Culture in the last 100 years (Was: gaddar's `comrade' Naajar is no more).
V. Chowdary Jampala (cjampala@dayton.net)
Fri, 7 Mar 1997 17:36:39 -0500 (EST)
I have been following with interest the posts by Sri
Chandrasekhar Kambhampati about culture. He seems to be saying
(Chandrasekahr gaaru: please correct me if I am incorrectly paraphrasing
you. I have included some excerpts from your post that led me to this
understanding):
a) When Sreenivas paruchoori lamented the lack of any studies of
the role of prajaanaaTya manDali in the cultural field, he was asking for
the Government to study this (or fund such studies), and that government
has no role in studying such things until it makes sure that poverty is
eradicated.
b) That the developments in Telugu culture (specifically literature) of
the last 100 years (more specially in the last 50 years), did nothing to
enlighten or educate the people and effect social changes for the better.
First, let me observe that Sreenivas's original post that sparked
this thread contained no plea for a government subsidy of any kind.
Moreover, most such studies in Telugu were carried out and published by
individuals and private organizations, funded by individual/private money
rather than public funds.
I am more intrigued by the second part of kambhampaaTi gaari
contention. If he is saying that the literature of the last 100 years
(that is from 1897 to 1997) had done nothing to enlighten and educate
people, (or that the society has not changed much), I find it difficult to
accept. The social fabric of our society - in this year 1997 - is much
different than it was in 1897 or even 1947. There are many reasons for
these changes, but the role of literature in effecting these changes is
not small. There has been no social movement in Andhra that was not
accompanied by its own cultural developments. A little over 100 years
ago, when the eradication of 'kanyaaSulkamu' and the promotion of widow
marriage were sought by the social reformers, the first thing they
resorted to was to develop its awareness through literature and plays. It
is no coincidence that the two early giants of Telugu literature happened
to be promoting these two causes. Whether it is recruiting people to join
the freedom movement, fight for the overthrowing of the Nizam rule,
creation of a unified Telugu state, change
the social traditions of the various periods, emanicipation of the
women or the Dalits or even the Naxalite struggle, there was always a
group of people promoting these causes on cultural / literal fronts.
Over these years (yes, in the last 50 years, or even the last 20 years
too), we have our own equivalents of Dickens, Dumas (?) or Voltaire. These
writers have been seeking to educate and inform not only the elite, but
the middle class and the downtrodden as well. They are not spreading mere
hopelessness, but they have been exhorting people to change the status
quo. Some of them have done more than write; they tried to show by
example or had the courage to suffer for what they wrote. I
think most people in this forum can easily, without too much effort,
name a hundred writers and several hundred works that fit this description.
One can take any 20 year slice of the last 100 years and find Telugu authors
and literature that fits this description. Either Sri Chandrasekahr is not
familiar with these works or he is in a particularly cynical mood choosing
to ignore this vast body of Telugu literature.
This is not to say that we don't have a vast body of 'literature'
whose purpose is purely sensual excitement (we do, a whole lot of it).
Nor is this to say that the literaure was solely responsible for the
progress of the last 100 years (it is but one in a myriad forces
effecting change). Nor is this to say that this literature has acheived
all it can and should (unfortunately it hasn't, but this is a moving
target as well).
I think it is vastly overstating to suggest that the last 100
years of developments in Telugu culture or literature had no effect on
the society.
Regards. -- Chowdary Jampala
Some excerpts from the Fri, 7 Mar 1997, post of C. Kambhampati:
> Agreed. But has this achieved anything. All it has done is to increase the
> decibels for more subsidy from the state to study and develop these issues
> further. And all for whose sake. For the sake of the likes of us. Not for
> Funding is the question here. Why do we have to fund culture? Why do we
> have to study this thing called culture? Culture is for the well heeled -
> the down trodden do not have time for culture.
>
> A look at the society in India is should answer that question. Culture has
> not brought us anything. We are still in the bottom of most things which
> matter in life - yes in CULTURE too! Indeed Indian society is being
>
> Literature has a task to perform. It is the task of educating and
> informing the elite of the nature of society and the conditions prevalent.
> Dickens did it. Dumas did it. Voltaire did it. So did many others. If
> current Indian literature is not able to do it - then it has failed in its
> purpose and is worthless as a medium for informing and developing the
> mind. By merely reflecting on society Literature (and as a consequence
> authors of these works) are indeed generating a status quo attitude
> amongst the elite and a sense of hopelessness amongst the downtrodden and
> the underclass. The authors and the middleclass indulge in humbug in
> trying to get funds for their pet forms of literature.
>
> No! That is wrong. Indeed literature of anykind must inspire people to
> reach new heights and not get mired in hopelessness (which is far removed
> from depression) {read the above}
>
> One can have an endless list of writers and poets who get thrown ino jail.
> Left wing or right wing one couldn't careless. They have not had an impact
> on society. They have down bugger all to change the attitudes prevalent in
> society. The have down nothing for the people that matter.
>
> No I am not against culture. Indeed I have tried to read the best of the
> last 50 years and enjoy some of the writings. Culture in general,
> literature in particular, should change peoples attitudes - for the
> better. That is the bench mark- the acid test. If it has not then it has
> failed miserably at the level of the society and not at a personal level.
>
> Indeed Indian Literature in the last 50-40 years has in the main failed to
> raise our collective consciousness. In fact it has ensured the humbuggery
> became respectable!
>