"Palnadu"
Andreas Zoeller
can anybody help me to find something about the epic story "Palnadu" written
in
original telugu? Especially is there any Web-Page or any downloadeble file
concerning about this story?
Thank you for help
and many greatings from Mannheim/Germany
Sreenivas Paruchuri
>can anybody help me to find something about the epic story "Palnadu" written
>in original telugu? Especially is there any Web-Page or any downloadeble
>file concerning about this story?
You may like to check the highly acclaimed and oft-cited thesis:
The_ epic of Palnadu : a study and transl. / by Gene H. Roghair
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982 , XIX, 399 p.
Palnati Virula Katha <engl.>
ISBN: 0-19-815456-9
which provides a comprehensive bibliography on "palnaaDu", which includes
a long list of books written in Telugu.
For another "critical" interpretation of the "oral" epic, and the authorship
controversies, and the creation of "secondary epics", you may also like to
check V. NarayanaRao's "Six Telugu Folk epics" in :
Another harmony : new essays on the folklore of
India / ed. by Stuart H. Blackburn ...
Berkeley: Univ. of California Pr., 1986; X, 387 p.
ISBN: 0-520-05498-9.
To your query, I am not aware of any web sites providing information palnaaDu
epic. As far as the (socalled) 'standard' texts in Telugu are concerned the
following three are better known:
i. Akkiraju Umakantam's, ii. Pingali Lakshmikantam's, and Etukuri Narasayya's.
schoene Gruesse von PB
Sreenivas
------------------
This public news site made possible by
the folks at http://extra.newsguy.com
Sreenivas Paruchuri
From: Sreenivas Paruchuri <sre...@ktpsp1.uni-paderborn.de>
Date: 1997/10/11
Message-ID: <1997101110...@ktpsp3.uni-paderborn.de>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian.telugu
In article <1997100822...@icarve2.me.wisc.edu>,
sur...@austin.ibm.com says...
>Also, do you know if there have been any new leads to the other
>unresolved debates (afaik) like whether nannechODuDu was earlier
>to the aaadikavi nannayya or not and if vEmulavaaDa bheemakavi is
>a contemporary of the nannayya. I think the other questions that
>were positively resolved are: whether palnaaTi yuddham was written
>by SrInaatha or not and if tenaaali raamalingaDu was the same
>personality as telnaali raamakRshNuDu...
As I said earlier (in my posting: paalkuriki sOmana's times), one at
a time, let me start with the authorship issue of palnaaTi yuddham.
The burning question: Did or didn't Sreenaadha pen it?
The existence of oral epics in Telugu is widely known, but its only
in the last 2-3 decades scholors/folklorists paid them serious
attention and have thrown light on the most well known epic in Telugu;
i.e. _palnaaTi veerula katha_.
The problem started when Akkiraju Umakantam, a well known literary
critic from the early decades of this century, apparently found some
palm-leaf manuscripts, authored by poet SreenaathuDu (!) and published
as _palnaaTi veera charitra_ in 1911. This establishment of _palnaaTi
veera charitra_ as the work of a reputed poet increased the epic's
value in the eyes of historians and among the literary elite. BUT, the
major problem was, it also diverted attention from the roots of the
(~700 years of singing) tradition itself.
As we all know, Telugu litearture is to be classified as written or
non-written. The written literary tradition is again divided in to
"maarga" and "dESi" traditions, where the former enjoys the reputation of
"great poetry" and the later a "second rate poetry". And, oral folk
literature falls altogether outside this established binary
classification. Although ignored by our literati, it comprises a wide
range of forms and styles. While both maarga and dESi literature are
"primarily" written by high-caste persons, oral lit. is "primarily" sung
by persons of low-caste.
Coming back to the controversy, the manuscripts that Umakantam was able
to secure were of unequal quality and credited to several different
authors. Moreover, he did not find a complete manuscript of the entire
_palnaaTi veera charitra_. He did, however, narrate a story that accounted
for the absence of a complete manuscript. It credited the authorship to
SreenaathuDu and accounted for its being with maala-s and other
non-Brahmins. The story says that: In later ages, Srinatha lost his
health because of his sexual excesses and moved to palnaaDu, where lord
chennakESava appeared in his dream, told him to write the history of his
servants, the heroes of palnaaDu, and dedicate it to him. Since, he was
suffering from a disease and an old man , he employed 7 disciples as
scribes and completed the work which is about as big as the "mahaa
bhaaratam". As soon as the book was finished, he was healed of his
disease, but fell in bad ways again. The god became angry and cursed
him saying that the work would fall in the possession of maala-s and
maadiga-s. Disturbed by the curse that the god would not accept it,
he tore it up and threw away the pieces, which maala-s and maadiga-s
picked up.
This story reveals some of the prejudices and assumptions that help
explain the importance of assignment of authorship to Srinatha.
The need to assign a poem to a well-known author can be understood
in an environment in which a work might often be accepted or rejected
on the basis of its supposed authorship (how many times did we have
this discussion in last 2 years here on TelusA/SCIT? :-)) rather on
its inherent merit. It is also important to make such an ascription,
if those who possess the poem are automatically deemed incapable of
composing any piece of literature.
Quoting a scholor, who studied this great oral epic: the episode
quoted by Umakantam not only satisfies the requirements of authorship
but it also explains how the low-caste people came into possession of
the manuscripts. "It is a folk story that is still told today, but it
is one which, in spirit, meshes perfectly with the prejudices and
preconceived notion of Telugu society at large". Infact, no serious
analysis of all the manuscript sources has ever been made, the
scholar Dr. Roghair, adds. (Incidentally, Gene Roghair obtained his
doctoral degree from Madison, Wisconsin under the stewardship of
Prof.Velcheru Narayana Rao)
So, to summarize Umakantam introduced this oral epic into the
literary consciousness of the Telugu people, as a "printed" text
supposedly written by one of the greatest poets. And it acquired
status and recognition. This is what is called as 'secondary epic
formation,' by Velcheru Narayana Rao, where the epic text is identified
with the name of a legitimized author, the epic renamed in sanskritic
style (veerula charitra, veerula bhaagavatamu etc.), and the folk ritual
singer is rejected in preferance for a literary author..
The problem lies in treating the manuscripts as literary texts,
assuming that the texts were once written in "standard" telugu and
later got corrupted. Infact, the author/publisher himself corrupted
the manuscripts, which had an oral origin.
Unfortunately, the scholarly preoccupation with the question of
Sreentha's authorship and the popular acceptance of the authorship
and the authority of pingaLi's & akkiraaju's editions has tended to
divert attention from the palnaaDu environment, where the epic
originated and continues to grow.
Both, tangiraala V.S.Rao of the Bangalore University and Roghair
show how the key passages in the epic were omitted (e.g., ala raaju
raayabaaram) and the extent of damage done to the local tradition,
by the "elitist or scholarly tampering" of the poem.
It is not only the editing of selected passages and changing the
language, but also another an important change 'forced' on to the epic
concerns the narrative sequence. None of the "written" stories contain
the entire epic, but one or two episodes! Also, in arranging the text,
in an order which makes it "read" as a connected narrative, "with a
beginning and an end", the editors resorted to changing not only the
language but the very structure of the narrative!!
Let me end up this post by quoting Roghair's concluding words in his
essay on: "palnaaDu tradition in Telugu literature": In focussing on
the epic as a living tradition in Palnadu, we study the dynamic role of
a traditional, oral literature in its local, rural setting. Because of
the repositories of the epic of palnaaDu are living men, not decaying
manuscripts, the tradition must be regarded as a living process.
Conservatism and innovation are integral parts of a living oral
process. The environment, singers, and the inherited story interact in
the formulation of a world view that is locally valid and more
important, culturally strengthening."
[If you find that most of the above as "plagiarization", you have hit
the nail right on the head! I generously stole material from Velcheru
Narayanarao's _telugulO kawitaa viplava swaroopam_ and G.H.Roghair's
essay on "palnaaDu tradition in Telugu literature". But, condemn ME,
for all the goofs!]
Regards,
Sreenivas
P.S. According to toomaaTi dONappa, the language used in the
manuscript commonly assigned to Srinathudu does not seem to be
earlier than the 17th century language. If true, this would not
necessarily prove that he never wrote one, but it would only
indicate that the question of authorship is more complex than
those who have taken sides on the issue have admitted.
Hari Tadepalli
Sreenivas Paruchuri wrote in message <6pfnic$e...@pdrn.zippo.com>...
>Subject: authorship of classics and folks epics in Telugu - I
>From: Sreenivas Paruchuri <sre...@ktpsp1.uni-paderborn.de>
>Date: 1997/10/11
>Message-ID: <1997101110...@ktpsp3.uni-paderborn.de>
>Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian.telugu
[A] _________
>So, to summarize Umakantam introduced this oral epic into
> the literary consciousness of the Telugu people, as a
> "printed" text supposedly written by one of the greatest
> poets. And it acquired status and recognition. This is what
> is called as 'secondary epic formation,' by Velcheru Narayana
> Rao, where the epic text is identified with the name of a
> legitimized author, the epic renamed in sanskritic style
> (veerula charitra, veerula bhaagavatamu etc.), and the folk
> ritual singer is rejected in preferance for a literary author..
[B]_________
>Unfortunately, the scholarly preoccupation with the question of
>Sreentha's authorship and the popular acceptance of the
>authorship and the authority of pingaLi's & akkiraaju's
>editions has tended to divert attention from the palnaaDu
>environment, where the epic originated and continues to
>grow.
This being a repost, I can not help asking a question that occurred to me
when it appeared the first time. This article, by providing the focal
summary [A], seems to be steeped in the very confusion (complained about in
[B]) about the authorship of the epic.
I am not clear when Srinivas mentions that the #dESi#, #mArga# styles are
not marked by an oral tradition. Even the much accreditedly formal works
like #bhAratam#, #bhAgavatam# & study aids like #amara kOSam# etc were
transmitted predominantly through the oral tradition - the written
manuscripts were very rare - much like bulky reference materials found in
contemporary libraries. According to my brother Tadepalli Bala Subrahmanyam
(who, to me, is an encyclopaedic reference on Telugu lit), the orgins of
even the biggest formal epic #bhAratam# could have been oral & Nannya might
have dictated it to some scribe orally. One could even well suspect that
Nannaya would not have been even a 'literate' in our sense of literacy. If
some parts of these 'formal' epics are more popular than others, it is only
due to the 'oral traditions' rooted in the #vIdhi nATakAlu#, #purANa
kAlakshEpAlu#, #hari kathalu# & #strIla achArAlu#. At the other extreme, we
had the whole body of Vedic literature wherein anything other than oral
rendition is deemed a profanity.
In a sense, the vertical division between the 'formally scripted works' &
those 'trasmitted purely through an oral tradition' based on this attribute
is hazy if we look at the fact that in the pre 20-th century era, any means
of public communication had to be only oral & musical. An oral medium of
communication makes perfect sense in a society in which the technological &
material means for scripting were scant & social interaction had to be
limited by confines of geography & locality. And a when a person-to-person
interaction was a prerequisite for any social exchanges.
For a work transmitted purely orally, it is very likely that more than one
'fixed' version of the work is available. This is very much true for even
the 'formally scripted' epics. It would be interesting to know if a
geneology of the different versions has been attempted for the #palnATi#
story.
T. Hari Krishna