[racchabanda] Vemana - Viswanatha ( Re: శ్రీ మరుపూరు కోదండరామరెడ్డి గారి "లోక కవి వేమన" )
Sreenivas Paruchuri
> > - vishNuSarma iMglIshu caduvu. mooDava adhyAyamu. viSvanAtha
> > satyanArAyaNa viracitamu.
>
> ఠంక్స్ ఫొర్ షరింగ్ థత్. ఈత్ ఇస్ వెర్య్ ఫున్న్య్. ఉన్న్య్, నొత్ తొ బె తకెన్
> సెరిఔస్ల్య్, ఈ గుఎస్స్!
ణొ, ఇత్స్ నొత్ ఫున్న్య్! విస్వనథ మీన్స్ ఇత్, ఒర్ మీంత్ ఇత్. అచ్త్ ఇస్ థత్ వె
దొణ్త్ క్నౌ *అన్య్థింగ్* అబౌత్ "వేమన". ఈఫ్ ఒనె బ్య్ థత్ నమె రీల్ల్య్
ఎక్షిస్తెద్, అంద్ వ్రొతె (థెయ్ చౌల్ద్ అల్సొ హవె బీన్ "ఒరల్ల్య్ వ్రిత్తెన్"!) సొమె
వెర్సెస్, వె చణ్త్ ఎవెన్ ఇదెంతిఫ్య్ థెం. ఆస్ అల్ల్ ఒఫ్ ఉస్ క్నౌ థె నుంబెర్ వరిఎస్
ఫ్రొం ఫెవ్ హుంద్రెద్స్ తొ ఫెవ్ థౌసంద్స్. ఆరుద్ర ఒంచె వ్రొతె థత్ raaLLapalli
anantakRshNaSarmaధస్్గ్రీత్ చొంత్రిబుతిఒన్ - థ్రౌఘ్ హిస్
"vEmanOpanyaasaalu" - హస్ బీన్: "vEmana gurinchi manakEmee
teliyadu". (పరఫ్రసింగ్ మినె!) ఈ దొ నొత్ థింక్ థత్ లత్తెర్ వొర్క్; ఎస్ప్.
బ్య్ ణ్. ఘొపి ప్రొవిదెద్ అన్య్ సిగ్నిఫిచంత్ నెవ్ ఇన్సిఘ్త్స్.
ఠెరె ఇస్ నొ ఎవిదెంచె థత్ హె వస్ "పొపులర్ ఒర్ విదెల్య్ క్నౌన్" ఇన్
ప్రె-చొలొనీల్ తిమెస్. ఠెరె అరె స్త్రొంగ్ అర్గుమెంత్స్ థత్ "వేమన" వస్ కింద్ ఒఫ్
దిస్చొవెరెద్ బ్య్ థె మిస్సిఒనరిఎస్ అంద్ చొలొనీలిస్త్స్, వ్హొ బెలిఎవెద్ థత్
ఈందీన్ సొచిఎత్య్ వస్ చొర్రుప్త్/ఇన్ఫెచ్తెద్ అంద్ ఇత్ నీదెద్ "రెఫొర్ంస్" అంద్ "థె
నతివెస్ షౌల్ద్ బె తౌఘ్త్ మొరల్స్" (రెమెంబెర్ థొసె "ంఒరల్ పెరిఒద్స్" ఇన్
ఔర్ స్చూల్స్?!) ఒన్ థె లినె ఒఫ్ "టెన్ ఛొమ్మంద్మెంత్స్".
ఋఎగర్ద్స్,
శ్రీనివస్
------------------------------------
టొ ఫొస్త్ అ మెస్సగె, సెంద్ ఇత్ తొ: రచ్చబందయహూగ్రౌప్స్.చొం
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Srinivas Nagulapalli
wrote:
>
> No, its not funny! Viswanatha means it, or meant it. Fact is that
> we don't know *anything* about "vEmana". If one by that name
> really existed, and wrote (they could also have been "orally
> written"!) some verses, we can't even identify them. As all of us
> know the number varies from few hundreds to few thousands. Arudra
> once wrote that రాళ్ళపల్లి అనంతకృష్ణశర్మ's great
> contribution - through his "వేమనోపన్యాసాలు" - has been:
> "వేమన గురించి మనకేమీ తెలియదు". (paraphrasing mine!) I do
> not think that latter work; esp. by N. Gopi provided any
> significant new insights.
I find it funny that Viswanatha well known for speaking out
his mind bluntly and fearlessly, chose to hide, nay, express that
by embedding it in a novel(?) and worse, mix in his outlandish
imagination superimposed on Tikkana. Why use Tikkana as fig leaf
to say loudly what he wanted!
Secondly, this saying that we don't know *anything* about Vemana
is neither new nor strange. We still don't know *anything* about
many things and beings- right from Valmiki, Vyasa and writers of
Upanishads. That did not deter any, including Viswanatha himself,
to praise and thank Valmiki et.al. We seemed to have learnt to
deal with not knowing *anything*, for good or bad.
> There is no evidence that he was "popular or widely known" in
> pre-colonial times. There are strong arguments that "vEmana" was
> kind of discovered by the missionaries and colonialists, who
> believed that Indian society was corrupt/infected and it
> needed "reforms" and "the natives should be taught _morals_"
> (remember those "Moral periods" in our schools?!) on the line
> of "Ten Commandments".
Not having evidence that he was "popular or widely known" in
pre-colonial times, may simply mean he may not have existed
much before pre-colonial times. Not sure it tells us any thing new.
True, missionaries and colonialists might have had contempt for
native "morality" and even tried to bear the "white man's burden"
by propagating Vemana's works. But to say that alone made his
poems linger on tongues of even so called "illiterate" masses, is
crediting them lot more, and worse discrediting the intelligence
of those generations even more. We know only too well, that
neither by fear of sword, nor with lure of money, majority could
not be made to sing to the tune of the rulers, let alone memorize
any one's works.
----------------------------------------------------
Regards
-Srinivas
------------------------------------
To Post a message, send it to: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
lylayer
> Thanks for sharing that. It is very funny. Funny, not to be taken
> seriously, I guess!
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Sreenivas Paruchuri <sreeni@...>
wrote:
> No, its not funny! Viswanatha means it, or meant it. Fact is that
we
> don't know *anything* about "vEmana". If one by that name really
> existed, and wrote (they could also have been "orally written"!)
some
బాగుంది. బాగుంది. నారాయణ నారాయణ. మేము కలహ భోజనులము.:-)
వీణ వాయించుకుంటూ, మధ్య మధ్యన, వేరే వారి వాదనలు ముచ్చటగా
వింటమే మాకానందం.:-)
విశ్వనాథ ఏమనుకున్నాడో మీరే నిర్ణయించండి. అదే పుస్తకంనుండి, అదే
ప్రకరణమునుండి, మరో కొంత సంభాషణ:
"
తిక్కన్న 'ఇక మీరు చచ్చినా యోగులు కారూ అన్నాడు. నాకు కోపం వచ్చి '
యోగులేమిటయ్యా! మా వాళ్ళేమంటున్నారో తెలుసునా? యోగి అనేవాడు
స్వార్థపరుడు. తనకొక్కడికే ముక్తి కావాలని కోరుతూ ఉంటాడు. అటువంటి
ముక్తి కోరుకోకూడదు. అది తప్పు. మీ పూర్వ లకష్యాలన్నీ ఇటువంటివే.
వాటన్నింటికీ మేమెదురు తిరిగాము. అదట్లా ఉంచి వేమన్న నీ అంతటి కవి
అంటేనే నీకింత ఎగేసుకు వచ్చిందే మీ ఇద్దరి అంతవాడు ఇంకొకడున్నాడు.
ఆయన పేరు చెపితే నీవు మళ్ళీ భూలోకం వైపు చూడకుండా
వెళతావనుకుంటున్నాను. ఎందుకంటే ఆ వేమన కనీసం పద్యాలన్నా వ్రాశాడు.
ఈ మూడవ ఆయన పద్యమనేది వ్రాయలేదు. వ్రాశాడేమో నాకు తెలియదు.
ఒకవేళ నాకు తెలియకుండా వ్రాసిఉన్న పద్యాలుంటే ఆ పద్య బలంచేత
మాత్రం కాదు మేము ఆయన్ని నీ దగ్గర నిలబెట్టడం. నన్నడిగితే ఒకవేళ
వేమన్న నీతోపాటు వాడేమో గాని, ఆయన మీ ఇద్దరికంటే గొప్పవాడు. ఇంత
గొప్పవాడని చెప్పటానికి వీలు లేదు. ఈ మధ్య మా వాడొకడు వాశాడు. '
అదివరకు ఉన్నదంతా తెలుగు భాష కాదు. తెలుగు కవిత్వం కాదు. తెలుగు
కవిత్వం ఆయన తోనే మొదలు పెట్టిందీ అని ......
"
ఈ వస్ త్ర్యింగ్ తొ ఫిగురె ఔత్ వ్హొ థిస్ థిర్ద్ వ్రితెర్ ఇస్ మ్య్సెల్ఫ్ బెఫొరె వ్.
శత్యణరయన తెల్ల్స్ ఉస్ ఇన్ హిస్ బూక్. ఈ చౌల్ద్ నొత్. ఋబ్ రీదెర్స్ ప్రొబబ్ల్య్
చౌల్ద్.
ఈ ఉసెద్ తొ థింక్ మ్య్ దెతెచ్తిఒన్ స్కిల్ల్స్ వెరె ప్రెత్త్య్ గూద్. భుత్ థెయ్ ముస్త్
బె దెతెరిఒరతింగ్. షుచ్క్స్! ఇ చన్ నొత్ ఫిగురె ఔత్ వ్హొ థిస్ bAbjIlu
పొస్తింగ్ ఇన్ ఈమాట మగజినేస్ రీదెర్ధస్్ొపినిఒన్ -ఇస్. వ్హొ ఇస్ థిస్ పెర్సొన్
ఇన్ దిస్గుఇసె? ఇ మీన్ వ్హొ ఇస్ హె రీల్ల్య్? డోస్ అన్యొనె క్నౌ? ఓర్ రథెర్,
దోస్ ఎవెర్బొద్య్ ఎకష్చెప్త్ మె క్నౌ వ్హొ భబ్జిలు ఇస్? ళికె థె తిమెస్, ఈ వస్
థె లస్త్ పెర్సొన్ తొ క్నౌ ఋఒహిని ఫ్రసద్ ఇస్ ఖొదవతిగంతి ఖుతుంబ ఋఅఓస్
సొన్. వ్హిలె ఈ వస్ హప్పిల్య్ బషింగ్ అవయ్ ko.ku ఒన్ ర్బ్, అంద్ అద్మిరింగ్
ఋఒహిని ఫ్రసద్. ణొత్ థత్ 'ర్ప్ధ్ింద్స్ మ్య్ బైంగ్ చ్రితిచల్ ఒఫ్ హిస్ ఫథెర్ధస్్్వ్రితింగ్. వ్హ్య్ షౌల్ద్ హె బె.:-)
ఆంద్ వ్హిలె ఇ అం అత్ ఇత్, :-)లెత్ మె తెస్తిఫ్య్, ఈ హద్ నొ ఇదీ ఋఅచకొంద వ్.
శస్త్రి హద్ త్వొ వివెస్. ఊంతిల్ రెచెంత్ల్య్ శ్.ణ్., వ్రొతె అబౌత్ ఇత్ ఇన్ ఒనె ఒఫ్
హిస్ ర్బ్ పొస్త్స్. ఈ వస్ షొచ్కెద్. ఈ మీన్ :-) :-) ఈ అం నొత్ షొచ్కెద్ రావి
హద్ త్వొ స్పౌసెస్, బుత్ షొచ్కెద్ ఇ దిద్ నొత్ క్నౌ అబౌత్ ఇత్. ఓన్ల్య్ థెన్,
రెత్రొస్పెచ్తివెల్య్, ఈ ఫిగురెద్ ఔత్ వ్హ్య్ ఖమెష్ ఇస్ సొ మద్ అత్ మె వ్హెన్ ఇ
వ్రొతె మ్య్ ఎచ్చెంత్రిచ్ - థె ముల్తిప్లె చొంప్లెకష్ స్య్ంద్రొమె సొమెథింగ్
సొమెథింగ్ ఒన్ 'అల్పజివి.'
ఈ వౌల్ద్ లొవె తొ కీప్ ఒన్ త్య్పింగ్, బుత్ ఆమ్య్ హద్ పైంతెద్ మ్య్ నైల్స్ ఇన్
సిల్వెర్య్ స్తర్ లిత్ నిఘ్త్ షిమ్మెర్ నైల్ పొలిష్ అంద్ హద్ స్తుచ్క్ తిన్య్ లిత్త్లె
షిన్య్ స్తర్స్ ఇన్ థె మిద్ద్లె ఒఫ్ ఈచ్ నైల్; థైర్ బీఉత్య్ ఇస్ సొ
దిస్త్రచ్తింగ్, ఇ గొత్ తొ స్తొప్. ఠెసె షిన్య్ నైల్స్ అరె మకింగ్ మె దిజ్జ్య్
విథ్ దెలిఘ్త్, థత్ ఎవెన్ థౌఘ్ ఇ హవె అ గూద్ తెలుగు స్తొర్య్ తొ తెల్ల్, ఈ
అం ఉనబ్లె తొ త్య్పె అల్ల్ 15 పగెస్ ఒఫ్ ఇత్ ఉసింగ్ అక్షరమాల. ఈ వౌల్ద్
రథెర్ విగ్గ్లె మ్య్ ఫింగెర్స్ అల్ల్ దయ్ ఇన్ ఫ్రొంత్ ఒఫ్ మె అంద్ బె ఫూలిష్ల్య్
హప్ప్య్ లికె అ నాచ్ గిర్ల్.
ఆఫ్తెర్ అల్ల్, నొత్ జుస్త్ ఇన్ శౌపదు, బుత్ ఇన్ ఎవెర్య్ లిఫె థెరె షౌల్ద్ బె అ
ఫెవ్ స్తుపిద్ సుమ్మెర్స్.:-)
ఛీర్స్
ల్య్ల
Kameswara Rao
> imagination superimposed on Tikkana. Why use Tikkana as fig leaf
> to say loudly what he wanted!
>I was trying to figure out who this third writer is myself before V.
>SatyaNarayana tells us in his book. I could not. Rb readers probably
>could
It is an easy guess (a guess becasue I haven't read 'VishNu Sarma
iMglIshu caduvu') that the answer for both the above is same. And
the thread which connects all these three pearls tikkana, vemana and
third one is none other than the poet who proclaimed himself to have
led the 20th century poetry!
> by propagating Vemana's works. But to say that alone made his
> poems linger on tongues of even so called "illiterate" masses,
is
> crediting them lot more, and worse discrediting the intelligence
> of those generations even more. We know only too well, that
> neither by fear of sword, nor with lure of money, majority could
> not be made to sing to the tune of the rulers, let alone
memorize
> any one's works.
Judging the value of poetry in terms of its popularity (that too,
with the masses) itself is a modern thought to which Visvanatha was
against.
ఇక్కడ గొడవంతటికీ మూల కారణం, వేరువేరు కాలాలకి చెందిన
కవుల్ని, వేరు వేరు రీతులకి చెందిన కవిత్వాలని ఒకే తూనిక రాళ్ళతో
తూచడానికి ప్రత్నించడం.
regards,
Kameswara Rao.
lylayer
wrote:
> It is an easy guess (a guess becasue I haven't read 'VishNu Sarma
> iMglIshu caduvu') that the answer for both the above is same. And
> the thread which connects all these three pearls tikkana, vemana and
> third one is none other than the poet who proclaimed himself to have
> led the 20th century poetry!
Happy Independence Day!
Solving riddle with a riddle!:-)
Are you saying the third kavi/pearl is V. Satyanarayana himself?
Regards
lyla.
Satyanarayana Pamarty
> I used to think my detection skills were pretty good. But they must
> be deteriorating. Shucks! i can not figure out who this బాబ్జీలు
> posting in eemATa magazine's reader's opinion -is. Who is this
> person in disguise? i mean who is he really? Does anyone know? Or
> rather, does everbody except me know who Babjilu is? Like the
> times, I was
Hi Lyla:
I don't know who he/she is. The folks at eemaata might know. They
mandate the disclosure of one's e-mail id before making posts. I
thought I will post some comments with the name saabjeelu and
challenge you to find out, but backed off seeing the e-mail part of
it. :-)
Otherwise, there could have been some fun, huh?
> ... had two wives. Until recently S.N., wrote about it in one of
> his rb posts. I was shocked. I mean :-) :-) I am not shocked rAvi
> had two spouses, but shocked i did not know about it. Only then,
You are okay. Do not feel too bad about it. One of my
grandfather's/grandmother's late cousins (God knows how he was
related to us! my brother actually keeps such tabs and chronicles and
might chip in with the actual relational equation sometime), who
seems to have been a journalist of repute, told me once that folks
from our (mine etc.) generations had no guts to marry more than once.
Well. I think it's true that not that many folks these days marry
more than once. I guess not long ago, this practice was very popular.
In fact, looking back, it sounds like it was in vogue at one time.
All the who's who of the yester year Madras seem to have had two
wives (at least). Where they got this steady supply from, I do not
know. Women folks weren't reading (m)any feminist magazines in those
days I guess.
Also, the other point I wish to make here is that many elderly
members on this forum might have actually failed their generation in
this aspect by behaving ahead of their times. Or may be, they learnt
the way like the newer generations to escape from getting arrested by
the institution. Who knows!
Anyway, I know guys who struggle to find at least one wife these
days. I think that there is also no need to stress that getting one
is easier than keeping one.
Having done a little trend analysis, I wouldn't be surprised when one
of those two smart sons of mine will turn back and tell me one day
that I was too dumb to marry once in the first place.
Now, I come to the topic in question about vEmana. SrI parucUri's
comments made my imagination go wild. I always thought the name
vEmana was not a telugu name. It now looks like it's a corrupt form
of Wayman. Otherwise, it would have been vEmanna with two ns like you
have been sporadically spelling. Now, that sounds like a telugu name.
Alas, since the name doesn't sound like that, I now positively think
it must have been Wayman. This is an English last name. I checked the
internet as usual and confirmed my worst fears. What then must be the
origin of yOgi? It must have been George. What do you think? jArji
vEman, jOrgi vEmana, yOrgi vEmana, yOgi vEmana. Eureka!!!
There is one mystery in all this though. How did the moralising
George Wayman, who was reasonably good at writing in telugu get to be
portrayed as the guy sitting in the buff with one leg stretched and
one leg bent? Our mother used to cover the vEmana SatakaM with a
brown sheet lest we see that image of George Wayman in that form and
get our minds corrupted. That ploy didn't work, did it?
Okay, here's the theory. In those days, the lesser the dress you
wore, the higher in the social spectrum were you placed. Our friend,
the bearded George hit upon a plan to hit the roof with his idea of
the buff. Our poor folk naturally fell for that dubious notion.
Am I now ready for my second PhD or what? I guess so, but before
anyone takes me seriously, they should even more seriously consider
the fact that there is a partial lunar eclipse taking place right
overhead as I am typing all this. Whoever said the planetary bodies
and their movements have no effect on us goofed! That's another story
I will reserve to tell on a solar eclipse day.
With best wishes
Satya
Hemantha Kumar
Beyond the relationship, I became pretty close to Krishna Tatayya and got along with him well alright. I had accompanied him to the Chennai airport on his last ever journey from Chennai to Hyderabad.
There were several anecdotes but the one I am still amused of is what happened when I got married and I took my new bride (pun intended) to his house in a Maruti car kindly arranged by my Brother-n-law in Hyderabad. The moment Krishna Tatayya saw the car he said "Ee moothi muduchukunna kaaru nee kekkadidiraa?"
God bless his soul.
Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy
One of my
grandfather' s/grandmother' s late cousins (God knows how he was
related to us! my brother actually keeps such tabs and chronicles and
might chip in with the actual relational equation sometime), who
seems to have been a journalist of repute, told me once that folks
from our (mine etc.) generations had no guts to marry more than once.
<snip>
lylayer
<pamarty@...> wrote:
( In reference to the question who 'bAbjIlu in eemaaTa' is )
>
> Hi Lyla:
>
> I don't know who he/she is. The folks at eemaata might know. They
> mandate the disclosure of one's e-mail id before making posts. I
> thought I will post some comments with the name saabjeelu and
> challenge you to find out, but backed off seeing the e-mail part of
> it. :-)
మనిషికి నిజం స్పౌసులే ఇద్దరు ముగ్గురు, ప్రతి స్పౌసుతోనూ ఎందరో
కొందరు నిజం పిల్లలు ఉండగా లేంది, మారు పేర్లు - ఈ మెయిలు అడ్డ్రెసులు
పదో పాతికో ఉండటానికి కష్టమేముంది సత్యా! నిజంగా టెక్నికల్ గా ఉందా?
ఈమాటలో పాఠకుల అభిప్రాయాలలో రాసేవాళ్ళలో ఎక్కువ మారుపేర్ల వాళ్ళే
అని నా అనుమానం. ఎందుకు మారుపేర్లతో రాస్తారో, అది మాత్రం నాకు
తెలియదు. ఐతే కొంత ఆలోచించగా - కల్పన కథలు, కవితలూ రాయటం
ఇవన్నీ ఆశ్చర్యం కలిగించే పనులే గదా! ఒక కల్పనను స్వీకరించి,
ఇంకో కల్పనను తిరస్కరించటం తగునా? - అని కొంత సరిపెట్టేసుకున్నా.
That does not mean i am dropping the investigation:-)
According to good detection practices, i am generating my suspects
list. As per rules,:-) you and I also need to be on that list. Just
because i raise the question, i can not be excluded, and just because
you answered that you don't know who 'bAbjIlu' is, you can't be
excluded from the list either. Good detectives must stick to rules.
The only thing i could so far say with certainity is 'bAbjIlu' is an
avid rb reader. That is not much of a clue, is it?
Also, On further thinking, even if some one declares himself, as
that person-bAbjIlu, how can we be sure of it? What proof can be
offered? So 'Who is bAbjIlu?' can forever remain an unsolved mystery.
It is not such an easy case to solve.
On the other hand: Once in New Jersey area, when in the news, a judge
announced his wife is missing; naturally my family members brought
the case to me, since every one knows how i love to play detective. I
said in a jiffy, the judge had murdered his wife. (before the police
could even open up a file on the case of this missing wife.) A few
weeks later my sister called me and started stuttering -how did you
know? How did you know, that the judge killed his wife? She is awe
struck. I said, "dear sis, that is elementary. What other solution
can there be?"
If Ramayana is a present day mystery, and Rama reports his wife is
missing, he will be the prime suspect. You think any detective will
believe, Rama's story- that he went to get a gold deer, (that too
because his wife asked for it) and his wife disappeared meantime?
Cheers
lyla.
PS: Satya, in looniness, you and i can not be eclipsed by any రాహు,
కేతు :-)
J. K. Mohana Rao
> In the good old days of SCIT, TelusA, there were a lot of people (me
> too!) who used to write with assumed names. That was a lot of fun for
> sometime. After a while, it appeared hackneyed and trite and most of the
> people (me included) dropped the assumed names.
I remember quite well, particularly in the case of SrImati suprabha
where in response to one of her poems, half a dozen pseudonyms
were born overnight! The courage and grit she showed then was
indeed admirable. Time for readers to go back to the telusA
archives.
Regards! - mOhana
_._,___
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
V.R. Veluri
In the good old days of SCIT, TelusA, there were a lot of people (me
too!) who used to write with assumed names. That was a lot of fun for
sometime. After a while, it appeared hackneyed and trite and most of the
people (me included) dropped the assumed names.
Hopefully, that could happen soon! But, as someone has said (again a trite
shibboleth!), "What's in a name?"
Regards, -- V R Veluri
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 7:17 PM, lylayer <lyl...@aol.com> wrote:
> --- In racch...@yahoogroups.com <racchabanda%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Satyanarayana Pamarty"
> <pamarty@...> wrote:
>
> ( In reference to the question who 'bAbjIlu in eemaaTa' is )
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ragasudha Vinjamuri
-Sudha
Knowledge increases in proportion to its use - that is, the more we teach the more we learn.
- H. P. Blavatsky, 1831-1891
--- On Mon, 18/8/08, J. K. Mohana Rao <jkm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: J. K. Mohana Rao <jkm...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [racchabanda] రచ్చబండ పరిశోధనలు
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 18 August, 2008, 7:25 PM
Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now, on http://help.yahoo.com/l/in/yahoo/mail/yahoomail/tools/tools-08.html/
Kameswara Rao
an
> avid rb reader. That is not much of a clue, is it?
వై? అని నేనడక్కముందే మోహన గారడిగీసేరు. నాకు Sherlock
Holmesలో
నచ్చని ఒకే ఒక్క పదం "elementary"! కాబట్టి మీరా సమాధానం
ఇవ్వోద్దు. I like Poirot more than Holmes because he is more patient
with me in explaining the details!
ఇంతకీ "బాబ్జీలు" కలంపేరని అందరూ ఎందుకనుకుంటున్నారో నాకర్థం
కావడం లేదు.
అతను "మా" విజయనగరం ప్రాంతానికి చెందినతనే అని మాత్రం
ఖచ్చితంగా
చెప్పగలను!
> If Ramayana is a present day mystery, and Rama reports his wife is
> missing, he will be the prime suspect. You think any detective
will
> believe, Rama's story- that he went to get a gold deer, (that too
> because his wife asked for it) and his wife disappeared meantime
Hmm...Not really! Rama was lucky enough to have a strong (eye)
witness in the form of Mr. Jatayu, that too with nothing less than
a "marana vA~mmUlamu" for it :-)
regards,
Kameswara Rao.
Satyanarayana Pamarty
>
> మనిషికి నిజం స్పౌసులే ఇద్దరు ముగ్గురు, ప్రతి స్పౌసుతోనూ
> ఎందరో ...నిజంగా టెక్నికల్ గా ఉందా?
ఈ స్పౌసు మాటకు తెలుగు పర్యాయపదాలు రచ్చబండ మీద చాలానే వచ్చాయే.
అవన్నీ మీ చెవిన పడినాట్లు లేవు. అవన్నీ బూడిదలో పోసిన పన్నీరేనా?
నిజంగానే నా వాదన సాంకేతికంగా సరిగ్గా లేదు. అయినా మీరు నేను
చెప్పిన మాటను నమ్మక పోవటం చాలా కష్టంగా ఉంది. :-)
> That does not mean i am dropping the investigation:-)
Believe me. You need some professional help here.
Look at the writing of SrI bAbjIlu. His telugu is good. It is not
true that he (let us assume that it's a he for the sake of ease)
lacks skills at RTS like SrI JKMR assumed. He might have just not
proofread his abhipraayaalu.
I don't know if he reads RB, but I don't think he is a poster on RB.
I have kinda profiled most regular RB posters and he doesn't sound
like anyone from here (including SrI vIramAcinEni of yester years,
although he was at first a strong suspect).
Who could he then be? Look at the length of each of those opinions
barring one or two. They are long by ordinary standards. Who would
want to write so much and so well? An author, of course!
He doesn't seem to be against tradition, but just a mild rebel while
not being an anti-establishment type of person. He likes traditional
music at least and has some strong interests in poetry as well. He
knows that NRIs hate Indian traffic (could be an NRI).
He could be a poet, but not one who necessarily sticks to chandassu.
:-)
The other reason why I think it could be an author on eemaata is
because of this. Let's say I am a regular contributor and I come
after your articles openly and wear my opinions on my sleeve, the
chances are that you or your well wishers will bite me at every
opportunity. So, what do I do? Hide my identity when I make some
candid remarks of course.
Now, who could it be? The style of the person's writing is a dead
give away. :-) The editors at eemaata would have already identified
the person. In fact, they would have fixed quite a few of the
stylistic features in his writings to suit the magazine. :-)
Read carefully all the articles and you will catch your suspect. I
think I have. If I reveal it here and I am wrong, chances are that I
will fall prey to a defamation suit. Who knows?
Incidentally, I think I know who the "Reader" from eemaata is too! If
I am right, he's a RB veteran. ;)
Write to me separately if you wish to know and I will tell you after
you sign a NDA.
All this is without any electronic forensic work. If you really wish
to find out for sure, take SrI surES^ kolicAla into confidence and he
might be able to give you all the details of SrI bAbjIlu you wish to
know.
With best wishes
Satya
PS: We on the baMDa won't let any anonymous posters of opinions be,
do we?
PS2: All this is to say, that with your unfounded suspicions not
withstanding, I am not bAbjIlu! Period.
J. K. Mohana Rao
> avid rb reader. That is not much of a clue, is it?
Is the person one person or multiple personalities as
lu at the end of the name suggests?
That person is new to RTS. Or is it another disguise?
The only thing we know is that person is very well read.
Sometimes it is nice to have a disguised person giving
opinions, is it not?
Any way, bAbjIlu must be laughing at all of us and having
a swell time.
Regards! - mOhana
_._,
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Hemantha Kumar
Now, first, why does one write under a pseudonym? It could be for any of the following reasons or any other reason that I could not fathom out.
1) Fear of failure
2) Fear of recognition or the lack of it
3) Fear of taxes???
4) Just a fancy
5) Fear of the boss/es {could even be one or more spouses:-))) }
6) A desired title
7) Following a tradition
8) Love for some one
9) Use it as a corridor and get away with it (that is what usually we think. But when you look forward to the "paarithoshikam", the cover is blown and so is the myth of the pseudonym)
In my case, I was writing travelogues, which I thought was my forte, very happily in my own name.
And then one day this bug of writing poetry hit me. I was not very sure of what I was doing or going to write. To escape the possible wrath of many erudite and educated readers, and also to save the names of my ancestors who for some reason or the other chose to be masters in poetry, I felt I needed a cover. And adding to that I wanted the cover to be as patriotic as possible however parochial it might be.
so I chose "andhraputhra" and there is not an iota of untruth in that. I am a proud son of Andhra Pradesh.
There have been a few attempts at dirtying paper with ink and with my so called poetry. The height of it is I even got the same published for whatever it is worth (I think I received some Rs.100 or so if I remember right). but over a period the inhibition went off and I felt that nothing like basking in one's own name.
So here goes both "andhraputhra" Hemantha Kumar.
Can you make out anything? No? That's it. These are the times when a pseudonym might come in handy. When you don't make any sense of what you are saying or even don't care about it.
But I am sure of one thing. People like Lyla and Satya can save their time, breath, thoughts and their detection skills with one less mystery.:-))) Because this is one Babu (You should recognise that there is no "ji" added to make it a "Babji") upon whom one doesn't need to waste anything on, as the mystery has been voluntarily unravelled.
Let us all have fun in the merry go around.
Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy
--- In racchabanda@ yahoogroups. com, "Satyanarayana Pamarty"
<pamarty@... > wrote:
<snip>
eemATalO pAThakula abhiprAyAlalO rAsEvALLalO ekkuva mArupErla vALLE ani nA anumAnaM. eMduku mArupErlatO rAstArO, adi mAtraM nAku teliyadu.
<snip>
That does not mean i am dropping the investigation: -)
<snip>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Kameswara Rao
> > It is an easy guess (a guess becasue I haven't read 'VishNu Sarma
> > iMglIshu caduvu') that the answer for both the above is same. And
> > the thread which connects all these three pearls tikkana, vemana
and
> > third one is none other than the poet who proclaimed himself to
have
> > led the 20th century poetry!
>
>
> Are you saying the third kavi/pearl is V. Satyanarayana himself?
It is not fair for you to confuse the matter further :-)
No, the third person is not V.S himself nor Sri Sri who is indeed the
thread that connects those three poets. Ok, let me give one more
clue. Here is a not so well-known poem from this poet:
kastUri gannEru kAvi cIra me~ruMgu
mEni cAyaku viMta misimi golupa
celarEgu muMgurul cErci kaTTina jOti
yirulapai rikkala karaNi veluga
paiTapai dUgADu paccala hAramul
caladiMdra cApaMbu cADpu jUpa
niddaMpu jekkula diddina patramul
makarAMku birudAla mADki ma~rala
me~rapu kemmabbu lOpala me~rayunaTlu
valipamuna mElmi molanUlu taLukulIna
bhadra naDateMce baMgaru paLLeramula
baMDlu bUvulu gonucu saparya koraku
regards,
Kameswara Rao.
lylayer
> --- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "lylayer" <lylayfl@> wrote:
> > Solving riddle with a riddle!:-)
> > Are you saying the third kavi/pearl is V. Satyanarayana himself?
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Kameswara Rao" <kamesh_b@...>
wrote:
> It is not fair for you to confuse the matter further :-)
False accusation.
Good tactic though. Can make one lose balance. Works often well -
particularly with the female gender. Could not help admiring.:-)
> No, the third person is not V.S himself nor Sri Sri who is indeed
the > thread that connects those three poets.
Thank you for letting me know that SriSri is the string, stringing
the three pearls. Is that how he got his shine?
పువ్వులతో గూడిన దారమునకు తావి అబ్బుతుంది గాని, ముత్యాలు గుచ్చిన
దారానికి ఏం వస్తుంది?
Perhaps the string is so selfless.:-) Only wants to bring the pearls
together, and showcase the luminiscent pearls.
>Ok, let me give one more
> clue. Here is a not so well-known poem from this poet:
>
> కస్తూరి గన్నేరు కావి చీర మెఱుంగు
> మేని చాయకు వింత మిసిమి గొలుప...
Smart. Smart. Smart.
Haven't stopped laughing since reading all those rb posts, in the
last couple of days.
Appreciate :-)your giving me the clue, for an answer I already know.
Lovely poem. Loved reading it.
The poem you posted has 'Subhadra' in it. The 'third poet'
Visvanatha's book mentions had written a పద్యకావ్యము 'సుభద్రా
in 1912. Also you brought up 'pearls and string,' into the
guessing game, so I am inclined to think you made the right guess.
Regards
lyla.
PS: Kamesh, I loved all your essays on Telugu poetry on eemaata.
lylayer
wrote:
>
> Dear Laila gaaru:
>
> In the good old days of SCIT, TelusA, there were a lot of people (me
> too!) who used to write with assumed names. That was a lot of fun
for
> sometime. After a while, it appeared hackneyed and trite and most
of the
> people (me included) dropped the assumed names.
How are you! Veluri gAru!
I thought the stormy weather passed, but it has not. It still looks
lousy here. Hope the weather got better where you are.
It is nice to hear of the fun you had in those old Telugu groups. It
is nicer for me, that you are continuing to write these days when I
am reading. I love to be your reader, wherever you may choose to
write.
eemaata continues to be a magazine, I enjoy.
The present frolic and fun of disguises in the readers' opinion
section - It is like one of the final scenes of the hit movie 'Thomas
Crown Affair' - There is only one Pierce Brosnan wearing a top hat
and carrying a brief case one minute. And the next minute the whole
Metropolitan Art Museum is teaming with men with similar top hats and
similar briefcases. No one is identifiable no more.:-) That is such a
cool scene.
Looks like you gained a new writer for eemaata, and that is always
welcome news to this reader.
Regards
lyla.