In article <17MAR96.05174990@wc6.wl.aecl.ca>, desikacharyk@wc6.wl.aecl.ca writes:
|> Dear friends,
|> I have been watching with curiosity recent discussions on
|> a) chandassu & its relevance to poetry
|> b) definition of mahAkAvya, mahAkavi and kAvya bhAsha
|>
|> Variuos view points on these topics were presented by people who
|> wanted to justify Sri Sri as a mahAkavi and by those who opposed this view.
|> I do not side with one party or the other, but wish to bring certain
|> sAhitya Sastra aspects to your attention, based on which you can make up your
|> own minds. These observations stem from the study of various sAhitya
|> sAstra granthAs in sAnskrit, telugu and english and also from my own personal
|> experience gained from the composition of several major (I am deliberately
|> avoiding the word mahA), and minor kAvyAs in gEya and padya genres in Telugu,
|> including the translation of kAlidAsa's ritusmahAra as a Telugu padya kAvya.
|> I hope this attempt will help those who are debating things from hearsay, and
|> prejudice and acquaint them with the rational thinking that has been a part of
|> sAhitya SAstra from the beginning (the earliest known such work is the
|> nAtya SAstra of bharata muni) in India and for a few centuries in the English
|> literary world. Thus, in this commumication I will adress item (a) and postpone
|> the discussion of item (b) for a later date.
|>
|> About chandassu, pro and anti Sri Sri debators get very emotional,
|> especially when we quote from our own lakshaNa granthAs. So, I will rely
|> mostly on English critics on this. In a well written short work named
|> "Rhetoric Notes" the relevance of metre to poetry is summarised as follows:
|>
|> 'Metre is instinctively used by ALL poets, and DISTINGUISHES poetry from prose.
|> Its uses may be specified as follows:
|>
|> 1. It is the survival of music and dancing in poetry, and gives pleasure
|> and thrill of both by its rhythmical flow.
|> 2. It is the spontaneous out-pouring of emotion, which it sooths by its
|> regularity.
|> 3. It is easy to remember and thus aids in the preservation of great literature
|> 4. By its fixity and short compass, it compels style to become terse and choice
|> in expression; and thus contains the finest speech of man'
|>
|> 'CAREFUL artists, like Milton or Tennyson, ALWAYS use metre with perfect taste
|> and propriety and load it with all possible beauty.'
|>
|> The above aspects are vividly illustrated by Prof. Clyde S. Kilby in
|> an excellent book named Poetry and Life.(For those of you who want to get an
|> understanding of the true nature of poetry this is an excellent book to read)
|> In this book, the whole 4th chapter is devoted to 'Music in Poetry'. In this
|> chapter Prof. Kilby writes as follows:
|>
|> 'The poet, like the composer of music, must have an ear for harmonies
|> and movements, for tones, overtones, and dissonances. He must understand how to
|> make music and meaning coalesce in the creation of emotional power.'
|>
|> 'Consider the following ways of recording the fact that the Trojan war
|> was brought about when Paris persuaded Helen, the most beautiful woman of
|> Sparta, to leave her husband Menelaus.
|>
|> I. 'The beauty of Helen was the cause of war in which the ancient city of Troy
|> was destroyed'
|>
|> II. 'Helen's lovliness launched a war involving Troy'
|>
|> III. 'The lovely Helen launched a mortal strife
|> involving the ancient city of Troy'
|>
|> IV. 'The lovely Helen launched a mortal strife'
|> And ancient Troy became a battlefield'
|>
|> V. 'The lovely Helen launched a mortal strife
|> When Paris planned to gain anothr's wife'
|>
|>
|> Prof. Kilby then explains the implications of the above 5 forms at
|> length, but to keep this message short, I will tersely summarise what he means
|> in my own words as follows:
|>
|> Version (I) is a simple prose sentence deviod of any mtrical beauty.
|> Version (II) is better because of the alliteration of the 'l'sound in words
|> lovliness and launched and consonance with 'l' in word Helen.
|> Version (III) is better still because the first line now has rhythm, in
|> addition to the alliteration that is contained in version (II)
|> version (IV) is better still because the second line also has rhythm.
|> version (V) is the best of all because it has both alliteration, rhyme (between
|> strife and wife) and rhythm in both lines.
|>
|> Now if you are one of those who think that metre is not necessary
|> poetry, probably you are happy with versions II, or III. But, alas! you have
|> stopped realising the beauty in its perfect form. Those so called poets who
|> profess the virtues of vachana kavitvam will be content with such forms and
|> those readers who are alpa-santOshis will be content reading such imperfect
|> compositions. But, why should you stop short of realising the perfect
|> beauty that is attained in version V? Why do you consider somebody as great
|> when he/she misleads a whole generation to under-achieve rather than striving
|> for perfection? Yes, I realise there are certain instances where the perfect
|> musical harmony has to be broken for proper rasa-pOshaNa. Such instances,
|> where needed, exist in tikkana. But what is the justification for breaking
|> metrical and musical harmony as a matter of policy and prejudice, without
|> any other apparent reason?
|>
|> Now consider how we can relate the metrical form (V) to the rules
|> of a telugu padyamu. In telugu padyamu, we have the following 3 rules:
|>
|> a) A rhythmic patteren - i.e., the so called gaNa sequence which must
|> be the same in all the 4 lines of a sama-vrittamu. The pattern can be
|> mAtra-gaNa based and somewhat flexible (i.e., somewhat asymmetrical)
|> in jAti and ardha-sama and vishama vrittAs.
|>
|> Notice that this requirement is the same as the rhythm in Version (V)
|> of the above example.
|>
|> b) Prasa - must be present in vrittAs, but not insisted upon in jAti
|> vrittAs like tEta-geethi, Ata-veladi etc.
|>
|> Notice that this requirement is similar to the rhyme in version (V)
|> of the above example. The only difference is that in English they have
|> prAsa at the end of the line, whereas in telugu we have at the beginning
|> of the line.
|>
|> c) Yati - which must be present in practically all the 4 lines of a
|> padyamu. I say practically, because metres such as kanda have yati only
|> in the 2nd and 4th lines.
|>
|> This requirement is similar to a combination of alliteration and
|> assonace in English poetry. (Assonace refers to vowel sound harmony,
|> as in the following lines:
|>
|> Avenge O Lord, thy slaughtered saints, whose bones
|> Lie scattered on the Alpline mountains cold,
|> Even them who kept thy truth so pure of old,
|> When all our fathers worshipped stocks and stones,
|>
|> In this you will notice the sound 'o' is is repeated often in each line)
|>
|> Now why do you think that telugu chandassu is excessively demanding
|> and a hindrance for free expression of emotion and thought? It is no different
|> from the chandassu of an English poem.Of course, if you are not skilled enough,
|> and if your emotion is weak, you cannot surmount the metrical restrictions
|> - i.e., you are chained in by chandassu rather than you chaining it in. But
|> this is your fault - not of the chandassu. So, you have no right to blame
|> chandassu, nor you deserve to be called a great poet - a sort of poet may be,
|> but certainly not a great one.
|>
|> No poet prechooses a metre in which to write. When emotion comes it
|> is automatically expressed in an appropriate metre consistent with the emotion.
|> Only good poets are capable expressing their emotions in flawless metrical
|> form. In the works of such poets, all metrical restrictions dissolve automati-
|> cally - actually they become constructs that immensely enhance the beauty
|> of expression. A prime example for this is pOthana mahAkavi So, a good poet
|> never blames chandassu. On the other hand, he uses the facilities of chandassu
|> to his advantage - to express his emotion more clearly, concisely, effectively,
|> musically, and above all more beautifully. So, if you cannot handle chandassu,
|> blame yourself, not chandassu.
|> .
|> Many enthusiasts of vachana kavitvamu (if you can call it that) think
|> that Sri Sri professed that non-metrical poetry is essential to write new
|> poetry. But if you read his mahAprasthAnam, you will find it conforms to
|> mAtrA-gati chandassu. Sri Sri may have written purely nonrhythmic, non-musical
|> lines in his later years - I am not familiar with his later works, but his
|> magnum opus undoubtedly is mahAprasthAnm. So, even Sri Sri, who was a
|> committed deviator from the perfect metrical norm, expressed his emotions
|> in mAtra-chandassu. There is nothing unnatural in this, because as I explained
|> above a good emotion always automatically finds proper rhythm - i.e., you
|> cannot sepearate chandassu from good poetry. Not only this, Sri Sri even
|> attempted to satsify the rules of alliteration, rhyme and assonance in his
|> poetry. An example:
|>
|> kadalEdee kadalinchEdi
|> mArEdi mArpinchEdi
|> penu niddura vadlinchEdi
|> munu munduku sAginchEdi
|> paripUrNapu bratukicchEdi
|> kAvAlOy nava kavanAniki
|>
|> If you read these lines carefully, you will notice all the elements of
|> chandassu that I have outlined above are present in them So, in my opinion it
|> is unartistic to fight chandassu - instead hone your skills and use it to your
|> advantage.
|>
|> Regards,
|> K.Desikachary (please forgive the typos - I am the worst typist)