Re: Telugu script withering away?
Bapa Rao (brao@tis.com)
Fri, 25 Jul 1997 11:02:00 -0700 (PDT)
> Apparently, nor do Turkish people either.
> But I do think there is a merit in the argument that a script is part
> and parcel of our culture as much as other specific art
> forms (dance, painting etc.) are.
> We may spend entire life without bothering about native
> dance, music, painting yet would like to think they are integral to
> culture.
> On the otherhand it will be certainly ironic to think that the script
> with which we are more in contact on a day to day basis
> doesn't deserve this consideration.
>
> -srikanth
>
> ps:
> Historian Will Durant wrote that Chinese regarded their script as
> an art form. (probably a reason for its pictorial aspects)
> Chairman Mao apparently impressed Chinese with his calligraphic
> abilities. Thus his writings were influential - in a different way :-)
I realize that, on my part at least, there was a bit of misunderstanding
about Ramana garu's post--in talking about "withering away", he was talking
about the possible effects of a free-market process in which someone
takes the initiative to market romanized telugu texts, and the roman
version could soon take over, due to the disproportionate economic power
of the roman-telugu sector (or it could remain isolated; the Indian
military uses roman Hindi, but outside the military, there is little evidence
of roman hindi.) in the economy. Anyway, the general debate has been
about the merits of wholesale replacement of Telugu script rather than
market-driven evolution towards roman telugu.
Basically I agree with Srikant garu's views. If I can elaborate a bit on
the cultural aspect of script, I would say that a culture has an important
aesthetic investment in its script, as Srikant garu pointed out, with
the importance given to attractive fonts, calligraphy etc. Speaking of
Turkey, Arabic script also has an emphasis on calligraphy, and perhaps
Turkish culture lost that particular aesthetic when Ataturk changed the
script. Maybe Ataturk was misguided or didn't know what he was doing, but
if his decisions are anything to go by, there is ground for supposing that
revolutionizing cultural and aesthetic symbols will result in deeper
social transformation. If this is the case, my tendency would be try and
evaluate fully the purpose, costs and claimed benefits of the proposed
change before acquiescing
Bapa Rao