FW: New topic, Why, definitely!
Uday Bhaskar (udayb@everest.majesco.com)
Mon, 5 May 1997 12:51:20 -0700
-----Original Message-----
From: Uday Bhaskar [SMTP:udayb@everest.majesco.com]
Sent: Monday, May 05, 1997 12:25 PM
To: 'Bapa Rao'
Subject: RE: New topic, Why, definitely!
Bapa Rao Garu,
Great new topic to start discussing - some years back, Mohan used to =
contribute to the "Udayam" front pages - wonder what he is doing now? He =
is certainly one cartoonist who can measure up to your standard of =
"literature in a sketch".
Jayadev and Ragati Pandari used to come out with occasional good ones, =
but you're quite right, if there is one area that is staler than "Chando =
poetry" (kshamicaali, I just couldn't resist!), it is the Telugu =
cartoons.
It is strange that we who are so well known at laughing at ourselves, =
who have made parody a mainstream art (a la Pattabhi, Jaruk Shastry, =
etc.), who have produced some brilliant works of humor (Mullapudi's =
Budugu can stand proud amongst the likes of Dennis, et al), are so =
singularly lacking in this department.
I am beginning to think that there is a PhD thesis lurking in this =
topic. Anybody game?
Regards
Uday Bhaskar
-----Original Message-----
From: Bapa Rao [SMTP:brao@la.tis.com]
Sent: Monday, May 05, 1997 10:58 AM
To: Sitaramayya Ari
Cc: telusa@cs.wisc.edu
Subject: New topic, sort of
OK, I admit to having an abiding interest in, but zero aptitude for,
chandassu. So, Sitaramayya garu notwithstanding, I don't mind the
chandassu debates at all, though they do get rather repetitive and=20
often degenerate into sikha-paTlu.
But here's a new (sort of) topic:=20
What I want to ask the telusa folks about is about cartoons. Maybe it
is outside the telusa charter to discuss cartoons (I recall one small
discussion some time ago) but I'll ask for some latitude on the grounds
that "a picture is worth a thousand words", so maybe a cartoon is a
form of literary essay, condensed into a picture and a caption.
My question is, why are Telugu cartoons, as a rule, so idiotic and
retrograde, and rarely funny? I have been exposed to Telugu cartoons
for upwards of 3 decades, and they haven't changed even one bit (at
least not the ones in the popular magazines.). It is always the same
tripe about henpecked husbands, fat bullying wives who can't cook,
henpecked husbands, fat bullying wives who can't cook,=20
henpecked husbands, fat bullying wives who can't cook, ad infinitum ad
nauseum. Even a magazine with a supposedly progressive bent like Rachana
seems to care not a hoot for quality or meaning when it comes to =
cartoons.
For me, "nasaalam" really stuck when I saw the recent ugaadi sancika of
Rachana. There were about 20 dozen variations of the same cartoon about
the wife who makes a mess of the ugaadi pacchaDi. A joke is a joke, but
shouldn't it make some sense at some level, especially if they are going
to tell us the same thing 20 dozen times? Shouldn't a mature cartoonist
try to explore socially-relevant issues with humor and understanding? I
mean, how many of these maga-mahaarajus who sneer at wifey's culinary
incompetence are even capable of boiling water for tea? Why isn't there
even one (just one) cartoon about a hapless male who is forced to make
his own ugaadi pacchaDi and manages to produce something else entirely?
My irritation about these cartoons has been festering for quite some
I can't help but make the comparison with American cartoons or the=20
old Punch cartoons which are often both funny and insightful, thus=20
"exploding" at just the right pitch. In Telugu (I exaggerate of course)
there seem to be about 3 cartoons, all created by some =
cartoon-equivalent
of kavitrayam. And all other cartoons are simply retellings of these=20
three cartoons.=20
Am I the only one who feels this way? If I am just being a contrary=20
dunnapOtu, unable to appreciate aTukulu, please don't hesitate to tell=20
me so. :-)
Bapa Rao