RE: Who's a Poet?
Bachoti Rao (BRAO@atlas.niaid.nih.gov)
Thu, 29 May 1997 11:59:51 -0400
aa.ve. guruvu laghuvu cEsi kumcimci kumcimci
laghuvu guruvu cEsi laagi laagi
kavita ceppunaTTi kavigulaamu baTTi
mukku kOyavalayu drokki paTTi
I have a little difficulty in understanding this. What is referred to
here is obviously traditional chando poetry where guruvunu
kumchinchuTa laghuvunu laaguTa jarugadu. If he was referring
to poetry by learners and full of mistakes, then those poems
cannot be and should not be considered in trying to define
good poetry. (I recall several instances where amateur poems
by learners are unduly used to ridicule traditional poetry).
Stretching words while singing is also not relevant here.
There are several poems which make more sense and say
that just because a so called poem fits meter perfectly, it cannot
necessarily be good poetry. I would like to see someone
who can disagree.
Another thought. Because those were the days when most
poetry was written in chandas, they used to say chandas
alone doesn't make good poetry. What should we say now
to make the same statement about modern poetry? If you
are able to write a grammatically correct sentence and
karta, karma, kriya tappakunDA
andarikee ardhamayElA naalugu
vAkyAlu vrAsi vATini viravagAnE
ayipOdu prati vachanam kavitvam
anAlA? But there is a problem because grammatical
correctness also was ridiculed by some modern
poets. Then should we say,
nAlugu mATalu prakka prakka chErchina
poTTi panktula gumpulu kAlEvu kavitvam.
anAlA? Just wondering.
Regards,
Bachoti Sridhara Rao