>oka mahAkavi viplava vAdi kAka pOvaccunu. vADu mahA
>kaviyE. oka viplava vAdi kUDa mahAkavi kAvaccunu.
>mahAkaviki viplava vAdamunaku sambandhamu lEdu.
If this is not true, we do not need poetry once the social problems
are solved. kaDupu ninDina rojuna kaLalU kavitvamU kASIlO
vadilEya vacchandarU.
> viplava vAdi yokka racana yandali guNamulE sweekAryamulu,
>taditaruni yandu sweekAryamulu kAvaninacO, adi guNa-grahaNa
>pAreeNata lEmi.
But this seems to be the trend. Looks like people identify poetry
only through viplavAtmakata (in other words, only when it promotes
their ideology and discard it altogether when it does not refer to that
despite any other merits it has). How do we judge poetry
by using only those parameters that are not poetry-related?
Syamala Rao wrote:
>The so called modernists have always extended their intolerance
>towards readers & writers who may have any semblance of sympathy
>towards anything that was traditional. And they push the same
>blame on them squarely.
Yes. The criticism of anything that was traditional has always been
harsh, unjustified and at times in very bad taste. It is always intolerance
and even hatred. It is so easy to see stones being thrown at traditional
poetry just because it is traditional and praises being showered on
mediocre poetry just because it is modern. We must be able to see beauty
in both wherever it exists.It is unfortunate that there is
so much antipathy for our cultural heritage. What I see in several so called
criticisms is not objective assessments, honest predictions or academic
evaluations but outright denial, intolerance, hatred and a wish to kill.
Sometimes I wonder if people really mean what they write.
Sincerely,
Bachoti Sridhara Rao