Ramanujan's biography
Rajan P. Parrikar
>Vanakkam!
>I am presently reading a biography of Srinivasa Ramanujan by the American
>author Robert Kanigel titled 'The man who knew infinity'. I find it to be
>thoroughly engrossing reading. The author has really understood the ethos
>of lower middle class Tamil life in the process of writing the book.
> The book is much more than just the story of Ramanujan's genius and
>the utterly moving tale of how it flowered in Cambridge. I find parts of
>the book that describe middle class life in a small town like Kumbakonam
>to be riveting and on occasions even humorous.
> What do other nettors think?
>-Srikanth
I read the book some years ago (soon after its release) and liked it. I
remember asking myself why no Indian had written something as absorbing
and entertaining on Ramanujan (there had been biographies of R earlier).
For the most part, Kanigel does well to stay in the narrative mode and
when he offers his opinions and commentary, they are apt and concise
and show none of the condescension or patronising tone that Western
authors usually reserve for Indian topics. I found Komalatammal's character
to be very endearing - a deeply pious woman who combines her innate strength
with visible motherly instinct.
Another important point Kanigel makes and which really needs to be
underscored is that Professor Hardy didn't really understand R on a
personal level despite their very fruitful professional collaboration.
H's reading of R's philosphic and religious sensibilities turned out
to be, at best, naieve, and in fact, wrong - Kanigel expounds on this
quite nicely, if I correctly recall.
There was one small nit in there that annoyed me - it concerned
S. Chandrasekhar's remark to the effect that that R was an Indian
was incidental and it had very little to do with his almost-supernatural
mathematical wizardry. Taken at face value, Chandra is right, of
course. But here's the other side - R is the one preeminent mathematical
talent India produces after a drought of a few centuries and Chandra
quickly saunters in to tell us (by implication) that we shouldn't
be proud of him because he is Indian. I say, find me an Englishman
who would say a similar thing about Newton (would Chandra dare say
this about Newton?). Try diminishing the "jewishness" of Einstein
in front of a jew - it won't be a pleasant experience!
On a tangential note, Chandra's own biography is out too and is
written by Kameshwar C. Wali of Syracuse U. It covers all the three
phases of C's life - his first 20 years mostly in Madras's uppity
society, then his Cambridge years and then his eventual hop across
the Atlantic to the USofA. Chandra's enormous scientific talent
and seminal achievements are highlighted effectively. The dedication
and fixity of purpose that Chandra brought to his discipline leads
one to the inescapable conclusion - that he is a gyani-yogi of the
highest class.
On the personal front, however, Wali does some sleight-of-hand and, I
dare say, misleads his reader. C.V. Raman, Chandra's uncle (i.e. brother
of C.S. Iyer, Chandra's father), is portrayed as a mean and nasty
fellow given only to polemics (there is even a dig at Lokasundari,
CV's wife). Clearly, there was a clash of egos here (both CS and CV were
of peremptory nature) but Chandra's unfavourable disposition towards
CV is taken as the standard by Wali who doesn't bother to inform
the reader of the 'other` side. Sure, CV had his shortcomings (who
doesn't?) but to cast him as being only an egotistical genius is to
do injustice to CV's mercurial personality. One should read his bio-
graphies to understand his composite character. Personally, I would
put CV miles ahead of Chandra as a model for Indians to emulate.
Wali even puts a positive spin on Chandra's unabashed fondness for
the Brits. Chandra's cowering to Eddington's imperious manner is presented
to us as discretion on his part! I can't help but compare Chandra
and CV here - Chandra wilted under Eddington's fire. CV would have
'socked` Eddington there and then:-). Ooops, I guess this is getting
quite irrelevant to sct now and so I'll quit (since the context for
the Eddington-Chandra imbroglio is quite detailed to go into here).
Rajan Parrikar
==============
email: parr...@mimicad.colorado.edu
Sundhar Soma
>sgop...@cadesm52.eng.utah.edu (Srikanth Gopalan) writes:
>
>>Vanakkam!
>>I am presently reading a biography of Srinivasa Ramanujan by the American
>>author Robert Kanigel titled 'The man who knew infinity'. I find it to be
>>thoroughly engrossing reading. The author has really understood the ethos
>>of lower middle class Tamil life in the process of writing the book.
>> The book is much more than just the story of Ramanujan's genius and
>>the utterly moving tale of how it flowered in Cambridge. I find parts of
>>the book that describe middle class life in a small town like Kumbakonam
>>to be riveting and on occasions even humorous.
>> What do other nettors think?
>>-Srikanth
I did read it when it came out. It is a very absorbing book.
And as kanigel himself says he went to India and stayed
for two weeks and got some kind of a feel for it, before
writing the biography. I would also rank it as teh best book
written on R.
On the other hand, I remember reading a letter to the AMS
criticizing R. Kanigel for down-playing Ramanujan's explanation
about godess's coming in his dream etc...The letter was
written by two or three people (out of which atleast one was
a mathematician---and all three were Indian). Kanigel had
replied in the tone that compared to others (like Hardy etc.)
he had given a very fair share of that side....(there were
more in that letter---I can get the reference if anyone needs it).
>
>Another important point Kanigel makes and which really needs to be
>underscored is that Professor Hardy didn't really understand R on a
>personal level despite their very fruitful professional collaboration.
>H's reading of R's philosphic and religious sensibilities turned out
>to be, at best, naieve, and in fact, wrong - Kanigel expounds on this
>quite nicely, if I correctly recall.
(comment on Chandrasekhar's comments deleted---personally
I didn't feel as strong as Mr. Parrikar---I more took it
as a reactionary statement to a some sort of a feeling that
R's effort were put-down by the super-natural/ Indian cover.
Maybe I was wrong....)
>On a tangential note, Chandra's own biography is out too and is
>written by Kameshwar C. Wali of Syracuse U. It covers all the three
>phases of C's life - his first 20 years mostly in Madras's uppity
>society, then his Cambridge years and then his eventual hop across
>the Atlantic to the USofA. Chandra's enormous scientific talent
>and seminal achievements are highlighted effectively. The dedication
>and fixity of purpose that Chandra brought to his discipline leads
>one to the inescapable conclusion - that he is a gyani-yogi of the
>highest class.
I should thank Mr. parrikar for his views on Chandrasekhar's
biography....I am yet to read it.
<...>
>Rajan Parrikar
>==============
>email: parr...@mimicad.colorado.edu
>
>
--cheers
Somasundhar
Selvaraj Ramasamy
>Let me conclude with this observation - all of life
>is about choosing the rational middle path between
>extremes.
I would very much agree with the above statement.
There is always a middle path in between the two
extremes, which is more sensible and rational than
the two extremes. But sometimes, people get confused
between chosing the middle path and indecision. It
is not indecision, but decision to choose the optimal
position.
Overall, the discussions in this thread were good
and to an extent informative. I haven't read Kanigel's
book, but read the detailed excerpts, posted in SCT by
Balaji Kannan long time ago.
Keep it up, folks.
>RS
Selvaraj.
27 Jan 95.
--
University of Louisville
Rajan P. Parrikar
Amid all the other talk I forgot to mention (and I haven't seen others
mention it) that there is a beautiful documentary on Ramanujan entitled
"The Man Who Loved Numbers" available under the Nova series. This is
different from the one made my BBC and should be available in most of
the university libraries/media services and public libraries.
It was shown on PBS some years back.
Raghu Seshadri
: judgements are seriously questionable. Based on my readings
: ( of this book and an American Institute of Physics Interview and
: shorter writings of his work and miscellanous items), I gather that
: he is a very consciencious and a very sincere person with strong views.
: The appreciation for Western things are in my firm belief very very
: genuine and nothing at all is objectionable in his not citing or
: making any substantial reference to India ( It does not mean India
: does not have such). He might not have been familiar enough to the
: extent he may have wanted to be able to make comments and eventhen,
: he might have had a different appreciation. Who knows he might say
: some exotic things in his coming years. I for one will not
: criticise him. It is not because he won Nobel. I have a high regard
: for people who have certain principles. I deeply felt for Madu Limaye.
: How many people live like him and achieve like Prof. Chandra. It is
: very uncharitable to make such comments about a truly great person.
: These are just my opinions, please feel free to disagree.
:
This shows, Selva, that you, like my sweet mother, subscribe
to the idea that "if you cannot say something good about someone,
don't say anything at all." I completely agree with this principle
in social interactions. But can you meaningfully follow this
in a book review or a film review , for example ? Don't you
have to be objective, and also mention the weaknesses of the
book or the play ?
Public personalities inevitably become objects of discussion.
It is not a condemnation of the man in toto to record certain
idiosynchrasies which strike me as odd. Of course we are not
talking about his legal rights here, he has a full right to
his opinions and if he thinks India has produced no objects
of beauty or excellence, he should be able to express that thought.
No doubt.
I have praised Prof Chandra's virtues and accomplishments.
At the same time, I feel I am right in remarking how odd
it is that an Indian can so totally blank out everything
about his country and his culture and his history and
his heritage. It is not a crime; it is just very very odd,
thats all. If you think even this is uncharitable, I
must express my admiration for your very refined
sensibilities.
RS