Me too. In stead, I took to responding in shorter, kind of impressionistic, post.
> > If there is a tragedy in 20th century telugu lit, it is the sharp polarization
> > of writers into communists and traditionalists. How is it that there were no
> > non-communist iconoclasts? Or should I say, how did all the iconoclasts get
> > attracted to communism? .....
> > However I find that even
> > today my favourite writers, kAleepaTnam rAmA rAvu and ko.ku. were communists.
> > Somehow the demise of communism doesn't seem to make their writings
> > irrelevant.
> >
> > Ramana
[Highly simplistic post alert! The redux retains only the impressions, nothing
more.]
In modern telugu literature that we like and admire came in many varieties.
The iconoclastic variety, for example, can be of nationalistic type or the
marxist type. Communists are a subgroup of marxists.
For example, if you take garimeLLa satyanaaraayana and basavaraaju appaaravu,
they belonged to the Gandhian school of thought that valued self-sufficiency
and "family walues" (for the lack of a better word).
Then there are other kind of iconoclasts that broke rank with the
traditionalists with respect to the style of writing. They changed the
content and form, thus breaking the icons of yester-years.
Eventually there are iconoclasts who saw poetry as an integral part of
socio-economic forces. They believed that poetry is not merely the expression
of people as a creative process -- it is influnced and influences as much as
say weaving. It is an economic activity, impacting the economic life and being
impacted by it.
Having studied economic theories to a limited extent, I can understand why
marxism poses a powerful alternative. Among all other choices, it is the most
logical, conclusive, and hopeful. [I managed to see some sort of historical
determinism in it too.] It provides a framework for several subjects can be
studied. In mathematical terms, it is like category theory -- a unifying
framework that can be applied in different places.
To average English and Sanskrit educated thinking Subbarao, the choices are
two fold: to look back for inspiration and to look west for inspiration.
If Subbarao were to look back for inspiration, he is again faced with choices:
to unquestioningly glorify the past, or to sanitize it, or to critically study
it. [In the order -- Ex: Viswanatha, Vivekaananda, D.D. Kosambi]. When
nationalism is well-clamied by the first two groups, if you intend to be
critical, chances are you will not fit in.
Then there is the western schools of thought: Marxism is a trusted system of
thought that offers tools of analysis. In addition, like OO, it is well-spread
with many teachers [and thus increasing the chance of "wrong" practice.] Here
too subbarao is faced with choices: He can believe the inexorable logic of
communism and worker-ruled world. Or, he can believe see what communism is
offering and try tp blend in democracy -- a sort of fabian socialism. Or, he
can merely take the tools of marxism and apply it to philosophy to understand
and extend. Several other possibilties exist, but predominantly this area is
staked out by the marxists of communist and socalist variety.
So, what can subbarao do? Subbarao posts on the telusa-list :-).
> Sincerely,
> Kumar Vadaparty
PS: Please correct me on D.D.Kosambi, somebody, please!!