Re: avadhaanamu and kavitvamu
Bapa Rao (baparao@locus.com)
Fri, 8 Mar 1996 10:42:38 -0800 (PST)
Seems like avadhaanam is basically entertainment, a sort of brainy
variety show. Which is fine. But there is certainly a school of thought
that feels that it is inappropriate to view avadhaanam this way, and
is of the opinion that it belongs more in the realm of high art and
scholarship. (Note that the fact that a particular prakriya such as avadhaanam
requires scholarship as a prerequisite doesn't necessarily mean that
the prakriya itself is a scholarly or artistic exercise.) For instance,
the comparison of avadhaanam with dommaraaTa raised at least one hackle.
What I am wondering is: why is it that everybody is taking it for
granted that dommaraaTa itself is an "inferior" thing, so much so that
comparison to it is insulting? I mean, obviously, the people who practice
dommaraaTa are considered socially inferior to those that practice
avadhaanam, but beyond that, what are the valid comparison points that
objectively distinguish avadhaanam from dommaraaTa in a qualitative sense?
Once we understand these, the debate about avadhaanam vs. kavitvam might
begin to make more sense.
My personal views.
Bapa Rao