However, I think we need to congratulate nannayya on one account: he dared
to undertake the first major work in Telugu (allowing that 90% of it is
Sanskrit - again, I don't know this). He adopted, and sometimes defined
telugu Chandas, and showed a trend to the next generation. Most tleugu
panDitulu agree that the portion translated by tikkana is more enjyable
than the one by Nannayya: OK, my question is would tikkana have dared to
translate mahaabhaaratam, or initiate some major work in telugu if not for
nannayya's lead? I don't know. My guess is he might not have.
On a similar argument, take tyaagayya. He was considered a revolutionary in
his times. If you closely examine his kRtulu, both philosophically, and
aesthetically he scorned several traditional practices of his times, and
set his own standards - and his works are the standards, 'classical', now.
Does that deny him the honor of being a revolutionary, or original? I don't
know.
I was trying to answer a few questions here, but this has turned into a
confession of ignorance. Let me stop here.
Regards
Nasy