OF MOVEMENTS, COMPROMISES AND RETREATS: ORISSA, 1936-1939 65 erable effect on the peasant movement—although the process was not uniform. Radicalisation, Legislative Politics and the *Breakes': The State of the Peasant Movement in Coastal Orissa and the Jeypur estate: The post-Civil Disobedience period was marked by a political lull. The Gandhian alternatives of Harijan upliftment and village reconstruction coupled with Gandhi's visit to Orissa were hardly sufficient to fill the vacuum. Many young activists of the Congress were disillusioned with the Gandhian retreats.1 People like Nabakrushna Chaudhury, Surendranath Dwivedy, Bhagabati Charan Pannigrahi, Pranath Pattnaik and Gour Charan Das got together and formed the Utkal Samyavadi Karmi Sangha (Utkal Socialist Workers Association) in 1933.2 In a context in which the Congress work had slowed down and the Communist Party had not yet beert organized the destiny of the peasant movement passed on to the hands of the Congress Socialists. May Day was observed at Cuttack from 1933 and Sarathi, their newspaper, began circulating from around the end of the same year.3 The floods of 1933 which had ravaged the districts of Cuttack and Puri provided the immediate context to the Socialists for working amidst the peasantry. The efforts of Mahtab to form a Krushak Sangha merged with that of the Socialists.4 This attempt remained confined to the three coastal districts of Cuttack, Puri and Balasore although some spontaneous peasant movements did exist in other parts as well. When it came to methods of working the Socialists tried to use Sarathi to reach the peasantry and asked the readers to send letters stating their grievances, responses to which seldom came in.5 Even though Mahtab wrote about 'the necessity of a social revolution16 the heart of the countiyside was yet to be touched.7 The situation improved marginally after the first conference was held in February 1934. The focus shifted to establishing some camps in the districts of Cuttack and Puri and taking up day-to-day issues of the peasants arising from their interaction with landlords, moneylenders and the police.8 The hegemony of the established order was extremely strong. The peasants viewed the landlords as god's representatives and viewed their own existence within the framework of the god's will and fate. Although he two mass movements (i.e. the Non-Cooperation and the Civil Disobedience Movements) had weakened the hold of the zamindars and the colonial administration the sight of the petty official could, on occasion disrupt a discussion with peasants.9 Nevertheless changes were taking place. The exposure to the peasants and tribals during the two mass movements and the sense of frustration and disillusionment with Gandhian politics narrowed down the gulf between he intellectual and the peasant. The camps and Sarathi epistomised this phenomenon. Consequently the ideological background to work with the peasants was prepared.10