Re: Who's a poet (fwd)

Hari Krishna Tadepalli (harit@co.intel.com)
Fri, 30 May 1997 10:26:34 -0700 (PDT)


Dr. Pillalamarri Ramakrishna says:

        > Somewhat recently someone wondered aloud as to "who is 
        > writing classical poetry nowadays!". Well, I am sure some 
        > are doing it even now. One of the ......

Pardon my (unexpected) guest appearance here. The persistence of this 
discussion on this group has catalysed me into some lengthy soliloquies, 
some of which I have finally decided to post here. There should be a 
zillion quotations in Telugu/English/Sanskrit/modern/ancient literature 
on censuring #kukavis# & all those who engage themselves in the writing
profession for reasons other than genuine communication (to whatever 
audience of one's choice). Dr.VRV's persistence in driving the same (a 
rather well known) message again and again makes one clueless about its 
true import, unless he volunteers to deliver it in his own words. Not 
everything below might be directly relevent, neither is it entirely 
disjoint.


A week ago, some of the authors had gone to lengths to extoll the 
#yakshgAnAlu#. Should one, by the same train of arguments, say that all 
#yakshagAnAlu# should be dumped because:


		1. It is an archaic art form
		2. No contemporary themes or recent 
		   writings appeared in that style
		3. There sure were some bad/boring yakshgAnAlu
		4. They have a misplaced emphasis on certain 
		   form of recitation; The modern radio 
		   #rUpakAlu# do it much better. 


Should we say, hey #yakshagAnam# is "formaldehyde" or "a peat bog",
now that the modern cinema has bulldozed them all.


My personal problem in understanding classics in neither metre nor
Sanskrit, but our own good telugu, that had changed considerably
during the past 500 years - we dont use same words, idioms & the 
most important of all, the same #pratyayAlu#, which make us
uncomfortable while reading them. But this was all the living language
of that times. [If I were a PhD student in Telugu linguistics, this would
be my favourite topic - to trace the transformations in the phonetics,
diction, sentence structures, usage & idiom through the recorded 3K years-
perhaps a topic for a lifetime].  I wonder how many of the present day 
youth can understand even a #gayOpAkhyAnam#, a #kanyASulkam# or even an 
old film like #arthAngi#, given their scant training and regard for Telugu. 
The same should be the case with reading english classics like Milton, 
Shakespere, Chaucer et al., I rarely see anyone conversant with English 
literature indulging in #daily# calisthenics of firing "bullets" at them. 
The literary folks at large have learnt to acknowledge that they are 
prevailing art forms of a bygone era & are neither an impediment nor 
obfuscation of what one wants to do with oneself & one's writings in 
contemporary times. 


What is old & lasts for long is inevitably subject to larger scrutiny
& criticism, by its sheer age (& conversely instills more admiration, both
qualified & unqualified). Thus we have scores of critiques and criticisms 
on each of the classics. One would ask as to what fraction of the "modern" 
writings are subjected to the same depth of dissection for both their form 
and contents. With all due subscription to leftist ideals (& not to leftist 
parties), empowerment of working people with capital etc., I can only say 
the "leftist" a.k.a humantarian poetry has become absolutely trite with 
the same bunch of ideas, phrases, idioms, repeated ad. infinitum. I still 
mean no disrespect to the idealism itself, but this very obsession with 
reciting it day after day has rendered them bores & in a way robs one of 
any sensitivity one might have towards those issues. It is one of the 
confirmed workings of the human brain that any sort of repetitive 
information is encoded and stowed away into obsure corners & most likely 
forgotten until its detail becomes directly relevant. Had not one SS written 
well enough about the plight of the poor and the downtrodden ? This is not 
to disparage all those commited writings, but to call for an introspection 
on the part of all those who live and die for them. It would also be 
worthwhile to acknowledge the locality attributes of such commitments when 
they are not universal.


Perhaps much of the confusion prevails for not acknowldging the diversity 
of human experience & its expression in literature. That something is of 
limited use and ciculation does not render it absolutely worthless. Even 
personal letter can contain a wealth of poetic expression subject to the 
context. But the trouble comes only when some of them are required to 
be admired for their 'universal' appeal. Very few writings qualify for 
this stamp & its award will have to be decided by the readers on a 
one-to-one basis. 


Corrections, criticisms & flames welcome.



- T. Hari Krishna