Re: kottha kavithallO kavi samayAlu
Nyayapathi Srinivasa Rao (vasu@india.hp.com)
Sat, 24 May 97 13:22:19 IST
Sree rama rao says:
> I have recently embarked on an experiment and wanted to see the existing
> literature on this subject before proceeding further.
> ...........................................................
Not necessarily. Not always. I did not understand many things about
bhakti philosophy and Vaishnava Maaya or such-stuff when i read the
most memorable (for its sheer aesthetic appeal) prabandham, manu caritra.
But when i read some interpretations, i began to appreciate it more.
So the claim that traditional poetry is a scalar sum of its words
is incomplete/incorrect.
Any express involved/deep-thought (poetry being one such) may need a bit
of interpretation. This doesn't make that poetry bad, though!
Getting closer to modern poetry doesn't imply a major paradigm shift.
It actually is living in our own times.
I can't say the same for the classics.
One should be so familiar with alankaara Saastram, aanandavardhanuDu,
all those do's and don'ts even to talk about them.
It is like 'kuppuswaamayyar made difficult'.
Ofcourse, genuine poetry (ancient/modern)
communicates before it is understood.
Modern poetry is what really is close to us.
And, I agree.
The literary/political 'isms' made it a bit more difficult
but no serious reader should complain because times change
and new-methods and new-techniques are what give poetry
a new life.
'Make it new' was what Ezra Pound said to poets.
> While Dhvani plays some role in the older poetry,
> it appears that a large fraction of the recent poetry is based on Dhvani
> ...............................................................
Your familiarity with the traditional tools and expressions should
not be inhibotors.
Quite a few modern poets said in several occasions that modern poetry
HAS TO BE NECESSARILY SHALLOW. And that's a very deep statement.
To break out of the old-shackles, poets invent new forms of
expression and throwing-out all old phrases and styles is one such.
The aesthetic appeal that modern poetry is capable of is never inferior
to that which the traditional classics are admired for.
> and never felt so helpless in trying to understand the poet. Imagery,
>..............................................................
Take a poem that most people like and we can discuss.
> What I am trying to do: In essence, my very ambitious goal is to
> identify all the tools one needs to understand this recent poetry as
> clearly as the traditional one and then "build" those tools that do not
> yet exist in any formal form.
I'm sorry to say that this is academic trivia.
You cannot dissect a joke and expect to see 'humour'.
Regarding your comments on criticism, i agree that Telugu
cannot boast of too many crictics but there still are good
critics.
One example i cite here is the review article by
Sree Veleru on Jayaprabha's poem 'sparSaanu raagaanni aalapistoo'.
(Serialized in Andhra Jyoti several years back)
The above poem of hers is a LOT LOT better than her more often
quoted 'coopulu' which most feminists love to quote and which
is rather dull.
--
Regards & Thanks
Vasu.