Re: 'mahaakaavyaalu'-'mahaakavulu' (1st of 3)
Bapa Rao (baparao@platsol.com)
Sat, 13 Apr 1996 20:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
I disagree with Sri Vissa that it is a pity that people approach
the epics from a mythological-devotional point of view than an analytic
one. The former is also a valid approach. The myths of a people in
some sense are "just stories" that shaped the collective imagination
of a people. They don't have to have any special moral or other
message (if they do, and it is usable today, that's a bonus.). It is an
almost useful definition of "Hindus" to say they are the people who told and
retold the stories of Ramayana and Mahabharata. Just as it is "almost
useful" to talk about the ancient Hellenes as the people who sang
the Homeric idylls, or the ancient Celts as the people who recited
BeoWulf.
Shared myths are what give a people cohesion. Exchange of myths is
what forms bridges between peoples, leading ultimately to universality.
At least, that is one aspect of nationhood and universality.
[ If you couldn't tell already, I'm a fan of the late Joseph Campbell. ]
My personal views.
Bapa Rao