Now Tarasankar's distinctiveness lie in the following:
He talked about a rural world- a rural society which was never so largely and
so intimidately and so closely ever figured in the writings of Bengali
and Indian literature. Prior to him, there were rural Bengal in the writings of
Tagore, but in the case of Tarasankar here is a representation of its
insider version - someone talking very closely that had never been before
conceived of. This subaltern world never figured so positively in the
literary imagination of the Bengali elite prior to Tarasankar. It was so long a
world of neglect, but Tarasankar gave those poor, silent, mute community
a language - a representation - a place of honor- this low order of the society
came forward with its greatness and sublimity and distinctiveness.
Again this world is not a homogenous world- it is again subdivided- its
competitions, its rivalries- its pettiness - it subdivisions - all found
their rightful place.
Secondly, he provides us the story of a world where the government records could not reach. The future generation of historians should always read for their own needs - for reconstructing a world - they would be indebted to him for talking about a world in their own language where the world of official literature could not reach - he came down to this level where no outsider could reach.
Thirdly, he talked about an Indian rural society - its peasantry- its village system- its social structure-its internal system of economic
production and the distribution of the rural surplus- with all its complexities- on all India level. He might have talked about rural Bengal
only and directly and exclusively - but that story represents the village community- its peasantry with different social categories, its artisan class like carpenters, blacksmiths, etc - from Peshawar to the Bengal- this village frame work more or less remained the same with minor difference here and there.
Finally he talked the peasantry- its social divisions and political consciousness- this largest rural group which was to play a very decisive
role in Indian political movement. India got her freedom due to many reasons, one of it was certainly the rise of the peasantry as a major
political force in favor a mass movement against the British political domination - this was the age of Gandhiji- he could convey the message of peasant mobilization to the wider Indian world.. The message of a new powerful force which had so long remain dormant- This powerful unit when it was awaken, it came forward and fought against the British- their participation in the different phases of the Indian national movement brought about a great change in the Indian national panorama. There is another issue. Indian literary works and masterpieces, classics have their own traditional form and style- Tarasankar could bring this Literary Form- to us. Indian literary is the form of a story telling of the form of Ramayana and Mahabharata- their art of narration is not at per with that of the Western world. Tarasankar did not follow the typical western form of novel. On the contrary, he rediscovers Indian old and traditional story telling fashion of the Katha Saritsagar (Ocean of stories) form. Bankimchandra more or brought the Western forms of novel writing, but in Tarasankarís case that western form was not there. It was born in the Indian soil in the many century past- he talked like any traditional story teller of the Indian style and form.