Ever since Carlo Coppola submitted his dissertation on the Progressive Writers’ Movement in Urdu (1975) to the University of Chicago, it became the first resource for scholars working on the complex relationship between literature and politics in South Asia. People longed for the publication of this masterly dissertation. Finally, we have this 684-page volume—an expanded, updated version of the original thesis.

The book begins by investigating the intellectual background of the Progressive Movement. Contrary to the popular view that the movement was derived from British, French, and Russian sources, Coppola shows that there are important Indian and later Pakistani ideas and features that are equal to, if not greater than, the European writers’ contributions.

A critical component of the book is an extensive and detailed history of progressivism in Urdu, with a special focus on the poetry this movement produced. The study provides a comparative view of the movement's interactions with other significant movements, notably the Freedom Movement. Coppola's meticulous narrative of the history of the movement through its various phases is impressive and illuminating. A sizeable section of the book (chapters 7–11) discusses the seminal works of five major poets: Faiz Ahmed Faiz, Ali Sardar Jafri, Asrarul Haq Majaz, Makhdum Mohiuddin, and Sahir Ludhianvi.

Coppola's approach to these critical biographies is empathetic. He met with, recorded interviews, and exchanged letters with many of the luminary Progressives. This brings a special flavor to his writing. The discussion is peppered with translations of the poetry. Coppola evaluates the poetry both within the context of the movement and, more importantly, purely as poetry for art's sake. His analytical stance is indicated in the different chapter headings given to the critical biographies: Faiz, “The Progressive Poet as Aesthete”; Majaz, “The Progressive Poet as Romantic”; Makhdum, “The Reluctant Progressive”; Sardar Jafri, “The Progressive Poet and the Consistency of Commitment”; and Sahir, “The Progressive as Lyric Poet.” This shows that the progressive poet was not simply a sloganeer or “poet of revolution” but had an individualistic stamp of style.

Coppola's analysis of the fiery, romantic Majaz (1911–55) is particularly compelling. Majaz, according to Coppola, was caught up in two mainstreams of poetic composition—the romantic preoccupations of a ghazal poet and the elegant descriptions of a nature poet (p. 412). For example, in the poem “Ek Dost ki Khush Mazaqi Par” (On the “good taste” of a friend; composed in 1932), the narrator addresses a friend who prefers to read a book rather than imbibe the beauty of nature.

Another famous poem, “Raat aur Rel” (Night and train, pp. 415–17) translated in full by Coppola, remarkably captures the some of the enthralling rhythm of the original:

Coppola's extensive analysis of this much-admired poem skillfully situates it as a literary piece. The train, a symbol of power and fiery recklessness, is placed within the specific context of revolutionary romanticism. In the poem, the destination or goal of the train, and, by extension, of the revolutionary, is deliberately kept vague. The sense of forward motion expressed through the cadences of Urdu create an effective image rather than “meaning.” Coppola rightly concludes that the three strains in Majaz's poetry—nationalism, romanticism, and nature poetry—do not conform to the dicta of social realism. Majaz, unlike Faiz, is not a socialist realist but a revolutionary romantic. He also does not have the studied indirectness and symbolism that pervades Faiz's poetry. Thus, Majaz, despite flashes of brilliance and unique, memorable images, has a limited poetic vision. Coppola is perhaps the only scholar who has given us a comparative picture of the progressive poets.

Similarly, the chapter on Makhdum Mohiuddin (1910–69) is full of interpretive insights. Makhdum was a Marxist, but as a poet, he had reservations about Marxist aesthetics. Coppola boldly suggests that Makhdum's essential poetic orientation, his literary penchant, ran contrary to progressive tenets. His best poetry is of the personal, romantic voice:

This much-awaited volume delivers a panoramic, comprehensive assessment of the progressive episode in Urdu literature. It is written in a direct style devoid of unnecessary twists and turns of rhetoric, much like the literature of the movement it documents.