ruler's court in India from Persia and evolved into Ghazal. In Nepali literature, Motiram Bhatta introduced it. However, there has not been any significant contribution to Nepali Ghazal since then till one or two decades ago when likes of Gyanuwakar Poudel, Lalijan Rawal started to practice it. These days you can see floods of ghazals in Nepali literature. Most sikaru kaviharu and occasionally naam chaleka haru pani, do not always write in the traditional format and are often referred to as 'fazal'. I don't know how this word came in circulation, though. My favoritest (Sitara 2004) ghazalkar is Bund Rana. There is a collection designated as 'Utkrista Ghazal haru' at nepalikavita.com. I would rather call it a collection of samples from 'Utkrista Ghazalkar haru'. Bund Rana's best ghazals are found elsewhere. I liked the samples from Manoj Neupane and Dibya Giri. Check them out, (- http://www.nepalikavita.com/100_gajals.htm ) ****************** Narayan Adhikari, Thank you for posting your kavita. I want to share with readers here the quick comment I had made at the Reading. The thing that fascinates me in this style of poem is the fact that the poem assumes a personality partially independent of the poet. It may be both weakness as well as strength of the poem, though. In any case, in our busy life style, this kind of sleek, slim and sexy poetry may be very suitable to us.