Re: Who's a Poet?
Ramakrishna S. Pillalamrri (pkrishna@ARL.MIL)
Thu, 29 May 1997 18:11:58 -0600
One has to be careful about the lengths of ones posts, especially now that
one is aware of PMM's presence back in the country. This post clearly
exceeds the two screenful-limit, but I explain to myself, that it is my
only post of the day, and thus I am entitled to this luxury.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My reports of uniform endorsement of certain views re:good poetry seem to
be (rightfully) premature. I see three or four subsequent posts on this
point, from both sides of the aisle, with considerable disagreement. As it
should be.
One can 'define' good poetry according to one's own bias, and then support
or attack specific poetical works, as fulfilling or lacking in these
qualities. Such extemporaneous definitions, suited to ones own individual
preferences, may or may not withstand the test of time. One of the original
defining SlOka for a 'kAvyam' is:
kAvyam yaSasE-artha kRtE, vyavahAra vidE, SivEtarakshatayE
sadyah para nirvRtayE, kAntA-sammita-tayOpadESayujE
(corrections welcome, the old memory ain't what it used be)
When one says, "vidvat kavaya@h kavaya@h", it is almost a contradiction in
terminology. It implies that there is only one category - vidwat-kavi. The
other one 'kavi' is not a kavi! What else? Chopped liver? Potted plant?
If one says "tella kAgitamE kAgitamu, kAni kAgitam kAgitam kAdu", does it
make sense?
> here is a debate worthy of the mighty! athiratha mahArathulu bari lOki
>digAru. inka rasa~jnyata ki kodavEmundi?
I certainly hope NUB is not talking about me. utti jaTakA tOluku pOyEvANNi.
'rasaj~nata' rathastula valla automatic-gA rAdEmO! caduvadi yenta kalgina
rasaj~nata yincuka lEka yunna, nA caduvu nirarthakambu - annAru.
mahAkavi "kadilEdI kadilincEdI penu niddura vadilincEdI" kAvAlannADu -
navakavanAniki. kAnee, prati kottadee automatic-gA mancidi kAdu, pAtadi
ceDDadee kAdu!
aa mahAkavE, oka mATu
rudrAlika nayana jwAlika, kalakattA kALika nAlika
egarEsina errani jenDA, puli campina lEDi netturU ...
ivannee nava-kavanAniki kAvAlani, inkO mATu
kukka pillA, sabbu biLLA, aggi pullA saripOtayyannADu.
Moreover, we can pick our own mahAkavi, and then use his definition to
attack and defend. Thanks to our custom of liberally sprinkling such
superlative epithets, perhaps there are several people who have similar
/equivalent titles! With different concepts of what 'good poetry' is.
>1. All good poetry comes out of intensely and extremely personal emotions
>2. All good poetry comes from a poet who respects his audience, and is
>sensitive to the fact that, above all, he must communicate.
As others have already pointed out, it is easy to agree with (1), or else,
it will be immediately seen as the fake (not positive-real) it is.
But (2) is something else. How does the poet even know his audience? If a
gaddar is standing on an out-door stage and reciting/reading poetry, he MAY
have an idea of his audience. But when he publishes it in a book, how does
he know, and consequently, a priori, 'respect his audience'?
VSN in SRKV says he wrote it because of "tanDri yAj~nayunu, jeevuni
vEdana". He also says that if you ask why write yet another rAmAyaNa - "yee
prapancaka mella nellavELa tinucunna yannamE tinucunna dinnALLum, tana ruci
bratukulu tanavi gAna; cEsina samsAramE cEyucunnadi, tanadaina yanubhUti
tanadi gAna; talacina rAmunE talaceda nEnunu, nA bhakti racanalu nAvi
gAna..". He essentially wrote it for himself. "yidi meccedarO, meccaro,
yidiyunu cadivedaru, caduva-rElA nA kayyadi" - says he. He couldn't care
less if there is an audience for it or not. That he found enough audience
for it, and that the mahAkavi used to go to vijayawADa and have VSN read
sections of SRKV to him, is besides the point. A bonus, not the basic pay!
>To put it simply, good poetry should not require interpretation.
Let me see a show of hands. OK.
Simple poetry may not require interpretation. If you are on stage exhorting
people to embark on a course of action, perhaps you ought to state it in no
uncertain terms, and leave absolutely no room for ambiguity. Not so with
say a SAkuntalam, or a Paradise Lost. Theses still get written on new
interpretations and understandings therein.
A nit-picking point. In the dEvulapalli piece, I think two adjacent lines
are reversed.
"dEsamantE matti kAdoyi dEsamantE manushyulOyi" ani gurajADa rASADu,
taravAta (apparently) SrISrI dAnni sinimA-pATa cEsinaTTUnnADU, kAnee, I
read an article recently (the reading is recent, the article itself may be
10-15 yrs old) which posits that 'dESam' is indeed 'maTTi', and
'manushyulu' are incidental, and have characteristics based on that maTTi.
A simple example. Millions of people in a patriotic spirit literally lay
down their lives to defend the land. Why wouldn't they rather go with the
"bratikunTE balusAku tinaccu"!
(an aside: I was surprised to find that gurajADa wrote such lines as
ninna vaccA ringileeshulu
monna vacciri musalamanu laTu
monna vaccina vADa veevani
maraci vErulu beTTakOyi
vaccenide bangAru kAlamu
vAncha lellanu teeru; sujanula
kAngilEyula dharma rAjyamu
j~nAnamunu swAtantrya miccucu
santatamu vardhillu gAvuta
kannu gAnani vastu tatwamu
gAncanErparu lingireejulu
kalla nollaru; vAri vidyala
karaci satyamu narasitin -gurajADa
I couldn't understand the almost sycophantic(sp?) praise of the English,
until I remembered that gurajADa's sympathies lay with the justice party.
The following paragraph is translated from kOvela sampatkumArAcArya's
(award winning) book of essays, "kAvyam; kavi-swAmyam" (SreelEkha
pracuraNalu, Warangal, 1993)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"our literature acquired a true modern trend, in the last part of the
previous century, by the literati who studied English literature, along
with Telugu literature" - pingaLi lakshmeekAntam - goutama vyAsAlu
"our present day literature acquired a new awakening, and sported new
branches, with the influence of western literature" - kOrADa rAmakRshNayya
- Andhra kavitA vimarSanamu
That with western influence not only in our literature, but in all
walks of our life, progressiveness is developing and flourishing, is
accepted generally by all. However, there is a point to be noted here. This
so-called "progressiveness" is not one that our people sought on their own.
It was forcibly thrust upon it. Having colonized this country, having
subjected it to tremendous exploitation, the English government with a view
to perpetuate the servitude of this nation, has spread its tentacles into
all facets of life of the people. In this spreading, it defiled the
culture, tradition, demolished various social, financial, cultural
institutions, and instituted in their places, its own culture, tradition,
institutions, literature, science, ... It did that quite adroitly. See the
effect on such a genius as gurajADa!
(insert the three poems from above here)
Thus gurajADa attempted to "teach" the natives, even as Bengal was trying
to come to grips with break-up, the consequent national movement of "vandE
mAtaram" were going on at the time, as a protest. How else do we understand
the seriousness and the success with which the English made the
"intelligentsia" believe in their dogma?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>vEturi gAru shows his absolute disregard for the context
Obviously one can show good songs written by vETUri, as well as some trash.
On the rare occasions I watch a new telugu movie, my initial concern that I
am not able to 'hear' the lyrics to the song amid the orchestrated noise,
quickly disappears when I do hear an occasional phrase.
While "communication" is a basic ingredient in any writing, at what level
does it have to do this? At the level of an ordinary T-G/G? Depends on the
poet, the context, the topic,... The old classical poetry was classified
into drAkshA, kadaLee, nArikELa, and even pAshANa pAkam! Krishna Sastry of
the "Teach Sanskrit" movement said that some of Kalidasa's poetry is not
necessarily "klishTa", but "prouDha". SKDR used a lot of acca-tenugu in his
Amukta-mAlyada, which made it harder to understand than peddana's manu-
caritra, which has more tat-sama words.
NSR is right in saying "The rule that poetry SHOULD NOT require any
interpretation is rigid". Are we trying to bankrupt Cliff's Notes people?
Oh, BTW, it should be "kavita ceppunaTTi kavi gulAmunu baTTi"
BSR said "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.". Many of us here in telusA occasionally write a poem or two.
Some have 'learned' the technic in the last few months. Such poems do not,
and should not be taken as examples of, make great poetry. Why, even some
poems by accomplished avadhAnis do not make great poetry, because, the
rules of engagement are different there. The primary requirement there is
speed, not stamina. To change the rules for criticism's sake is not fair.
Kovela Sampatkumara (Retired Telugu Professor, Kakateeya University) had
long discussions with Cekuri Rama Rao (Professor, Telugu University, a
proponent of vacana kavitwam, I think) on the matter of vacana kavitwam,
much of which was published. KS is an acknowledged master of the subject,
and I may have posted some of his views, about an year ago (August 1996,
can be seen in the archived file log96.aug.b). I will post some more later.
He has codified some essential elements of a 'vacana padyam'. Later. But a
few snippets from that post.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* vaiyaktikamgA nA varaku nEnu anukunEdi - Adhunika chandassu - anEdi
EdainA unTE, adi "vacana padyamE" ani. vacana padyam is not specified by
the traditional syllable, mAtra, gaNa counts. Its "chandO-ness" depends
(actually the word "ASrayinci" was used here; shall we say "relies")
on the bhAva in it. Because of this fundamental difference, I consider
vacana padyam as a modern chando-structure. Please refer to the book
"vacana padyam - lakshaNa carca" which is a compilation of the debates
between Sampatkumaraacharya and Chekuri Rama Rao.
* From time immemorial, there was no poetry without chandas and no chandas
without poetry. Poetry was full of chandas, and all chandas was poetry.
However, as time passed by, some things changed. chandas was sometimes
"used" to give a "poetic stamp" to otherwise unworthy stuff. chandas here
just did "veTTi cAkiree".
Moreover, poetry was being written without chandas, and it was proposed
that "that" (in and of itself) was a formidable, and great endeavour.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IF "grammatical correctness also was ridiculed by some modern poets", then
it is best to terminate any and all discussion. It is as if a cook is
saying "why follow the 'rules' of a recipe, or 'good taste'? I'll put red
chillies in jilEbee, and call it 'chilEbee'. If you can't stand the heat,
get out of the restaurant".
I am glad that NUB later said "I am not saying that poetry must at any cost
communicate, even to the least inclined audience". peddana required "ooha
teliyangala (lEkhaka)-pAThakOttamul". teliyani vALLaku teliyadu. For
instance, he followed the usual custom of "indicating" story of the epic,
right in the nAndee padyam. Now, if you don't catch it, there are scholars
who can interpret it for you. If you don't care for the interpretation, or
if you are not aware of it, all is not lost. You think that the poet is
merely invoking the blessings of Vishnu for SKDR. That is enough at some
level.
I received an off-the-net mail, saying "Incidentally, there are many a
folk (like my brother & my friend Prasad's 85 year old grandfather)
who wrote abundantly in classical forms & never cared to publish even
a single verse". I am reminded of a chAsO incident. Someone asked him how
many stories did he write. Noticing a hint as to the small number of his
stories, chAsO supposedly said "you mean the ones that were published?"
>would like to see chandObaddha poetry describing the agony of this wife
I am not poet enough to come up with her agony in a poetical form, but let
me show a poem by KS, on the subject of naxalites. This is from a Satakam
he wrote, with the makuTam, "yateendrA, vyAja rAmAnujA" (addressing
LakshmaNA yati in Warangal).
bassul gAlcuTa, raiLLu gUlcuTa jana-prANammulan deeyuTal
kassum-bussula viplavammu-livi,sanghammun samAnincunA!
hissA kOsamu campulADukonu tAmee nAyakul mAku SrE-
yassun tetture? nammuTeTTulu! yateendrA! vyAja rAmAnujA!
(hissA - share [of the loot])
the following is a bonus, not necessarily connected to the above topic.
anubhavam kannA anubhavOha bhayAvaham
anubhavam kannA anubhava-smRti mudAvaham
pratyaksha prati-mAnasamayyE anubhavam kannA
UhA-smRti yugaLAnikE, endukO janamlO balam -Kovela Sampatkumara
I am in trouble. As I am typing this mother of all posts, replying to
selected points from other posts, I am being reminded of yet other posts
coming in. At this rate, this will be never done. jeerNamangE subhAshitam.
>To many persons dismay, we have a rerun or two of a debate on chandas
I think in addtion to TSR, someone else too said this. But, are we really
discussing chandas here?
Juvvadi Ramana's post just came in. Two corrections. MNS quoted that poem,
didn't come up with it at the avadhAnam. And more importantly, the line
chAndasuDu --> chanDaluDu (chandassE sarvasvamanE vADu??????)
If memory serves me right (lately it's been a lousy servant),"chAndasuDu"
is not one who is immersed in chandassu, but a "vEda panDituDu". vEdAniki
"chAndasamu" ani marO pErundi. I think he mentioned it. maDi kaTTukuni unna
vEda panDituNNi, tAkarAdu kanaka chanDAluDitO samAnam ani SlEshincAru. I
will check the "j~nAtwA nirastArayA" line, and will post a clarification.
Far be it for me to critique NUB's ASu-poem
adhikAram cEsina kIDidi (keeDu+idi ?)
penu BhAram mOsina bIDidi (beeDu+idi ?)
mArketlO berum sAram
mA bratukullO callina kAram
but would AS accept it as a chandO-poem? 'cos it is of the same lineage as
"kadalEdee, kadalincEdee....".In any case, I venture to suggest that it
would sound better, if the last line keeps up the rhyme in the first two,
such as "nOLLa nunci koTTina kUDidi". But, why give in to "sounding
better?"
I see several definitions of "good" poetry, posted by pAlana. I would like
to see several such definitions from dESee sources, even Telugu ones, as
that's where the rub is.
A question. Is it just myself, or did others see the following at the end
of the mail from N.U.B:
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Attachment converted: HD 80:RE- to poets of all flavors ....
This happened today, with the mails "spaShTata vs. aspaShTata. Was RE:
Who's a Poet?", and "RE: to poets of all flavors", but not with the mail
"Re: Who's a Poet?". When I looked at these mails with not-Eudora, I see a
lot of ASCII-gibberish, that looks like bin-hexed, formatted text. Does
this give him a clue as to what's happening?
For example, I see a file called "RE- to poets of all flavors" in my Eudora
Folder, but can't open it! As I do not have the application program that
created it.
There is a lull in the posts. This is my cue. pArkalAm. nA pOyiTTu varA.
Ramakrishna "nEnu chAndasuNNi kAdani samajaita lEda!" Pillalamarri