nAlO nEnu (Is literature the ultimate? #7)
Prabhakar Vissavajjhala (vissa@cortex.neuro.mssm.edu)
Tue, 17 Jun 1997 20:42:49 -0500
nAlO nEnu
[Is literature (poetry) the ultimate regarding practical reality?#7)
[This is put in the form of a dialogue between 'manassu' (mind) abbreviated
as 'M' and 'buddhi' (conscience) abbreviated as 'B' of the same
individuval.]
M: So, many questions at a time?
B: Yah! Just I wanted to give you a taste of your own medicine.
M: Look! Just showing some loopholes and saying that I am wrong doesn't
prove that you are right. O.K.?
B: Exactly. But it holds good for you too. You know this very well, still
you don't behave accordingly. That is why all this discussion arose. This
is what exactly makes things repeated. Not that you don't know it, but
when you don't keep it up in practice, it requires a reminder and thereby
it becomes a repitition. Did you get it?
M: O. K. Come back to the point. So, you mean to tell me that just because
those guys are contributing on a few occassions, why don't you keep quiet?
If I stress further you give me the examples of 'aUranga zeeb' and 'akbar
pAdushA' again talking the importance of tolerance? Isn't this what you are
going to tell me?
B: ahhahhahhhha......... That is not what I mean. I only showed you how
appreciating the past doesn't mean ignoring the present day reality.
Indeed, I didn't tell you anything about the 3rd and 2nd category people so
far. Soon after I completed about the 4th category ones, you flooded me
with a few questions. So, it took this turn.
M: O.K. As you are of the opinion that literature is not the ultimate to
deal with reality, are you going to prove that 'art is for the sake of art'
and there is no necessity to represent the present day times of human life
through literature?
B: I can't say anything right now. I address this question at the end.
So, go for the next.
M: O.K.,What do you think of the 3rd category people. Should they read and
talk old or new literature?
B: Let me know first, what you are thinking of the 3rd category people as
per the new version of our story, before I tell you about them?
M: Well, according to the new version, they read literature of their
choice, understand and talk or speak . Whenever, they can they may be
contributing to the 4th category at their convenience or permittance, so
they are next best to the 4th provided they keep in touch with the reality.
B: Next best to the 4th.....? How much next?
M: Well, I don't know about the old literature reading people, you have to
tell about them. But in my view, a 3rd category person reading present day
literature of genuine quality, O...K..?, not the vulgar one that is coming
up, if reads and feels for the pity or the misery of the contemporaries in
an authentic way, and could shed a tear at least in a sincere way, though
he/she doesn't react practically on every occasion, I feel they are close
to the 4th category people but for the major distinction. What do you
think? Don't their sincere emotions have any value, just because they
didn't react practically on every occasion to that extent needed like the
4th ones?
B: Well said, buddy. But there is a little more what they should do, in my
view. Literature whether old or new, should move the human, result in
mental elevation and make a person realize the human feelings and let
him/her emerge out as a better individual, even if they can not meet the
required effort at 4th category everytime. However, there is no point if
someone laments for the misery of a 'seeta' or a 'draUpati' of rAmAyaNa and
mahAbhArata even in a sincere way, or for a modern daywoman- role depicted
in a play or a story, while failing to relate such feelings to understand
the present day co-living woman's/person's misery. What I mean to say is,
mere appreciating the literature and feeling elevated is not the end point
for this. This applies to both past and present day literature reading
people equally, bacause basically this 3rd category people apparently only
read and discuss. It doesn't tell us how genuine they are in practical day
to day life. You can't just decide it by their choices of literature
whether it is old or new. If and when they fail to relate it to the day to
day dealings with the other people they get involved, it is absolutely
useless what they read and discuss. If a man claims himself as a devotee of
rAma and prays to him everyday and chances his arm at the lady secretary
in his office and buys an M.S. subba lakshi's concert ticket for 100 bucks
and go there and sleep, I can't keep him in the 3rd category. Similarly, a
person who talks very high of Sree Sree's poetry and curses the rich
grudgefully and goes out and ruthlessly bargain with a rikshaw puller,
spending lots of money on the other hand on cigarettes and drinks, doesn't
make him belong to the 3rd category either. Remember 'duvvUri rAmireDDi's
(1895-1947) poem, 'mAtRmandiramu', we read in our Intermediate telugu
lessons
meraseDu nadi yella mElimi kAdu
bAhya cihnambula bhaktuDu gADu
enda rendaro yAtra kEgu dencedaru
vijaya mandeDu vADu vEyinTi kokaDu
adhama lOhamu lella agni puTAna
antarincunu okka aparanji dakka
The genuine people are always genuine. It doesn't matter what they read, as
they are truly high on moral grounds. They grasp right things from anywhere
in the right way, not just necessarily from literature or poetry of archiac
or chandO or non-chandO styles of old or new only. You asked me about old
literature reading people. I can only say that rAjA rAma mOhana rAy,
veerESa lingam, raghupati venkaTa ratnam nAyiDu all these were very
traditionalists throughout their services to the society at the 4th
category level, which includes the abandonment of untouchability also. On
the contrary, we see people quote old literature for not reacting to the
human needs giving their own interpretations. So, once again it is not the
type of literature but its correct perception and genuine implementation
that plays a role. Afterall, what can I say?
sarasula vij~nula keppuDu
sariyagu ardhambu dOcu savyamugAnE
dorakoni vakrata cUpina
mari dorakune yardha mepuDu, mahilO nendun?
M: How about the 2nd category, who listen but don't talk?
B: As per the story, they were said to have understood, but didn't speak
out. Probably, they don't wish to committ as they know their limitations?
Or they have more hesitations? Tough to guess, what the reasons are.
However, if they are genuine, they are far far superior to the unworthy 3rd
category and indeed, they are equivalent to the best of 3rd category.
M: Coming to the old literature, I have two important questions. You said
new literature has resembles the old sometime before. How did you say that?
You can address this later. But very curious one, a very nagging one for
a long time. I am just asking with 'jij`nAsa' only, O.K.? Why in the
oldtime prayers/classics, people often described the breasts of a goddess,
while addressing her? Isn't this odd? I may take it O.K. with a kAvya
nAyika, but how about with a goddess.? for e.g.,' .....kucOnnatE, kumkuma
rAga SONE by kALidAsu; 'Sree ramaNee kuca durga vihArE' by
sadASiva brahmEndra; and 'kATuka kanTineeru canukaTTu payinbaDa...."
by pOtana. How to digest this? How can you explain this?
(to be continued)
With regards,
Prabhakar Vissavajjhala