సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
harita_n
Friends,
I am not sure if this is the appropriate forum (or for that matter if
there is an appropriate forum left anywhere anymore to discuss this
topic ;-)), but several recent posts and long discussions encouraged
me to start this new topic. Hope RBers will indulge me and engage in
this dialogue.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines politics as "The often
internally conflicting interrelationships among people in a society".
And literature is a relection, an interpretation, and hopefully, an
attempt at resolution, of these "internally conflicting
interrelationships among people in the society". From this
perspective, I believe that there is no such thing as literature that
is not political.
Literature - if it is literature at all - must be political in the
sense that it honestly and faithfully reflects these
interrelationships. Whether a piece of literature deals with the
tender nuances of the man-woman relationship as in the novels of
calaM or OlgA's stories, or the brutalizing effects of the legal
system on the lives of common people (as in many of rAvi SAstri's
short stories), or the factional fights in rAyalasIma and how it
affects human relationships (as in kEtu viSwanAdha reDDi's stories),
or the significance of sanAtana dharmaM (as in viSwanAdha's vEyi
paDagalu), they are all intrinsically political in nature.
No self respecting writer will ever say that his or her writings
are "apolitical". They might embrace the politics of "pluralism",
or "sarva mAnava sauBrAtRtvaM", but nevertheless, they will have very
strong opinions about what is right and what is wrong with the world,
and what their role as a writer is with respect to that. If nothing
else, they will hold a strong opinion that they do not need to do
anything about the way the world is, and so they stand for the
politics of status quo.
So the question obviously is not whether or not literature should
reflect a particular political viewpoint (దృక్పథం), but rather,
whether or not literature should uphold a particular political
agenda. The proponents of "pure" literature will not object to a
writer being of a Marxist or an Evangelical Christian pursuasion, but
rather to the use of literature as a means of propaganada for these
political agendas. This is a far more seductive (and therefore far
more pernicious) argument than saying that literature should not
reflect any politics. This is seductive, as it appeals to the
intellectual sensibilities of the free spirit. It is pernicious, as
it is doing precisely what it asks the other side not to do. In other
words, the argument that there should be no political propaganda in
literature is in itself a political propaganda.
To me, the problem is not with propaganda or the politics itself - it
is usually with the fact that the people who frequently indulge in
such propaganda do such a bad job of it. While this is most visibly
true of the left wing writers of the "కొట్టు, తిట్టు చంపు" variety,
it is equally true of the conservative writers. The only difference
is that the right wing propaganda is usually sponsored by
establishment organizations like TTD, and marketed through heavily
funded channels, and often not taken seriously enough by critics to
be even criticised for lack of quality.
On the other hand, some of the best examples of literature (IMHO
only) are unabashed propaganda. Just to cite a few -
1. "ఒకనాడు గలదాంధ్ర యువకులు తూరుపు కనుమదుర్గములనేలిన దినంబు
ఒకనాడు గలదు శిల్పకళాసరస్వతి అమరావతిని నృత్యమాడు దినము
ఒకనాడు గల్దాంధ్ర సకల ప్రపంచమ్ము కృష్ణాస్రవంతి నూగిన
దినంబు
ఒకనాడు గలదు నిల్వకపాఋ శతృలనాంధ్ర సైన్యంబు వేటాడు దినము
ఒకనాడున్నయది యాంధ్ర యుద్ధభూమి కత్తివాడికి రిపుల రక్తంబు
నదులు
కట్టినదినంబు నేటికింకాలవశతనస్మదున్నతి తలక్రిందులయ్యెగాని"
2. "ఆత్మశుద్ధిలేని యాచారమదియేల
భాండశుద్ధిలేని పాకమేల
చిత్తశుద్ధిలేని శివపూజలేలరా
విశ్వదాభిరామ వినుర వేమా!"
3. "మీ దోపిడి కొట్టాలకు నిప్పులంటుకుంటున్నయి
మా ఊపిరితిత్తులతో ఊది ఊది మండిస్తం"
4. "నీ యవ్వన తేజంతో ప్రజాపోరు నెరపాలి
నీ రక్తం పుష్పించగ ఈ దేసం ఫలించాలి"
5. "ఎరుపంటే కొందరికి భయం భయం,
పసిపిల్లలు వారికంటె నయం నయం"
6. "రక్తమిచ్చిన రాయలసీమకు ఏమిస్తవురో రామన్నో
నీళ్ళడిగిన రాళ్ళసీమకి కన్నీళ్ళాయెర భీమన్నా,
చినీమాల రామన్నా"
Regards,
Uday
PS: In deference to Viplav's admonition, I decided to resist the
temptation to get "poetic" in my title this time :-)
From srini_nagul@y... Thu Nov 04 12:57:32 2004
Return-Path: <srini_nagul@y...>
Received: (qmail 26714 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2004 20:57:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
by m17.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Nov 2004 20:57:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n2a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.36)
by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Nov 2004 20:57:30 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.1] by n2.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Nov 2004 20:57:03 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.177] by mailer1.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Nov 2004 20:57:03 -0000
X-Sender: srini_nagul@y...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 69642 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2004 20:06:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Nov 2004 20:06:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n11a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.16)
by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Nov 2004 20:06:53 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.59] by n11.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Nov 2004 20:06:41 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.178] by mailer8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Nov 2004 20:06:41 -0000
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 20:06:39 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cme24...@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1231
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.16
From: "srini_nagul" <srini_nagul@y...>
X-Originating-IP: 12.8.34.199
Subject: NRI Telugu Student needs help
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=136275963
X-Yahoo-Profile: srini_nagul
X-eGroups-Approved-By: mvmachavaram <mvmachavaram@y...> via web; 04 Nov 2004 20:57:01 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.36
X-RB-Message-Num: 10580
The sad news can be read at:
http://www.andhrajyothy.com/mainshow.asp?qry=/2004/nov/4new11
It pains me to mention this, but it is more painful not to, that
often students do not have health insurance to save money, and such
unfortunate tragedies come back to haunt us badly. It is worth
forgoing the fun of watching Telugu/Indian movie(s) at theatres, or
food at authentic Indian/Telugu restaurant(s), if it helps one to
have health insurance in US. I would even add life insurance in
addition to health insurance. I BEG people to ASK students they
know of, about their insurance coverage, and increase this
awareness. Please ask this even before the customary బాగున్నారా
question. Why? Because, if they do not have the insurance, their
response to బాగున్నారా is not that relevant.
There are many sites which cater to these issues and Dr KV Rao's
site is doing a commendable service that I am aware of, and you
can check them out at:
http://health.kvrao.org/
http://www.indnet.org/
Even if one such student/person reconsiders their options as a
result of this, I feel extremely gratified. I do not know how else
to emphasise this gently or bluntly.
Regards
-Srinivas Nagulapalli
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
lylayer
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
>
>
> > Lyla Garu, I dont mean to be uncharitable, but the typical middle
> class intellectual has a naive conception of the level of
> understanding that the working class has of literature and poetry.
A
> textile worker working in the powerlooms of Surat, living in a
dirty
> slum, once gave me a more inspiring lecture on SrI SrI's
> mahAprasthAnaM than I can ever hope to hear from the academic
pundits
> anywhere in the world.
>
But you were Uday.:-) You have linked me and you with a class and you
gave me a prejudice, that I don't have, that i underestimate one class
people's ( working class) understanding of literature. But I am a
working class girl, and i have reasonable understanding of literature
and poetry. :-)
> I wish I had SivAreDDi's కవులేం చేస్తారు? handy. Hopefully some
one
> will be able to post that here.
I hope. Or let me order the book if it is available. And
suggest some other books that you like.
I know i still have to get 'Karavadi gari' book on ancient poetry. i
did not forget that book.
> Lyla Garu, I (and many of my ilk) may or may not know the way to
the
> bathroom, but our goal is not to reach the grand ball room.
So what are your goals Uday? as a writer?
I felt over all -i heard two conflicting thoughts - that writers are
powerful, they make great predictions, they brought lots of changes
in governments, peoples lives, peoples' thoughts over centuries in
many countries, - but if I say then - could they ( not necessarily
the same ones) also have brought famine, turmoil, brought down the
quality of life by introducing corrupt thought and ideas and
promises,some times? i hear you say how can that be, -
it is the foolish people who brought the bad stuff upon themselves.
In other words writers are simply briliant, infallible,they do only
good. non-writers are dumb. The brilliant writers are making
sacrifices for the dumb people . How smart can that be?
We sure have one thing in common -love for the written word. and I do
love writers. I am just smitten.:-)
Let us say what Voltaire said- 'I disagree with every thing you said
but i will protect your right to say it till my last breath.'
I have not verified the quote.:-) ( I am not sure Voltaire is all
that liberal.:-) Do you?)
And I don't disagree with a lot you have said. Very enjoyable post.
Hope we talk many times on rb. Thanks again for the post.
regards
lyla.
P.S: please call me lyla, won't you? That request goes to viplav too.
thanks.
good night rbites. Don't let the bed bugs bite.
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Kamesh
> On the other hand, some of the best examples of literature (IMHO
> only) are unabashed propaganda. Just to cite a few -
Let me also give it a try(may not be the best though!).
తియ్యవిల్కాడు వింట సంధించి విడిచె
అక్షయంబైన సమ్మోహనాశుగమ్ము
గౌరి కడకంటి చూపుతో కలసిపోయి
గుచ్చుకొనెనవి ముక్కంటి గుండెలోన!
ఖది ధూప్మె అప్నె ఘర్సె నికల్న
వొహ్ చిదియ వ్హొ బుల్బుల్, వ్హొ తిత్లి పకద్న
వొహ్ గుదియ కి షాది పె లద్న ఝగద్న
వొహ్ ఝులొ సె గిర్న వ్హొ గిర్కె సంభల్న
వొహ్ పితల్ కె చ్హల్లొ కె ప్యరెసె తొహ్ఫె
వొహ్ తూతి హుఇ చుదియొ కి నిషాని
If some definition of poetry does not categorize them as poetry, I
would humbly reject such a definition. For me, as a reader, they are
heart-touching poetry (and poetry is a part of literature, is it
not?).
If one brings in some politics into them or sees some political
propoganda behind them or proves that those poets are political
ativists, I don't care. Because, I do not need to understand those
politics to enjoy them (infact, I doubt if I would still enjoy them
if I understand those politics).
regards,
Kameswara Rao.
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
lylayer
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
>
>> To me, the only legitimate purpose of analysing literature (or for
> that matter, anything at all in life) is to understand its impact
on
> its targeted audience.
Does this mean if a poet had written in his poem,some thing like -
'you people are rotten, your life is useless, it is better to die,
there is nothing to live for etc.'
then the analysis is to see - how many people got the message,
realised their life is shot, how much percentage went into deep
depression, and how many ended their life- is that how the analysis
is done?
>
> If we look at literature not from the writer or the critic's
> perspective, but from the reader's perspective, every dimension on
> which we can objectively measure and rate that literature resolves
> itself to a political question - whether or not it is overtly so
> recognized.
who is measuring here? The writers and the critics or the readers?
what is being measured? give a few examples here, how it happens. Do
not conclude while the discussion had just barely started.
>
> The redeeming value of this poem is its resounding affirmation of a
> particular world view. Written in the sixties, it has a chilling
> prophecy that forecasts the suicides of the cotton farmers, the
> tragedies of Bhopal and Gujarat, and the rape of the economy by the
> multi nationals, all of which are sad yet undeniable facts of
today's
> India. అమ్మా భారతీ, నీ గమ్యం ఏమిటి తల్లీ?
You sure it is not a self fullfilling prophecy? You sure pessimistic
writers are not the cause of some down turns of economy, creation of
chaos, driving people to suicides, over powering the economists who
can think solutions, other professionals who can build bridges,
buildings, who can lay down real roads for safe travel, doctors who
heal real diseases etc.
Are politicians and political poets in cohoots? Do poets want people
to shout empty slogans, tear their shirts, throw stones, and spend
their energies that way? If so why?
>
> >
> "ప్రజల్ని సాయుధులని చేస్తున్న రివల్యూషనరీ నేడు కవి".
>
> In my own poem, this is how I tried to present this perspective -
>
> "ప్రతి అక్షరం దుందుభిలా మ్రోగినప్పుడు మాత్రమే
> కవిత్వం నినాదమవుతుంది
> నినాదమై పోరు బాటలోని బాటసారికి బాసటగా నిలిచినప్పుడే
> అక్షరం సార్థకమవుతుంది"
>
> what in the world does the above poetry mean? what is the
perspective being presented? what weapons is the poet giving to the
people and for what purpose. How can each letter become a drum and
what shout is it sending out? who is the traveller? what is the
fight? what hand is the poet giving the traveller?
then may be i can understand whether the అక్షరం the కవిథ్వం
and కవి is successful. Only because you said you are trying to
present a perspective. I am all ears. tell me again.
So poets are visionaries and revolutionaries ? Ha. big job. no
credentials required. No law suits either. just take the credit and
fake fame , spread the blame and flame. Just feel powerful and make
the gullibles miserable. Who knows for how long? But again telugu
literature is the best, and India is always the leader, and విస్వ
మానవ స్రేయస్సే భారత సాహిత్య లకష్యము. some such grand scheme
like that.
It looks like some people ( sorry! poets, writers) who don't know
their way to the bathroom, are trying to show some people the way to
the grand ball room!
regards
lyla.
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
lylayer
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "srini_nagul" <srini_nagul@y...>
wrote:
>
>
> > సాహిత్యం గురించి మాట్లాడుతూ, అందునా తెలుగు సాహిత్యం గురించి
> చర్చిస్తూ, తెలుగు రచయితల దృక్పథాలను విమర్శిస్తూ,
సమర్థిస్తూ,
> ఇక చెప్పకనే చెప్పుకొస్తున్న పాఠకుల అభిరుచులను గమనిస్తూ,
> ఎక్కువగా, కాదు, మిక్కిలీ ఎక్కువగా, తెలుగులో కాక, ఇంగ్లీషులోనే
> దీనినంతా సాగించడం కొంత వింతగానే కాక, కొట్టొచ్చినంత
> వ్యంగ్యంగానూ ఉంది.
ఓహ్! ఒర్ పెతేస్ సకె శ్.ణ్:
ఈ థౌఘ్త్ ఇ వస్ థె ఒన్ల్య్ హొర్సె, థత్ దోస్ బచ్క్ త్రొత్తింగ్. ఈత్ ఇస్ అ నొ
నొ ఇన్ aSvadhATi.
ఠిస్ దిస్చుస్సిఒన్ ఇస్ అల్రీద్య్ గల్లొపింగ్, థెరె ఇస్ నొ రిదెర్, నొ రైన్స్,
ప్రెత్త్య్ సూన్ థె హొర్సె జుంప్స్ అ ఫెన్సె తూ హిఘ్, అంద్ వె హవె తొ షూత్
థె హొర్సె.
థె దిస్చుస్సిఒన్ ఇస్ ఒన్ 'పొలితిచల్ విఎవ్ పొఇంత్స్ ఇన్ లితెరతురె.' ప్లీసె
చొర్రెచ్త్ ఇఫ్ థె త్రన్స్లతిఒన్ ఇస్ నొత్ రిఘ్త్. ఠత్ మీన్స్ ఇత్ చన్ ఇంచ్లుదె
అన్య్ లితెరతురె ఇన్ అన్య్ లంగూగె అంద్ వె చన్ దిస్చుస్స్ ఇన్ అన్య్ లంగూగె. ర్బ్
పెర్మిత్స్ దిస్చుస్సిఒన్స్ ఇన్ తెలుగు అంద్ ఎంగ్లిష్. వ్హెన్ వె వ్రితె ఇఫ్ ఔర్
లెత్తెర్స్ ఔతొమతిచల్ల్య్ అప్పీర్ ఇన్ తెలుగు మన్య్ ఒఫ్ ఉస్ విల్ల్ బె వ్రితింగ్ ఇన్
తెలుగు. వె దొణ్త్ హవె ఇత్ అంద్ వె మయ్ నొత్ హవె ఇత్ సూన్, బెచౌసె వె హవె
ఋట్శ్.
ఝుస్త్ అన్ అనెచ్దొతె - ఈన్ శ్రి శ్రీస్ ఎస్సయ్స్ అంద్ రెవిఎవ్స్ - థె పూర్ మన్
హద్ సొమె ప్రొబ్లెం విథ్ వ్ణౄస్ థెసిస్. ఠె ఉనివెర్సిత్య్ రెగిస్త్రర్ సెంత్ హిం
అ లెత్తెర్ సైంగ్ థె తిత్లె ఒఫ్ వ్ణౄస్ వొర్క్ ఇస్ "రెవొలుతిఒన్ ఇన్ మొదెర్న్
తెలుగు పోత్ర్య్" అంద్ హె గొత్ ఎకష్చితెద్ అంద్ అగ్రీద్ తొ బె థె ఎక్షమినెర్- హె
సయ్స్. వ్హెన్ ఇత్ అర్రివెద్ థె తిత్లె ఇన్ తెల్గు వస్ telugulO kavitA
viplava svarUpaM.. ఇ అం గ్లద్ వ్ణృ గొత్ హిస్ దొచ్తొరతె, అంద్ థెయ్ దిద్ నొత్
అస్క్ హిం తొ రెవ్రితె థె వ్హొలె థెసిస్ తొ సుఇత్ థె రెగిస్త్రర్ ఒర్ శ్రి శ్రి.
ఇఫ్ వె చన్ థింక్ స్త్రైఘ్త్ అంద్ ఎకష్ప్రెస్స్ ఔర్సెల్వెస్, ఇన్ సొమె లంగూగె థత్
ఇత్సెల్ఫ్ ఇస్ గూద్. నౌ అత్ హొమె ఇ అం వ్రితింగ్ దౌన్ మ్య్ ఎంగ్లిష్ మెస్సగెస్ ఇన్
తెలుగు, మ్య్ తెలుగు మెస్సగెస్ ఇన్ ఋట్శ్. ఈ అం అ మెస్స్. reMditiki kAdu
mUDitiki ceDDA rEvaDini
ఠె వీథెర్ ఇస్ గ్రీత్ హెరె అంద్ ఈ అం గొఇంగ్ తొ గొ రిదె మ్య్ బికె.
హవె ఫున్ ర్బితెస్.
ల్య్ల.
రొం స్రీనధ్గ్... శత్ ణొవ్ 06 13:32:52 2004
ఋఎతుర్న్-ఫథ్: <స్రీనధ్గ్...>
ఋఎచైవెద్: (మైల్ 36895 ఇన్వొకెద్ ఫ్రొం నెత్వొర్క్); 6 ణొవ్ 2004 21:32:51 -0000
ఋఎచైవెద్: ఫ్రొం ఉంక్నౌన్ (66.218.66.217)
బ్య్ మ్22.గ్ర్ప్.స్చ్ద్.యహూ.చొం విథ్ ంఫ్; 6 ణొవ్ 2004 21:32:51 -0000
ఋఎచైవెద్: ఫ్రొం ఉంక్నౌన్ (హేళో న్14అ.బుల్క్.స్చ్ద్.యహూ.చొం) (66.94.237.28)
బ్య్ ంత2.గ్ర్ప్.స్చ్ద్.యహూ.చొం విథ్ శ్ంట్ఫ్; 6 ణొవ్ 2004 21:32:51 -0000
ఋఎచైవెద్: ఫ్రొం [66.218.66.59] బ్య్ న్14.బుల్క్.స్చ్ద్.యహూ.చొం విథ్ ణ్ణ్ంఫ్; 06 ణొవ్ 2004 21:32:50 -0000
ఋఎచైవెద్: ఫ్రొం [66.218.67.154] బ్య్ మైలెర్8.బుల్క్.స్చ్ద్.యహూ.చొం విథ్ ణ్ణ్ంఫ్; 06 ణొవ్ 2004 21:32:50 -0000
-శెందెర్: స్రీనధ్గ్...
-ఆప్పరెంత్ల్య్-టొ: రచ్చబందయహూగ్రౌప్స్.చొం
ఋఎచైవెద్: (మైల్ 71809 ఇన్వొకెద్ ఫ్రొం నెత్వొర్క్); 6 ణొవ్ 2004 21:14:08 -0000
ఋఎచైవెద్: ఫ్రొం ఉంక్నౌన్ (66.218.66.166)
బ్య్ మ్16.గ్ర్ప్.స్చ్ద్.యహూ.చొం విథ్ ంఫ్; 6 ణొవ్ 2004 21:14:08 -0000
ఋఎచైవెద్: ఫ్రొం ఉంక్నౌన్ (హేళో ంత9.స్ర్వ్.హ్చ్వ్ల్న్య్.చ్వ్.నెత్) (167.206.5.42)
బ్య్ ంత5.గ్ర్ప్.స్చ్ద్.యహూ.చొం విథ్ శ్ంట్ఫ్; 6 ణొవ్ 2004 21:14:08 -0000
ఋఎచైవెద్: ఫ్రొం శ్రీనధ్దెల్ల్ (ఊల్-18బ్9298ద్.ద్య్న్.ఒప్తొన్లినె.నెత్ [24.185.41.141])
బ్య్ ంత9.స్ర్వ్.హ్చ్వ్ల్న్య్.చ్వ్.నెత్
(ఇఫ్లనెత్ ంఎస్సగింగ్ శెర్వెర్ 5.2 హొత్ఇకష్ 1.25 (బుఇల్త్ ంఅర్ 3 2004))
విథ్ శ్ంట్ఫ్ ఇద్ <0ఈ6శ్00ఛ్1శ్0భ్ఝ్శ్ఘ్ఁ...> ఫొర్
రచ్చబందయహూగ్రౌప్స్.చొం; శత్, 06 ణొవ్ 2004 16:14:07 -0500 (ఏశ్ట్)
డతె: శత్, 06 ణొవ్ 2004 16:14:15 -0500
టొ: రచ్చబందయహూగ్రౌప్స్.చొం
ంఎస్సగె-ఇద్: <008501చ్4చ్445$91ఫ్003ఫ్0$1108అ8చ్0శ్రీనధ్దెల్ల్>
ంఈంఏ-వెర్సిఒన్: 1.0
-ంఈంఏఓళే: ఫ్రొదుచెద్ భ్య్ ంఇచ్రొసొఫ్త్ ంఇమెఓళే వ్6.00.2800.1441
-ంఐలెర్: ంఇచ్రొసొఫ్త్ ఓఉత్లూక్ ఏకష్ప్రెస్స్ 6.00.2800.1437
ఛొంతెంత్-త్య్పె: తెకష్త్/ప్లైన్; చర్సెత్=ఇసొ-8859-1
ఛొంతెంత్-త్రన్స్ఫెర్-ఎంచొదింగ్: 7భీట్
-ఫ్రిఒరిత్య్: 3
-ంశ్ంఐల్-ప్రిఒరిత్య్: ణొర్మల్
ఋఎఫెరెంచెస్: <20041106181021.10475.మైల్వ్...>
-ఎఘ్రౌప్స్-ఋఎమొతె-ఈఫ్: 167.206.5.42
రొం: శ్రీనధ్ ఝొన్నవిథుల <స్రీనధ్గ్...>
శుబ్జెచ్త్: చొప్య్రిఘ్త్ అంద్ సుచ్
-అహూ-ఘ్రౌప్-ఫొస్త్: మెంబెర్; ఉ=111258987
-అహూ-ఫ్రొఫిలె: జ్స్రీనధ్
-అహూ-ణెవ్మన్-ఫ్రొపెర్త్య్: గ్రౌప్స్-స్య్స్తెం
-ఎఘ్రౌప్స్-ఆప్ప్రొవెద్-భ్య్: స్రీనిపరుచురి <స్రీనిగ్...> వీ వెబ్; 06 ణొవ్ 2004 21:32:50 -0000
-ఎఘ్రౌప్స్-ఋఎమొతె-ఈఫ్: 66.94.237.28
-ఋభ్-ంఎస్సగె-ణుం: 10622
----- ఓరిగినల్ ంఎస్సగె -----
రొం: "ఝ్. ఖ్. ంఒహన ఋఅఒ" <జ్క్మ్రఒయ్...>
> ** ళెత్ ఉస్ అల్సొ నొత్ ఫొర్గెత్ థత్ అల్ల్ థె అర్తిచ్లెస్ అంద్
> మెస్సగెస్ వె పుబ్లిష్ ఒన్ థె ఇంతెర్నెత్ అరె చొప్య్రిఘ్తెద్.
> ణొబొద్య్ చన్ రెప్రొదుచె థెం విథౌత్ పెర్మిస్సిఒన్. **
ఠిస్ ఇస్ తెచ్నిచల్ల్య్ త్రుఎ ఇన్ థె ఊశ్ ఫొర్ అన్య్ ఒరిగినల్ వొర్క్ చ్రీతెద్ అఫ్తెర్ ఆప్రిల్
1 1989 (సీ "10 భిగ్ ంయ్థ్స్ అబౌత్ చొప్య్రిఘ్త్ ఎకష్ప్లైనెద్"
హ్త్త్ప్://వ్వ్వ్.తెంప్లెతొన్స్.చొం/బ్రద్/చొప్య్మ్య్థ్స్.హ్త్మ్ల్ ), బుత్ ఇత్ ఇస్ చౌంతెర్
ఇంతుఇతివె; ఆన్ అవెరగె పెర్సొన్ వౌల్ద్ అస్సుమె థత్ అన్య్థింగ్ పొస్తెద్ తొ అ పుబ్లిచ్
గ్రౌప్ విథౌత్ ఎకష్ప్లిచిత్ చొప్య్రిఘ్త్ నొతిచెస్ ఇస్ ఫ్రీ తొ రెఉసె; సొ పెర్హప్స్ థె
ఎదితొర్స్ వెరె గుఇల్త్య్ మొరె ఒఫ్ ఒవెర్సిఘ్త్ థన్ చ్రిమినల్ ఇంతెంత్.
వ్హెన్ ఈ నీద్ తొ రెపుబ్లిష్ అర్తిచ్లెస్ ఫ్రొం ఋభ్ ఒర్ ఒథెర్ భ్భ్శ్ ఒర్ వెబ్సితెస్, ఈ దొ
సీక్ పెర్మిస్సిఒన్ (అంద్ చరెఫుల్ల్య్ సవె థె రెస్పొన్సెస్, ఇన్ చసె థెరె ఇస్ అ లతెర్
ఉఎస్తిఒన్); బుత్ ఈ అం చురిఔస్ అత్ థె వెహెమెంచె ఒఫ్ ంఒహన ఋఅఒ గరూస్ రెస్పొన్సె.
వె కీప్ హీరింగ్ ఫ్రొం థె మొదెరతొర్స్ అబౌత్ హౌ థౌసంద్స్ ఒఫ్ పెఒప్లె రీద్
పొస్తింగ్స్ ఒన్ ఋభ్. శెరిఔస్ల్య్, హౌ మన్య్ మొరె పెఒప్లె దొ యౌ థింక్ వౌల్ద్ సీ థెసె
అర్తిచ్లెస్ ఇన్ థిస్ భువనవిజయం ఫొర్ థె ఫిర్స్త్ తిమె? ఈఫ్ ఇత్ వస్ ఒకయ్ ఫొర్ థెసె
థౌసంద్స్ తొ సీ ఇత్, వ్హెరె ఇస్ థె హర్ం (ఒథెర్ థన్ థె త్య్పొస్ ఇంత్రొదుచెద్
ఇనద్వెర్తంత్ల్య్)?
భెసిదెస్, సెవెరల్ తిమెస్ ఇన్ థె పస్త్, పొస్త్స్ హవె బీన్ మదె (థౌఘ్త్ నొత్ బ్య్
ంఒహనరఒ గరు) చితింగ్ ఋభ్ పొస్త్స్ థత్ అప్పీరెద్ ఇన్ మైన్స్త్రీం టెలుగు
మగజినెస్; ణొ ఒనె ఒబ్జెచ్తెద్ థెన్;
ంయ్ పెర్సొనల్ ఫీలింగ్ ఇస్ థత్ ఫ్రీ రెఉసె, ఎస్పెచీల్ల్య్ ఒఫ్ ఇంతెర్నెత్ పొస్తింగ్స్, ఇస్
అకిన్ తొ ఫ్రీ స్పీచ్. ఈఫ్ సొమెఒనె తకెస్ అ పొసితిఒన్ ఒర్ మకెస్ అ స్తతెమెంత్,
థెయ్ ఇంప్లిచిత్ల్య్ మీన్ ఫొర్ అస్ మన్య్ పెఒప్లె అస్ పొస్సిబ్లె తొ హీర్ థత్ స్తతెమెంత్.
ఈ ఎకష్ప్లిచిత్ల్య్ రెనౌంచె అన్య్ చొప్య్రిఘ్త్స్ ఒన్ మ్య్ ఔన్ పొస్తింగ్స్ (థౌఘ్ ఈ దౌబ్త్ ఇఫ్
అన్యొనె వౌల్ద్ వంత్ తొ రెపుబ్లిష్ థెసె :( ; ఈ చల్ల్ ఉపొన్ థె మొదెరతొర్స్ తొ
మకె థిస్ థె పొలిచ్య్ ఒఫ్ థె గ్రౌప్, థత్ అన్య్ పొస్తింగ్స్ మదె తొ థిస్ బోర్ద్ అరె
ఫ్రీ ఫొర్ రెపుబ్లిచతిఒన్, ఐథెర్ ఒన్లినె ఒర్ ఒఫ్ఫ్లినె, ప్రొవిదెద్ అన్
అచ్క్నౌలెద్గెమెంత్ ఇస్ మదె తొ ఋభ్ అంద్ తొ థె ఒరిగినల్ ఔథొర్(స్).
శించెరెల్య్
శ్రీనధ్
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Hemantha Kumar
Having moved quite a bit with the "working poor" most of them rural folk too I would agree with Mr.VNR.
The native wisdom or the tastes cannot be simply classified as being "NOT UPTO THE OTHER LEVEL"
Here too the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar
Velcheru Narayana Rao <vnrao@w...> wrote:
<snip>
You seem to be saying, tell me if I didn't understand you right, that working poor cannot be expected to have a refined taste, because they are disillusioned with the world around them. I agree their taste is different from the leisure class, but it is refined all the same.
I have spent many years working in folklore, talking to people who sing songs and tell stories, farmhands working in fields, women who transplant and harvest,untouchables who sing epics, and children in rags who tell stories. I spent time with artisans, cowherds, beggars, and itinerant singers.
<snip>
vnr
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
srini_nagul
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
> And I thought that the epicenter of this earthquake was in
>Florida ;-)
You are still referring to the last one :-) This time it isn't
Florida, it shifted to Ohio :-)
> Speaking of pOtana, lately I have been consoling myself and
lifting
> my "spirits" with the motto "సత్కవుల్ హాలికులైననేమి,
> ఆల్కహాలికులైననేమి?"
Good one!
With best regards
-Srinivas
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
> Now, isn't that saying itself trying to impose (I say 'express')
> *that* view? Also, I don't understand what this imposing views
on
> others is all about. Doesn't that assume others have nothing
much
> in their heads to analyse, sift, accept or even reject any views
> they encounter?? Or does views become rocks that others feel
> imposed to carry to their tombs?
I am not the one saying we shouldnt "impose" our views on others - on
the contrary, my argument is that there is nothing wrong with some
one trying to use literature as a means of propaganda - I am saying
that there is a contradiction in the argument that no one should
impose their views on others, because this argument then is in itself
an imposition.
And yes, as you rightly point out, the argument that there should be
no politics in literature assumes that the readers do not have the
capacity to sift the wheat from the chaff.
> This discussion reminds me of my nostalgic and precious school
> assembly experience. All class teachers would go about shouting
> "Keep Quiet" or "Silence"! Everyone is looking for silence, but
> they were all shouting "Silence"! Only my teacher would keep
> silent and we thought he is getting too old to shout like others
> and even poked fun at him. It took me years (or seems like
> births!) to understand him and venerate him now. There were many
> people shouting anyway, and he just remained silent, so as not
to
> add to sounds any more and setting an example for us to figure
it,
> which sadly, took more than decade for me atleast to get it.
> Yet, I think he was successful in making us get it. Why? I do
not
> even remember now who all shouted at their loudest pitch then.
> How I wish I could tell him now, but he is no more. May be he
would
> have smiled just as silently.
>
> Regards
> -Srinivas
Great story! Do I have your permission to quote this story in future
discussions :-)?
To apply this to the present context, however, I will reverse the
paradigm - the need of the hour is not silence, but the ability of
people to speak up. Too many people are silently watching the world
around them crumble.
Regards,
Uday
PS: After many long weeks, I finally have a Friday almost to myself,
so am bombarding RB with more than my allotted daily quota of posts.
విజ్ఞులు మన్నిస్తారని భావిస్తాను.
From uday_shivani@h... Fri Nov 05 08:51:36 2004
Return-Path: <uday_shivani@h...>
Received: (qmail 62714 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 16:51:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
by m25.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 16:51:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n18a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.47)
by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 16:51:36 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.2] by n18.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:51:35 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.149] by mailer2.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:51:35 -0000
X-Sender: uday_shivani@h...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 35327 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 16:43:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 16:43:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n13a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.24)
by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 16:43:09 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.3] by n13.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:43:05 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.144] by mailer3.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:43:05 -0000
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:42:55 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cmgai...@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <cmg91...@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1563
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.24
From: "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
X-Originating-IP: 206.208.224.161
Subject: Re: సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=51289183
X-Yahoo-Profile: harita_n
X-eGroups-Approved-By: vcjampala <cjampala@g...> via web; 05 Nov 2004 16:51:34 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.47
X-RB-Message-Num: 10591
>
> Enjoyed your post. Not averse to the discussion.
>
> (recent "the new yorker' festival in october had a panel discussion
> on literature and politics. Did not get to this festival. was
trying
> to follow some of it on book tv- c span. have you followed any of
it?)
>
Lyla garu, my apologies if I gave the impression of being a serious
culture vulture ;-). Lately, my participation in any kind of
intellectual discourse has been confined to watching the Daily Show
with my daughter and discussing the subtleties of Jon Stewart's world
view.
I was aware of the fact that the New Yorker held their annual
festival only because I happened to tune into NPR and heard some
discussion about the panel discussion on the media's role in missing
the story on the Iraq war (at least that was my impression of what
that discussion was all about).
Thanks for giving me the pointer that they did have a panel
discussion on a topic that is dear to my heart. I will try and catch
this somewhere on the internet or, as you say, on c span (or may be
it will eventually find its way to comedy central ;-)). Will be
grateful if you can send me any links on it.
> (sorry, i already erased the rest of the your message,lazy to bring
> it back, can not quote correctly, but sure Satya is wrong on this
> one. :-).)
>
> that is all for now.
> regards.
> lyla.
My wife - who finds herself in great company, btw - has told me
several times that the world is a better place for what has been
erased from my writings, so no harm done ;-)
Regards,
Uday
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Narasimham Paranandi
srini_nagul <srini_nagul@y...> wrote:
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:Oh, come on, cheer up! World has always been like this, we will survive! If you still feel world is crumbling, come to Florida, read Pothana, invite RB to your house (oh that last one may really make you see it crumble!:-) !:-) :-) >.With warm regards >-Srinivas
What! If you invite Racchabanda to your house, does it really make you see WORLD CRUBMBLING? How does it do it?
No! I will not invite RB in that case, if it is true.
Moderators! Is it true? Please let me know.
Regards
--pAlana
To Post a message, send it to: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
srini_nagul
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
> I would urge you to consider this - if you are of the belief that
> no one should impose their views on others, then in all fairness,
> you should not try and impose that view on any one else - right?
Now, isn't that saying itself trying to impose (I say 'express')
*that* view? Also, I don't understand what this imposing views on
others is all about. Doesn't that assume others have nothing much
in their heads to analyse, sift, accept or even reject any views
they encounter?? Or does views become rocks that others feel
imposed to carry to their tombs?
This discussion reminds me of my nostalgic and precious school
assembly experience. All class teachers would go about shouting
"Keep Quiet" or "Silence"! Everyone is looking for silence, but
they were all shouting "Silence"! Only my teacher would keep
silent and we thought he is getting too old to shout like others
and even poked fun at him. It took me years (or seems like
births!) to understand him and venerate him now. There were many
people shouting anyway, and he just remained silent, so as not to
add to sounds any more and setting an example for us to figure it,
which sadly, took more than decade for me atleast to get it.
Yet, I think he was successful in making us get it. Why? I do not
even remember now who all shouted at their loudest pitch then.
How I wish I could tell him now, but he is no more. May be he would
have smiled just as silently.
Regards
-Srinivas
From lylayfl@a... Fri Nov 05 08:20:02 2004
Return-Path: <lylayfl@a...>
Received: (qmail 63154 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 16:20:02 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
by m21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 16:20:02 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n10a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.44)
by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 16:20:02 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.5] by n10.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:19:28 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.115] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:19:28 -0000
X-Sender: lylayfl@a...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 46641 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 16:16:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167)
by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 16:16:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n15a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.32)
by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 16:16:56 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.58] by n15.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:16:50 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.168] by mailer7.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:16:50 -0000
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:16:49 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cmg91...@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <cme06...@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1124
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.32
From: "lylayer" <lylayfl@a...>
X-Originating-IP: 24.106.120.66
Subject: Re: సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=147474383
X-Yahoo-Profile: lylayer
X-eGroups-Approved-By: sreeniparuchuri <sreeni@g...> via web; 05 Nov 2004 16:19:27 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.44
X-RB-Message-Num: 10589
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
>
>
> Friends,
>
> I am not sure if this is the appropriate forum (or for that matter
if
> there is an appropriate forum left anywhere anymore to discuss this
> topic ;-)), but several recent posts and long discussions
encouraged
> me to start this new topic. Hope RBers will indulge me and engage
in
> this dialogue.
>
>
Enjoyed your post. Not averse to the discussion.
(recent "the new yorker' festival in october had a panel discussion
on literature and politics. Did not get to this festival. was trying
to follow some of it on book tv- c span. have you followed any of it?)
rechecking your definitions. reflecting on the topic. will discuss.
disagree with satya who is seeing parodox in your statement ' that to
say there should be no politics in liter.... is in itself
political ..'. It may sound parodoxical but it is really not. :-)
(sorry, i already erased the rest of the your message,lazy to bring
it back, can not quote correctly, but sure Satya is wrong on this
one. :-).)
that is all for now.
regards.
lyla.
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
viplavreddy
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
>
> The American Heritage Dictionary defines politics as "The often
> internally conflicting interrelationships among people in a
society".
>
> And literature is a relection, an interpretation, and hopefully, an
> attempt at resolution, of these "internally conflicting
> interrelationships among people in the society". From this
> perspective, I believe that there is no such thing as literature
that
> is not political.
I will switch here from previous link to this since this looks like
the `blue light special' of the day.
I am not going to pick what I like and pan what I don't, from Uday's
message. I think he should rethink his perspective and would like to
know if he still maintains the same after reading what I have to say
below.
There is a fundamental flaw in the way I put my argument earlier:
accepting a specific ideology in literature is fine & VNR said that
too. But treating as if IT is a person (human) and bend it or taint
it with all the flaws that are usual to humans, as I argued
previously is a flawed idea. Perhaps those who were able to
understand it and contest it kept silent, which does not mean the
idea has merit.
A Literary work is not a person – it should not have multiple
personalities. It can not say one thing and move on to the next or
do another, unless it is a technique used to make a point - (people
on the other hand can & will). This idea is exclusively Indian, may
be, that we forgive most faults from people, likewise confuse a
literary work with the person. Forgiving a fault in literature is a
democratic idea which is a death sentence to literature. ------- I
think here is where the idea of having good editors/copy editors
comes into play, without that stream developing who can stand up to
the self-absorbed, egotistical writers we will not be making any
progress.
vaemana padyaM would not be the same if it began with ఆత్మశుద్ధిలేని
యాచారమదియేల and ended with ఆచారమౌనకన్న మిన్న
మరిలేదురన్న -- contradiction is possible in humans but we should
not extend the same to a work they seek to create, especially if it
must last a while.
Ideologies people embrace change from time to time (minute by minute)
based on political relationships/jockying for positions. I can be a
subscriber to a form of buddhism. I can also talk about
daLitavaadaM. I can be a feminist. I can be a communist, marxist,
maoist, leninist or belong to any color within that spectrum. As a
person belonging to that spectrum I will be accepted in general as a
left-leaning person. Similar varieties are available on the right
wing. That is not enough for good literature. In order to become
the best, it must define precisely where it belongs. Speak in those
terms. Express in exact ways. If done correctly, it may not evoke
any passion as is seen from mediocre literature whose motive is just
that. And it does represent a failure in the work if evoking passion
is the sole self absorbed idea. We call these works the time-pass
afternoon shows/never ending soap serials.
What do you think now?
BTW, Uday forgot/ignored, తిత్తినిండా గాలి పొత్తంగ వున్నాది
నిప్పారిపోనీకు నారాయణా to his examples. Ok, ok - it is
raamannaa, but ramannaa is no where to be seen. I think VNR lit the
fire, at least in this forum. More wanted - from him.
Regards, viplav
PS. I never needed a devil's advocate, I can do it better myself.
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Velcheru Narayana Rao
Apologies to the RBites who are active on this thread. I missed a number of
posts and might
sound irrelevant. Correct me if am.
Literature is not above politics and I agree, everything is political. But
then that's saying the
obvious. Good literature allows itself to politically analyzed, but then it
is not the most satisfactory analysis, partly because
it does not exhaust its meaning.
Another danger is reading politics in good literature is that the reader
arrives at an easy conclusion that all its says is subsumed in
its politics. Political analysis is helpful, even necessary, but it kills
literature if it is done badly. and my experience tells me it is easy to do
it badly.
We have a huge body of political poems -- which unfortunately are not poems
to begin with. Propaganda is great if it is done by a great poet.
or it stinks.
Cerabandaraju's Vandemataram is brought into discussion. It is a good poem
because of its irony, The political understanding that forms the basis
of the poem is shallow, simplistic, and rhetorical. But it works as a poem.
The contradiction in the poem of calling the mother
a goddess and then again a whore does the trick. The salutation Vande
Mataram changes meaning from respect to ridicule, from pride to pathos. as
the tone of the poem changes from stanza to stanza.
There very few overtly political poems that sustain your attention beyond
the outburst of their slogans.
And a personal note. I don't disown anything, I am still very political,
but maturely so, hopefully.
vnr
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
lylayer
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Kamesh" <kamesh_b@y...> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On the other hand, some of the best examples of literature (IMHO
> > only) are unabashed propaganda. Just to cite a few -
>
> Let me also give it a try(may not be the best though!).
> >
> ఖది ధూప్మె అప్నె ఘర్సె నికల్న
> వొహ్ చిదియ వ్హొ బుల్బుల్, వ్హొ తిత్లి పకద్న
> వొహ్ గుదియ కి షాది పె లద్న ఝగద్న
> వొహ్ ఝులొ సె గిర్న వ్హొ గిర్కె సంభల్న
>>
దోస్త్ , i love that song.
ఏ దౌలత్ భి లె లో ఏ షొహరత్ భి లే లో
మగర్ ముఝ్కొ లౌటా దే బచ్పన్ కి బాతే?
ఒ కాగజ్ కి కష్తీ ఓ బారిష్ క పానీ...
How i love that song! there are gaps in my memory, but what a song!
>
> If some definition of poetry does not categorize them as poetry, I
> would humbly reject such a definition. For me, as a reader, they
are
> heart-touching poetry (and poetry is a part of literature, is it
> not?).
> If one brings in some politics into them or sees some political
> propoganda behind them or proves that those poets are political
> ativists, I don't care. Because, I do not need to understand those
> politics to enjoy them (infact, I doubt if I would still enjoy them
> if I understand those politics).
>
I guess then you are a decadent reader like me! :-) who feels no
responsibility towards the writer/poet or society.
No, I will let you off the hook. I will not put that stamp on you.
Let me call myself as a decadent reader.:-)
I love to read "Walden" lying in a comfortable four poster bed, under
a light down comforter, and read his views on economy and admire his
general philosophy of - 'simplify, simplify.' In other words I love
Thoreau, in my decadent way.
But I do think that his premature death in the age of 40s is
preventable, and some of his experiments with life, might have led to
it. I think it is bad for Thoreau to die so early. But Uday may say
Thoreau sacrificed himself for me, you and several unknown people
and left some great writings behind. Who knows who is right? I am
not going to have the suffering or guilt of all these peoples'
sacrifices. I did not ask for them. I will continue to enjoy their
writings if they appeal to me, for what ever reasons.
But who loves Thoreau more? Uday or me? Who will know the answer to
that question?
s_pamarty
Dear All:
It's just been a few days since I read the posts last and find that a
lot of water has flowed under the bridge already. As I was standing
under the bridge, some of it has been flowing over my head. Literally,
I am ashamed to say that some of what I have been reading lately has
been over my head. :-)
As usual, that doesn't stop me from saying what I don't have to say.
Before the start of this exercise (of defining literature) itself, we
should collate some background information concerning straight forward
properties of literature and literary structure. In particular, we
need to state precisely how various literary elements and objects will
be uniformly continuous with respect to the metric used to define
them. These elements ought to be standard and widely known, although
not stated in literature in quite the form used for the purpose.
Doing this involves solving a parameter dependent multifaceted and
monolithic nature of literature. For this, two sorts of analysis need
to be used. The first is local analysis and the second is global
analysis. The global analysis should be performed with a lowering of
bounds for literary linearisation i.r.t local analysis. This will
later need to be followed by a comparative study with changing values
of the variable, viz., time.
An approximate solution can then be constructed out of the comparative
metrics and an uncertain number of uncertainties can certainly be
ascertained.
A similar analysis should be applied to the exercise of defining
politics. After the results of both analysis are available, they can
be looked at to see if any harmonic function on the surface can be
achieved between the two. The invariance of flux for such a coordinate
function can probably be thought of as a definition and could then be
embedded in our dictionaries as the definition of either of the two.
Whew! That's it. Once we do the above, we will be through, and lo and
behold, we will have the word "literature" and its purposes defined in
crystal clear terms.
I know that there is no place for me in the beginning or end of any
discussion on literature, but I thought there was some space for me in
the muddle. :-)
Please continue having fun!
With best wishes
satya
P.S.: If you didn't understand what I said above, that makes it two of
us (at least) ;-)
Disclaimer: All that said above is for fun only and analysts are
dissuaded in all sincerety from not using the methodology suggested
above. All analysts are requested to disregard professional analytical
advice, or delay in seeking it, because of something they have read
above. They are urged to rely on information above in place of seeking
professional advice. ;-)
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
s_pamarty
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...> wrote:
-----
In other words, the argument that there should be no political
propaganda in literature is in itself a political propaganda.
-----
How interesting!
In other words:
To say that there is no law in literature is in itself propounding
another law.
To say that I never spoke a lie is in itself another lie.
To say that I never spoke the truth is in itself another truth.
To say that that this argument is not for the better is something in
itself for the better.
To say that people should not follow any school is in itself a school
to follow.
After this clever argument from SrI uday, I must confess that I am
more confused now than I ever was. Where is the catch in the paradox
here? ;-)
With best wishes
Satya
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "vcjampala" <cjampala@g...> wrote:
>
> --- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "s_pamarty" <pamarty@h...>
wrote:
>
> > In other words:
> >
> > To say that there is no law in literature is in itself propounding
> > another law.
>
> I am reminded of the venerable playwright, who defined, "The
golden
> rule is that there is no golden Rule".
>
> And of JK, who apparently exhorted people not to follow the
> exhortations of the various Gurus.
>
> Regards -- V. chowdary Jampala
And then, of course, there is the Anarchist Manifesto. It consists of
two pages.
Page 1 says "There shall be no rules to be followed".
Page 2 says "You dont have to follow the rule on page 1".
harita_n
> > math simple :-) Yes, it is really my preposterous ignorance to
> > assume that Sri Uday gAri house cannot hold all of them, and
will
> > fall nothing short of crumbling, if they all eagerly show up!:-
)
> > I leave it to Sri Uday gAru to speak up if I am way off!:-)
> >
> > Enjoying the show of 'world crumbling' discussion :-)
> >
> > With best regards
> > -Srinivas
అయ్యా! కొంప దీసారు! (There we again, bringing the house down!).
వినీల్ గారి కోరికపై ఈ సారి కృష్ణశాస్త్రి గారినించి మొదలెడతాను నా
గ్రంథ చౌర్యం - కూర్చుండ మా యింట కుర్చీలైతే లేవు కానీ, 368 మంది
ఆప్తులు వస్తామంటే అంతకంటే కావలిసిందేముంది? అయిన ఇంత గెలిచి
రచ్చ గెలవడం విన్నాం గానీ, మీరు మా ఇంటిని రచ్చకీడుస్తున్నారండీ (or
is it the other way round ;-)?)!
Regards,
Uday
From viplavreddy@y... Fri Nov 05 20:35:00 2004
Return-Path: <viplavreddy@y...>
Received: (qmail 49068 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2004 04:35:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2004 04:35:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n16a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.45)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2004 04:35:00 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.59] by n16.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 04:34:55 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.151] by mailer8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 04:34:55 -0000
X-Sender: viplavreddy@y...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 26714 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2004 03:16:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2004 03:16:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n8a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.42)
by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2004 03:16:10 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.5] by n8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 03:15:29 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.135] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 03:15:29 -0000
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 03:15:26 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cmhfk...@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <cmgs3...@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1388
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.42
From: "viplavreddy" <viplavreddy@y...>
X-Originating-IP: 4.245.67.153
Subject: Re: సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=46953230
X-Yahoo-Profile: viplavreddy
X-eGroups-Approved-By: srpanini <srpanini@c...> via web; 06 Nov 2004 04:34:52 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.45
X-RB-Message-Num: 10608
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
> > vaemana padyaM would not be the same if it began with
> ఆత్మశుద్ధిలేని
> > యాచారమదియేల and ended with ఆచారమౌనకన్న మిన్న
<స్నిప్>
> ళెత్ మె సీ ఇఫ్ ఈ చన్ అద్ద్రెస్స్ థిస్ విథ్ అ వెల్ల్ క్నౌన్ ఎక్షంప్లె వ్హెరె
థె
> పోత్ దోస్ ఇందీద్ స్తర్త్ విథ్ అ స్తతెమెంత్ థత్ హె సీమింగ్ల్య్
చొంత్రదిచ్త్స్
<స్నిప్>
> పోం 'vaMdE mAtaraM' స్తర్త్స్ విథ్ "tallivi taMDrivi daivAnivi
> nIvEnammA!" అంద్ థెన్ గోస్ ఒన్ తొ సయ్ "duMDagulatO kulukutunna
SIlaM
> nIdi".
> టొ మె, ఇత్ ఇస్ థిస్ చొంత్రదిచ్తిఒన్ థత్ మకెస్ థిస్ పోం సొ పౌఎర్ఫుల్,
> అంద్ థె అగొన్య్ ఫెల్త్ బ్య్ థె పోత్ చొమె ఔత్ సొ స్త్రొంగ్.
శొర్ర్య్ యౌ తూక్ ఇత్ సొ లితెరల్ల్య్ (నొ పున్ ఇంతెందెద్!). ఈత్ వస్ అన్ ఇదీ
థత్ చొన్వెయ్స్ ఇఫ్ ఒనె బెగన్ విథ్ అ చ్లీర్ నొతిఒన్ అంద్ ఎందెద్ విథ్ అనొథెర్
ఇత్ ఇస్ లెస్స్ ఉసెఫుల్.
ఈ సీ నొ సుచ్ చొంత్రదిచ్తిఒన్ ఇన్ థె అబొవె ఎక్షంప్లె యౌ ప్రెసెంతెద్. ఠె
ఇంతెంతిఒన్ ఇస్ ఉఇతె చ్లీర్ ఫ్రొం బెగిన్నింగ్ తొ థె ఎంద్.
> హె స్తర్తెద్ లిఘ్తింగ్ థె ఫిరె మొరె థన్ 34 యీర్స్ అగొ, ఇన్ విజగ్. శొ
> వ్హత్ ఇఫ్ హె దిసౌన్స్ హిస్ లెగచ్య్ నౌ.
ఈ హవె అ ఫీలింగ్ థత్ వస్ మొరె లికె లిఘ్తింగ్ ఒఫ్ అ ప్య్రె థన్ అ ఫిరె,
(ఇఫ్ యౌ అరె రిఘ్త్ అబౌత్ హిం దొఇంగ్ సొ).
ఊసూల్ల్య్ ఒనె దోస్ నొత్ క్నౌ వ్హత్ తొ ఎకష్పెచ్త్ ఫ్రొం ఫిరె, ఇఫ్ ఇత్ ఇస్ ఫొర్
రీల్ థత్ ఇస్. ఆన్య్ ప్రెదిచ్తబ్లె అంతిచ్స్ చన్ ఒన్ల్య్ బె అ రెసుల్త్ ఒఫ్ అ
చొంత్రొల్లెద్ బుర్నింగ్ ఒఫ్ అ ప్య్రె. ఈ ఎకష్పెచ్త్ సొమె లిమితెద్ గూద్ అంద్ అ లొత్
ఒఫ్ స్తెంచ్ ఔత్ ఒఫ్ ఇత్.
ర్గ్ద్స్, విప్లవ్
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
srini_nagul
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Ramarao Kanneganti <rama@k...>
wrote:
>
> It is tough to define literature. <snip>
> All literature is about food. All literature is about water. All
> literature is about growing up. All literature is about just about
> anything.
I like it. What I don't like in this thread's discussion
particularly is this:
సాహిత్యం గురించి మాట్లాడుతూ, అందునా తెలుగు సాహిత్యం గురించి
చర్చిస్తూ, తెలుగు రచయితల దృక్పథాలను విమర్శిస్తూ, సమర్థిస్తూ,
ఇక చెప్పకనే చెప్పుకొస్తున్న పాఠకుల అభిరుచులను గమనిస్తూ,
ఎక్కువగా, కాదు, మిక్కిలీ ఎక్కువగా, తెలుగులో కాక, ఇంగ్లీషులోనే
దీనినంతా సాగించడం కొంత వింతగానే కాక, కొట్టొచ్చినంత
వ్యంగ్యంగానూ ఉంది. ఏవో కొన్ని చోట్ల తప్ప - కొన్ని చోట్ల ఉదయ్ గారు
తెలుగులో రాయడం, చాలా తక్కువగానే రాసినా పాలనగారు అందులోనైనా
తెలుగులో చెప్పడం, రామారావుగారి చక్కని పోస్టు లో చిట్టచివరి
వాక్యానికే తెలుగు నోచుకోవడం, వినీల్ గారి వ్రాతలో కొంత తెలుగు
చోటుచేసుకోవడం - వదిలేస్తే, జరిగిన చర్చంతా ఇంగ్లీషులోనే.
అంతే కాదు, ఇంగ్లీషు డిక్షనరీలనే సప్రమాణంగా తీసుకోవడం,
ఇంగ్లీషు కవులను, వ్యాఖ్యాతలనే ఉటంకించడం సహాయకారిగా ఉన్నా,
మన లాక్షణికుల అభిప్రాయలను పూర్తిగా విస్మరించడం, అసలు
literature పదానికి ఒక్క ఇంగ్లీషు డిక్షనరిలోనే అర్థం
వెతుక్కోవలసిన అవసరం రావడం ఎందుకో అర్థమవలేదు.
"సాహిత్యం" అనే ఎంతో సార్థక, సమంజసమైన, అర్థవంతమైన
పదం ఉన్నదనే విశయమే దాటివేయడం కొట్టొచ్చిన వెటకారంగ
కనపడుతుంది.
"సహితస్య భావహ్ సాహిత్యం" అని అన్నారు. ఆలోచనామృతం
సాహిత్యమన్నారు. ఇవేవీ ప్రస్తావించాల్సిన, పరిశీలించాల్సిన, కనీసం
ఖండించాల్సిన విషయాలుగా కూడా కనిపించకపోవడం దురదృష్టకరం.
ఇక హితమంటే ఏమిటి? ఏ రాజకీయాలైన వారు చేసేది హితమనే అంటారు.
కాని దానికి కూడా మనకు కొన్ని నిర్దిష్టమైన నిర్దుష్టమైన
అర్థాలున్నాయి. వాటిని పరిశీలించాల్సిన అవసరం, కనీసం
విమర్శించి సహేతుకంగా అవి పనికిరావని ఖండించాల్సిన
భాగ్యం కూడా అవి నోచుకోకపోవడం విచారంగా ఉంది.
శ్రీ వెల్చేరు గారు కూడా, నాకు తెలిసినంత వరకు, ఇప్పటిదాకా
రచ్చబండలో తెలుగులో తక్కువగాకూడా వ్రాయకపోవడం కొంత
నిరాశగా ఉంది. తెలుగు సాహిత్యం కోసం చేసే చర్చలో, తెలుగు
రచయితల దృక్పథాలను, విమర్శ స్థితిగతులను అవలోకించేటప్పుడు
కూడా మనం తెలుగులో అభిప్రాయాలను, వాదాలు, ఖండన భండనలు
చేసుకోకపోవడంలోనే తెలుగు భాష దుస్థితికి, దాపురించిన
దౌర్భాగ్యానికి కారణాలున్నయని అంటాను. ఈ విషయాలపై ఇంతగా
స్పందించే మనకే తెలుగు అనుకూల వాహికగా కానప్పుడు దానిగురించి
ఇక ప్రత్యేకమైన సాధికారమైన, సప్రమాణమైన, సహేతుకమైన
ఇంకో వ్యాఖ్యానం, విమర్శల యొక్క పెద్ద అవసరమేమీ లేదనే
అంటాను. అయితే ఇంగ్లీషులో రచ్చబండలో RTS లో రాయాలంటే
ఎంత తిప్పలో, కష్టమో తెలియని వాన్ని కాదని గట్టిగా చెప్పగలను.
అయితేనేమి? ఆ కష్టం కూడా కొంత అలవాటుతో కారు నడిపినంత
హాయిగా అవుతుందని కూడా నొక్కి చెప్పగలను.
విధేయుడు
-Srinivas
From dasigi_lakshmi@y... Sat Nov 06 07:58:26 2004
Return-Path: <dasigi_lakshmi@y...>
Received: (qmail 49339 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2004 15:58:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167)
by m22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2004 15:58:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n21a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.50)
by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2004 15:58:26 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.5] by n21.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 15:57:26 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.120] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 15:57:25 -0000
X-Sender: dasigi_lakshmi@y...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 29658 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2004 15:30:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
by m25.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2004 15:30:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO web41122.mail.yahoo.com) (66.218.94.165)
by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2004 15:30:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 30391 invoked by uid 60001); 6 Nov 2004 15:30:40 -0000
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=qW1yNYp/WhtjPOUT4T45ZwA9RmKTBY+p+y9vLZKErjYqN28WtYcIzP8XFyMM9fgYQheO3+WW2H2eFKUT0437d2jbuxxPkG2DHtlxtGY0/lT21dm5cId0/EkHVa48MxRx36eZt0Sy2QeG4NP3Mlu2zRubBkvgzy6JbxUOXrk49N4= ;
Message-ID: <20041106153039.30389.qmail@w...>
Received: from [61.2.74.4] by web41122.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 06 Nov 2004 07:30:39 PST
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 07:30:39 -0800 (PST)
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
In-Reply-To: <1099708555....@yahoogroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.218.94.165
From: Dasigi <dasigi_lakshmi@y...>
Subject: 2nd issue of Bhuvanavijayam (www.bhuvanavijayam.com)
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=158274104
X-Yahoo-Profile: dasigi_lakshmi
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Approved-By: mvmachavaram <mvmachavaram@y...> via web; 06 Nov 2004 15:57:23 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.50
X-RB-Message-Num: 10613
Hi Members,
We are glad to intimate you that 2nd issue of
Bhuvanavijayam (www.bhuvanavijayam.com) is released
with following content:
TABLE OF CONTENT - 2nd ISSUE, DT: 06-11-1004:
Sampaadakeeyamu
* gaanakOkila lataamaMgEShkar - Samaganapriya
Kadhalu & Kadhaanikalu
* Kali Yuga SIta - Anamika
* Abhaasu ChEsina kiTTubaaTu - Bharoga
* Idi "MaamUlu" Kadha - Sowjanya
* AnukonnadokkaTI... - MV Rami Reddy
Serials & novels
* Chivaraku Migiledi (Part -2) - Sowjanya
* Manasunna Prema (Part -2) - Sahiti
* Vennela Needa (Part -1) - Bharaago
Padyaalu
* aSvadhATi - jejjAla kRuShNa mOhana rAvu
* samudra tiramu - udaya rAvu
* samasyA pUrNaM - jejjAla kRuShNa mOhana rAvu
Kavitalu & Geyaalu
* vyatyAsaM - Sowjanya
* ammAyi - Sahiti
* amerikA pajjAlu - Laila
Vyaasaalu
* nannaya nuDulu - SrI bommakaMTi SrInivaasaacaaryulu
* veena naadamu - jejjAla kRuShNa mOhana rAvu
Science Column
* Sabdha Taramgaalu - Hubble's Eye
Kadambam
* Americophilia - Anandaswarup Gadde
* A True Story - Manohar Chowdhary
* I do not know what I do not know - Krishna Rao
* We American Telugus - Ramarao Kanneganti
Pustaka Samiksha
* Bharaago "Saradaa Kadhalu" - Sri Puranam Subrahmanya
Sarma
Hubble's Eye
* telusukonave yuvatI - Hubble's Eye
Annamayya Kirtanalu (lyrics)
* Annamayya Kirtanalu - 1 - Samkalanamu - Srinivas
Nagulapalli
Vantinti Vaidyam
* Vamtinti Vaidyam (part 2) - Samaganapriya
Ruchulu-Abhiruchulu
* Beans with Buttered Rice - Samaganapriya
Kutlu-Allikalu
* Button Hole Stitch and Cutwork- Ms. Nirmal C. Mistry
Embroidery Designs
* Shadow Embroidery- Ms. Nirmal C. Mistry
* Shaded Embroidery- Ms. Nirmal C. Mistry
Aalochinchamdi
* vivAhalalO ADaMbarAlu - Late Smt. Savitri
* Kali Yuga SIta - Anamika
Chit-Chat
* A true love story - Ravi
* Types of women - Ravi
* Vision 2020 - Ravi
* Naa Antaramga Taramgaalu- Sujit Kiran
Panchatamtram
* munISvaruDu-chiTTeluka- SumabAla
Tenali Ramalimgadi kadhalu
* Tenali Ramakrushnudu (Balyam) - Sowjanya
Sumati Satakam
* Sumati Satakam (2nd Bhaagamu) - Samkalanamu Sowjanya
Jokes
* Navvite Nava Ratnaalu (Part2) - Samaganapriya
* Chilipi es.eM.es.lu - Sumabala
Cartoons
* Bapu Cartoons (Part-1) - Courtesy Bapu
Budugu Games
* Lottery Veddaamaa? - By Kalluri Saila Bala
Brain Teasing Puzzles
1. Find out the Hidden words - Kota Ravi Kumar
* Ramayana
2. Children Quiz - Samaganapriya
* General Knowledge
With Best Regards,
abhinay_aanand
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
> Uday gaaru: Isn't it an overstatement that "Ismail became the
center
> of an ఆస్థానం himself"? And, aren't you going overboard claiming
> that "several" members of RB belong to this "Ismail aasthaanaM"?
> Could you please name just 2 people on this list who belong to
> that 'club'!
>
> Regards,
> Sreenivas
Sreenivas,
First of all, no gaaru, please!
I am not suggesting that the ఆస్థానం is necessarily anywhere
comparable in magnitude to the other two. My own native East Godavari
at one time had hundreds of ఆస్థానాలు, and every third land owner
was a "రాజా వారు". In that sense, even if Ismail's following
consisted of just a handful of disciples, it nevertheless has been a
force of some significance, if for nothing else, for being the
proponents of this "రెండు ఆస్థానాలు" theory.
About the 'several' members, again, I am not sure if they are still
members, I was thinking of Vinnakota Ravi Shankar and Tammineni
YadukulaBhushan when I said that. Both admittedly proud card carrying
members of this 'club'.
lylayer
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
> >> I would like to quote another great poem - this was written in
1975,
> on the occasion of the first International Telugu Conference in
> Malaysia -
>
> అపస్వరాలు
>
> ఆకలేస్తోందా నీకు?
> ఆంధ్ర సంస్కృతి మహోజ్వలమైనది
> తినడానికి తిండిలేదా నీకు?
> > ఏ దేశమేగినా ఎందుకాలిడినా ...
> నీయమ్మ! నాకాకలేస్తోందిరా!
>
>
>
I like this poem. It is very good. It is honest. the poet makes you
laugh at the silliness of some grand talk and shows you reality in a
spunky and humorous way. it does not matter which group the reader is
in to appreciate this poem.
But the poem below comes across differently to me . here the poet is
divisive. he is joining one group of people and is jealous of the
other group . he is also saying the groups should not merge or cross
lines.
Here we go...only parts of the poem..
అద్రుస్టవంతులు మీరు
వెలుగును ప్రేమిస్తారు...
అలజడి మా జీవితం
ఆందోలన మా ఊపిరి
తిరుగుబాటు మా వేదంతం..
ఉన్న చోతు చాలును మీకు...
ముందుకు పొతం మేము
ప్రపంచం మా వెంట వస్తుంది..
అభిప్రాయాల కోసం
బాధలు లకష్యపెట్టాని వాళ్ళూ
మాలోకి వస్తారు.
అభిప్రాయాలు మార్చుకొని
సుఖాలు కామించె వాళ్ళు
మీలోకి పోతారు.
The poet , in this poem clearly is expressing, his group- the group
that marches on have some clear ideals and they don't mind
suffering.
Isn't the fight itself about economical equality and comfort for
every body? then why does he despise the people who have it? And
where is his group marching to? Why does he think it is o.k to suffer
and die and be remembered?
I think the poet here is muddled in thinking, angry, jealous,
misguided and in turn is misguiding some people if they are willing
to listen to him.
'నిజంగానే నిఖిల లోకం నిండు హర్షం వహీంచాలంతే such
fractions, and divisive thought should diminish in literature. That
is good politics. :-)
Love to hear your thoughts? Any one who likes to explain/comment
please do.
Velcheru Narayana Rao
Thank you Uday for quoting apaswaralu. I should probably wait for rbites
response to the poem before admitting I wrote it in 1975. But some of them
probably already know.
The quarrel I have with you is about your "model" -of the working class -
to borrow Ramarao's word. You seem to be
saying, tell me if I didn't understand you right, that
working poor cannot be expected to have a refined taste, because they are
disillusioned with the world
around them. I agree their taste is different from the leisure class, but
it is refined all the same.
I have spent many years working in folklore, talking to people who sing songs
and tell stories, farmhands working in fields, women who transplant and
harvest,
untouchables who sing epics, and children in rags who tell stories. I
spent time with artisans,
cowherds, beggars, and itinerant singers.
(I am not very comfortable with the category "Folklore" and avoid
that label, but that need not detain us here.) I have not found one
instance where their
taste is less refined than that of the well-fed people. I could show any
number of
differences -- stylistic, structural, thematic and ideological -- between
the written scholarly literature and oral unlettered
literature. But the taste of the people who tell those stories and sing the
songs is every bit as
refined as that of any you can find among the learned poets who inhabit
royal courts.
Perhaps you know, it is very difficult to write a folk song or a folktale.
Not even a great writer can accomplish that.
These texts are the result of the craftsmanship of generations of singers,
tellers, and listeners --
and are refined like pebbles in the riverbed. Siva Sagar came close to it
in one of his poems -- narudo bhaskaruda --
the only poem that he ever wrote. Most "revolutionary" poetry is written by
persons
who took upon themselves to think and feel for an imagined "people" and
they wrote bad poetry
because they are not poets to begin with. They created a dead language and
dull imagery to translate revolutionary
messages into song and story.
I have no quarrel with you when you say that the revolutionary writers have
put their politics ahead of aesthetics. They surely did that. In fact they
used literature as vehicle to
speak politics, because they thought it was an easier way to reach
their audience. Many mass movements, including the bhakti movement
did the same in Telugu and other Indian languages. I understand the
pragmatism involved in it.
But when you are evaluating literature, as you and I are doing form the vantage
point of hindsight -- we can do better than reproducing revolutionary
rhetoric, quoting Mao or Castro.
vnr
>
>
>With due respect, "a certain refined taste" is as much of a partisan
>prerequisite as Bhakti or political fervor of whatever pursuasion.
>The refined taste of a person who is well fed, and who meets all the
>criteria that Peddana laid out for enjoying poetry will be different
>from the refined taste of a person who is totally disillusioned with
>life around him or her, and cant wait to see things change.
>
>I would like to quote another great poem - this was written in 1975,
>on the occasion of the first International Telugu Conference in
>Malaysia -
>
>అపస్వరాలు
>
>ఆకలేస్తోందా నీకు?
>ఆంధ్ర సంస్కృతి మహోజ్వలమైనది
>తినడానికి తిండిలేదా నీకు?
>తెలుగుభాష 'ఇటాలియన్ ఆఫ్ ద ఈస్ట్ధ్్ోలీసులు నిన్ను చితగ్గొడుతున్నారా?
>మనకి అంతర్జాతీయ ఖ్యాతి అవసరం
>నన్నయ గొప్పవాడు
>నాకు ఆకలేస్తోంది
>కృష్ణదేవరాయల రోజుల్లో -
>ఒరేయ్! నాకు ఆకలేస్తోంది
>ఏ దేశమేగినా ఎందుకాలిడినా ...
>నీయమ్మ! నాకాకలేస్తోందిరా!
>
>
>The point that I am trying to make is that no poetry can ever pass
>the test of universal acceptability.
>
>To get back to my analogy of the stock market from yesterday, there
>can be no stock that one can recommend equally strongly to the
>billionaire who wants a diversified portfolio, and a retiring school
>teacher who wants to guarantee growth and income. That doesnt
>necessarily make either Microsoft or Walmart a bad stock. They just
>appeal to different segments of the market.
>
>I am not well schooled in aesthetic appreciation, but I am sure that
>a dispassionate analysis using traditional tools of understanding
>poetry will giving passing grades to both SivasAgar and subbArAo
>pANigrAhi in terms of the "pure" poetic merits of their poetry. What
>prevents their poems from even being considered for that analysis is
>that they put their politics ahead of the concerns of aesthetic
>evaluation, and so it would be easy to highlight what is wrong with
>their poetry.
>
>Well, as Castro would have said, condemn them, they dont mind.
>History will absolve them.
>
>Regards,
>
>Uday
harita_n
> I always make Racchabanda crumbling but I seldom see it happening
the other way. I am very very happy that RB still approves my
crumblingable (created this) messages. Sri Nagulapalli gAri message
prompted me to reply to his message. This gives me an opportunity to
at least question who is crumbling whom.
>
> తీతువు పిట్ట, కాళ్ళు మీదకి పెట్టి ఆకాశాన్ని చూస్తూ, తనే ఆకాశాన్నంతా
మోస్తున్నాననుకుంటుంది. దాన్ని చూసి, పుణ్యపురుషుడు తనే ప్రపంచాన్ని
ఉద్ధరిస్తున్నానకుంటాడు
>
> --pAlana
>
> Got to go to have a cup of coffee and bAbA!
I guess this is what they mean when they say "bringing the house
down" :-)
పారనంది వారి కొసమెఋపు మరీ బాగుంది.
అందుకే మరి!
నేను సైతం తీతువు పిట్టనై
భువన భవనాన్ని కిందకీడ్చాను
పురుషులందు పణ్యపురుషుడనై ("paN" intended ;-))
నా agendaని రచ్చకీడ్చాను :-)
Gosh! I almost forgot what a rush it is to participate in an RB
thread!
cittagiMcavalenu!
Uday
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Krishna Rao Maddipati
On 11/7/04 11:03 AM, "Velcheru Narayana Rao" <vnrao@w...> wrote:
>
> I will give an example from Bhakti. You do not enjoy a stotra to Krishna
> unless you belive in him
> as God. To a non-believer they are no more than a bunch of names nicely put
> together.
> If you are a believer every syllable sends you to raptures.
>
> Sanskrit theorists of literature seriously disputed if Bhakti is a rasa.
> For something to be poetry,
> it should work on all readers/listeners without prerequisites, other thana
> certain refined taste.
>
> I don't think Uday's examples pass the test. That's why I said, they are
> not poetry.
I am a little (or perhaps completely!) lost here. On one hand you say that
the beauty of the poem is purely perceptional. But again, it has to pass the
³universal test² (elections are over and these words are liberated now!) to
be called poetry. Since no two perceptions are identical, how can any poem
pass the universality test to be labeled poetry?
A more mundane question is, what is poetry?
I may be ignorant but am serious in asking this question. I was watching
పల్లెటూరు last night and I was moved again (for the nth time) by
పొలాలననీ, హలాల దున్నీ..... This (as well as the examples given by Uday)
may sound sloganeering to some but poetry to me. It has the rhythm, the
concentration of thought, the powerful use of words, and most importantly
all the words have real meaning to me and evoked certain feelings. Before I
am told that this is not poetry, I would like to know what is the yardstick
by which I should determine when I encounter another piece of text.
Krishna Rao
harita_n
>
> Sanskrit theorists of literature seriously disputed if Bhakti is a
rasa.
> For something to be poetry,
> it should work on all readers/listeners without prerequisites,
other than a
> certain refined taste.
>
> I don't think Uday's examples pass the test. That's why I said,
they are
> not poetry.
>
> As for politics -- they of course are.
>
అపస్వరాలు
prevents their poems from even being considered for that analysis is
that they put their politics ahead of the concerns of aesthetic
evaluation, and so it would be easy to highlight what is wrong with
their poetry.
Well, as Castro would have said, condemn them, they dont mind.
History will absolve them.
Regards,
Uday
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
> A Literary work is not a person – it should not have multiple
> personalities. It can not say one thing and move on to the next or
> do another, unless it is a technique used to make a point - (people
> on the other hand can & will). This idea is exclusively Indian,
may
> be, that we forgive most faults from people, likewise confuse a
> literary work with the person. Forgiving a fault in literature is
a
> democratic idea which is a death sentence to literature. ------- I
Interesting perspective - standards of judging an individual and a
piece of literature can be, and often are, different. But to me, the
underlying principle in both cases is this - what is the impact of
the individual, or the piece of literature, on the people who are on
the receiving end. If you are convinced that the overwhelming impact
on the world around them is positive, a thousand faults will be
forgiven - whether you are talking about an individual, or a work of
art.
> vaemana padyaM would not be the same if it began with
ఆత్మశుద్ధిలేని
> యాచారమదియేల and ended with ఆచారమౌనకన్న మిన్న
> మరిలేదురన్న -- contradiction is possible in humans but we
should
> not extend the same to a work they seek to create, especially if it
> must last a while.
>
Let me see if I can address this with a well known example where the
poet does indeed start with a statement that he seemingly contradicts
as he gets into his poem - some one on this forum will probably be
able to quote the full text, but from memory, cerabaMDa rAju's famous
poem ధందే మాతరంధ్్స్ర్త్స్ విథ్ "tallivi taMDrivi daivAnivi
nIvEnammA!" అంద్ థెన్ గోస్ ఒన్ తొ సయ్ "duMDagulatO kulukutunna SIlaM
nIdi".
టొ మె, ఇత్ ఇస్ థిస్ చొంత్రదిచ్తిఒన్ థత్ మకెస్ థిస్ పోం సొ పౌఎర్ఫుల్,
అంద్ థె అగొన్య్ ఫెల్త్ బ్య్ థె పోత్ చొమె ఔత్ సొ స్త్రొంగ్.
>
> వ్హత్ దొ యౌ థింక్ నౌ?
>
ఔర్ వ్హొలె ప్రెమిసె ఇస్ థత్ లితెరతురె ఇస్ సొమెథింగ్ అబొవె అంద్ బెయొంద్
థె సొచిఎత్య్ - సొమె కింద్ ఒఫ్ అన్ ఎతెర్నల్ స్తందర్ద్ అగైన్స్త్ వ్హిచ్ థె
సొచిఎత్య్ ముస్త్ చలిబ్రతె ఇత్సెల్ఫ్. భుత్, ఇన్ అల్ల్ హొనెస్త్య్, ఇస్ంత్ ఇత్ థె ఒథెర్
వయ్ అరౌంద్? షౌల్ద్ంత్ లితెరతురె పెరిఒదిచల్ల్య్ రె-ఎవలూతె ఇత్సెల్ఫ్
అగైన్స్త్ థె స్తందర్ద్ ఒఫ్ సొచీల్ రెలెవంచె?
> రామన్నా, బుత్ రమన్నా ఇస్ నొ వ్హెరె తొ బె సీన్. ఈ థింక్ వ్ణృ లిత్
థె
> ఫిరె, అత్ లీస్త్ ఇన్ థిస్ ఫొరుం. ంఒరె వంతెద్ - ఫ్రొం హిం.
>
> ఋఎగర్ద్స్, విప్లవ్
హె స్తర్తెద్ లిఘ్తింగ్ థె ఫిరె మొరె థన్ 34 యీర్స్ అగొ, ఇన్ విజగ్. శొ
వ్హత్ ఇఫ్ హె దిసౌన్స్ హిస్ లెగచ్య్ నౌ.
ఋఎగర్ద్స్,
ఊదయ్
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
viplavreddy
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Velcheru Narayana Rao
<vnrao@w...> wrote:
>
> Wherever we are going -- bathroom or ballroom -- we have hit a
dead end.
>
okay I figured this out, a way to the largest bathroom on the planet
to hold all 370 members of RB at the same time. follow me.
BTW a simple observation from a guy visiting US the other day said
this: 'A single visit to a mensroom in USA tells you something -
there are more toilets than urinals at every place. These guys know
nothing better than eat all day and shit all day' - I can only
assume that he would rather wait in line to get into a bathroom one
time and then wait in another line to use a toilet like people used
to at Gowliguda bus station twenty years ago at the most forward
looking state capital in India.
All those poets I figure would have gladly waited in line to go last
as they were more interested in the common man's plight in making
the front of the line than themselves.
రహదారికిరువైపుల
ఉరికొయ్యల చెక్కిన
బీజాక్షరం నా అక్షరం
ఎవరికోసం?
రాత్రి రాలిన చినుకు
చెప్పిన సాకష్యం -
శివస్త్రోత్రం
ఇక వినిపించదు.
కవి చెప్పిన ఆఖరి ఊసు -
ఎవరి చావు వాళ్ళను చావమని.
Wake up people it is another day. It is time to live this time.
regards,
-viplav-
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Ramarao Kanneganti
It is tough to define literature. Once we start (even the by the
dictionary) on defining it, we instantly invalidate the dictionary,
especially one that keeps evolving.
If a work talks only about the internal conflicts of oneself, will it
cease to be literature? Hope not.
Even with the nebulous definitions of literature, my hypothesis is this.
All literature is about food. All literature is about water. All
literature is about growing up. All literature is about just about anything.
To elaborate, I think there is no way you can seperate your political
feelings, your aesthetic senses, your carpentry, or anything from you.
You are a culmination of all the thoughts, experinces you ever had. So,
if you write something, that is a part of you.
Ipso facto, if you have political opinions, your literature will reflect
that. Even mildly.
Nextly, I do not believe all literature is prescriptive. Lot of
literature is descriptive too, without positing specific opinions about
the ways to salvation. Even best of the writers write descriptive works.
It may be that some people find prescriptive works unsettling. If you
happen to disagree with their prescriptions for the world, you will be
biased against that.
Descriptive work is little less confrontational. It is easy to swallow
as the political or other influences on that literature are subtle.
They are not "in your face".
So, the question that confronts prescriptivists is this: How much do you
let your prescriptions color your works? Are you willing to change your
prescriptions, based on new experiences, new thoughts? Do you have
strong enough faith in your prescriptions that you let them be challenged?
So, if you have a prescription, go ahead and make it. Make it well. Make
it in the full confidence that literature, as much as it is a part of
you, has place for it.
If you want to write great literature though, remember that literature
is judged by others. So, write well. Think well. Don't escape the
questions. నిత్య నిరుత్తర ప్రశ్న గ్నానం ఇచ్చిన దానం. Remeber that.
--
Rama
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
> then that's saying the
> obvious. Good literature allows itself to politically analyzed, but
then it
> is not the most satisfactory analysis, partly because
> it does not exhaust its meaning.
Whose satisfaction are we talking about here? the critic's, or the
reader's (on whose behalf the critic does the analysis)?
To me, the only legitimate purpose of analysing literature (or for
that matter, anything at all in life) is to understand its impact on
its targeted audience.
If we look at literature not from the writer or the critic's
perspective, but from the reader's perspective, every dimension on
which we can objectively measure and rate that literature resolves
itself to a political question - whether or not it is overtly so
recognized.
> its politics. Political analysis is helpful, even necessary, but
it kills
> literature if it is done badly. and my experience tells me it is
easy to do
> it badly.
>
I completely agree. My experience tells me the same thing. I have
seen too many mediocre idealogues masquerading as literary critics.
And I also agree that the harm they can do to a clear understanding
is far more devastating than anything that a "pure aesthetist" can
ever do. (Please bear in mind, though, my contention that a "pure
aesthetist" is as much an idealogue as a card carry marxist).
But this is what I think is called the "post hoc, ergo procter hoc"
paradox. Just because a bad carpenter can do an incredibly bad job
doesnt mean that all of his tools are dangerous, nor that there is an
alternate way of building furniture.
> We have a huge body of political poems -- which unfortunately are
not poems
> to begin with. Propaganda is great if it is done by a great poet.
> or it stinks.
>
Again, isnt this true about any product of any effort? with all due
respect, bad odor is not the monopoly of the left.
> Cerabandaraju's Vandemataram is brought into discussion. It is a
good poem
> because of its irony, The political understanding that forms the
basis
> of the poem is shallow, simplistic, and rhetorical. But it works as
a poem.
I must respectfully disagree. To me, the situation with this poem is
precisely the reverse. I think it was pApinEni SivaSamkar who brings
out the structural and technical flaws of this poem in a very
convincing manner. As a digaMbara kavi, cera was still a work in
progress as a poet.
The redeeming value of this poem is its resounding affirmation of a
particular world view. Written in the sixties, it has a chilling
prophecy that forecasts the suicides of the cotton farmers, the
tragedies of Bhopal and Gujarat, and the rape of the economy by the
multi nationals, all of which are sad yet undeniable facts of today's
India. అమ్మా భారతీ, నీ గమ్యం ఏమిటి తల్లీ?
> There very few overtly political poems that sustain your attention
beyond
> the outburst of their slogans.
>
Again, I must respectfully disagree. As a poet, I am acutely aware of
how difficult it is to distill everything you want to say into a
crisp and catchy phrase. Of all the millions of erudite lines written
by the poets of the world, the only part that remain as poetry is
what reaches and stays in the minds of the readers. That is why, to
me the walls of my hometown taught me more about what is poetry than
all that the great critics have ever written.
SivasAgar wrote a poem titled 'microscopic' that is full of polemics
and political discourse, yet the part of that poem that every one
quotes was probably the only thing that he really needed to say in
that poem -
"ప్రజల్ని సాయుధులని చేస్తున్న రివల్యూషనరీ నేడు కవి".
In my own poem, this is how I tried to present this perspective -
"ప్రతి అక్షరం దుందుభిలా మ్రోగినప్పుడు మాత్రమే
కవిత్వం నినాదమవుతుంది
నినాదమై పోరు బాటలోని బాటసారికి బాసటగా నిలిచినప్పుడే
అక్షరం సార్థకమవుతుంది"
Regards,
Uday
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
viplavreddy
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Velcheru Narayana Rao
<vnrao@w...> wrote:
>
> and are refined like pebbles in the riverbed. Siva Sagar came
close to it
> in one of his poems -- narudo bhaskaruda --
> the only poem that he ever wrote.
I am going to move on to VNR's turf on this and ask him the
following:
అ. Does he believe Shiva Sagar could have written 'naruDoe
bhaaskaruDa' if that was the only poetry or prose he ever wrote?
I think you can see the implication from there.
ఆ. If poetry or any good piece of writing does not depend on the
people (who it is intended for has little to do with what is good
literature etc.,) then why worry about peoples tastes? Sounds like
a 'chicken or egg' to me!? Taste somehow defines what is good
literature?? isn't there a contradition embedded in his theory?
regards, viplav
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
>
> Oh, come on, cheer up! World has always been like this, we will
> survive! If you still feel world is crumbling, come to Florida,
> read Pothana, invite RB to your house (oh that last one may
really
> make you see it crumble!:-) !:-) :-)
>
> With warm regards
> -Srinivas
And I thought that the epicenter of this earthquake was in Florida ;-)
Speaking of pOtana, lately I have been consoling myself and lifting
my "spirits" with the motto "సత్కవుల్ హాలికులైననేమి,
ఆల్కహాలికులైననేమి?"
Cheers,
Uday
From cjampala@g... Fri Nov 05 09:21:55 2004
Return-Path: <cjampala@g...>
Received: (qmail 9845 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 17:21:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167)
by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 17:21:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n2a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.36)
by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 17:21:55 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.2] by n2.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 17:21:42 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.155] by mailer2.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 17:21:42 -0000
X-Sender: cjampala@g...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 37799 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 17:20:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 17:20:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n8a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.42)
by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 17:20:44 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.5] by n8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 17:20:00 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.140] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 17:20:00 -0000
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:19:57 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cmgcn...@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <20041105170215.58745.qmail@w...>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 580
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.42
From: "vcjampala" <cjampala@g...>
X-Originating-IP: 152.132.8.196
Subject: Re: సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=203210930
X-Yahoo-Profile: vcjampala
X-eGroups-Approved-By: sreeniparuchuri <sreeni@g...> via web; 05 Nov 2004 17:21:41 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.36
X-RB-Message-Num: 10598
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Narasimham Paranandi
<paalana@y...> wrote:
> What! If you invite Racchabanda to your house, does it really make
you see WORLD CRUBMBLING? How does it do it?
>
> No! I will not invite RB in that case, if it is true.
>
> Moderators! Is it true? Please let me know.
I am afraid that Sri Paalana would have to turn elsewhere to find
out the truth here.
We have no idea of knowing what Sri Nagulapalli would see and why.
After all, it is his 'objective reality'.
;-)
Regards -- V. Chowdary Jampala, on behalf of moderators.
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
srini_nagul
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
> > "sahitasya bhAvah sAhityaM" ani annAru. AlOcanAmRtaM
>
> Just a little nit pick, Sreenivas - this is Sanskrit, not Telugu ;-)
Uday gAru, sorry for my nit picking your nit picking, - what I
wrote about is indeed a Sanskrit word and not Telugu word:-)
That first word of this thread title సాహిత్యం is indeed Sanskrit,
not Telugu word :-)
> But in all seriousness, we are discussing issues beyond Telugu, and
> we need to communicate in the most effective manner possible.
I am lost here. What is this discussion of issues beyond Telugu
doing at RB?? If it is beyond Telugu, there are millions of
non-Telugus who might be interested and may have opinions on these
and I am afraid RB is not the most suitable forum for it. Did I
loose you all? Can some kind soul take trouble to make it little
easier for my limited mind? Since when RB began to take on its
shoulders to worry about issues beyond Telugu?
> If that means we reach into the American Heritage Dictionary
> instead of ఆంధ్ర శబ్ద రత్నాకరం, or if we quote Christopher
> Caudwell instead of వల్లంపాటి వెంకటసుబ్బయ్య, it is simply a
> matter of what comes to mind as the most appropriate instrument for
> that effective communication. After all, like the great poet once
> said, "మంచి గతమున కొంచెమేనోయ్".
Whoever that great poet is and whenever/wherever (s)he said it, I
guarantee it belongs to only గతం and by inference that applies
completely to that quotation as well!
With best regards
-Srinivas
From srini_nagul@y... Sat Nov 06 18:26:23 2004
Return-Path: <srini_nagul@y...>
Received: (qmail 76187 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2004 02:26:23 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Nov 2004 02:26:23 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n22a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.51)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Nov 2004 02:26:23 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.4] by n22.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Nov 2004 02:26:16 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.166] by mailer4.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Nov 2004 02:26:16 -0000
X-Sender: srini_nagul@y...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 12739 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2004 22:43:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2004 22:43:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n16a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.45)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2004 22:43:34 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.6] by n16.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 22:43:19 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.124] by mailer6.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 22:43:19 -0000
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:43:17 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cmjk2...@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <cmje3...@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1069
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.45
From: "srini_nagul" <srini_nagul@y...>
X-Originating-IP: 69.34.85.52
Subject: Re: సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=136275963
X-Yahoo-Profile: srini_nagul
X-eGroups-Approved-By: mvmachavaram <mvmachavaram@y...> via web; 07 Nov 2004 02:26:15 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.51
X-RB-Message-Num: 10627
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "lylayer" <lylayfl@a...> wrote:
>
> I thought i was the only horse, that does back trotting. It is a no
> no in అశ్వధాటి.
> This discussion is already galloping, there is no rider, no reins,
> pretty soon the horse jumps a fense too high, and we have to shoot
> the horse.
Lyla, thanks for pitching in. I am holding my horses, with
difficulty and not sure will last :-)
> the discussion is on 'political view points in literature.' please
> correct if the translation is not right. That means it can include
> any literature in any language and we can discuss in any language.
Sure, sure. But, what has literature in any language that is
not Telugu, got to do with RB? There are wider and broader forums
for addressing those than RB. Furthermore, who are the
beneficiaries of these discussions? Does any one think that those
non-Telugu language speakers, whose issues we are supposedly
discussing, bother to read/care RB? Its getting interesting by
every post.
Regards
-Srinivas
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Velcheru Narayana Rao
Veluri showed us the best way to talk. We can talk until cows come home of
what poetry is.
It is not a question, because there is no answer to it which does not come
back to the question again.
No definition of poetry exists, which does not include a concept of poetry
in it.
As Bertrand Russell would say you cannot define cheese for someone who does
not have a non-linguistic
experience of it.
Poetry is what poetry does.
Since everyone of you have an experience of poetry -- it is a more
productive exercise to talk of
how to read a poem or why you thought a particular piece is poetry to you.
Could anyone tell me why you thought SivaReddy's poem quoted here is a poem?
vnr
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
srini_nagul
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "harita_n" <uday_shivani@h...>
wrote:
> Great story! Do I have your permission to quote this story in
> future discussions :-)?
You do not need any permission, it all belongs to my teacher.
I request you though when you quote, to keep it as just "story"!
> Too many people are silently watching the world around them
> crumble.
Oh, come on, cheer up! World has always been like this, we will
survive! If you still feel world is crumbling, come to Florida,
read Pothana, invite RB to your house (oh that last one may really
make you see it crumble!:-) !:-) :-)
With warm regards
-Srinivas
From andhraputhra@y... Fri Nov 05 08:53:11 2004
Return-Path: <andhraputhra@y...>
Received: (qmail 35474 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 16:53:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m19.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 16:53:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n18a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.47)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 16:53:10 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.59] by n18.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:52:52 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.187] by mailer8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 16:52:52 -0000
X-Sender: andhraputhra@y...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 26328 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 16:51:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
by m17.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 16:51:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO web60709.mail.yahoo.com) (216.109.117.232)
by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 16:51:28 -0000
Message-ID: <20041105165026.65254.qmail@w...>
Received: from [61.2.35.34] by web60709.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 05 Nov 2004 08:50:26 PST
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:50:26 -0800 (PST)
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
In-Reply-To: <cmdsu...@eGroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 216.109.117.232
From: Hemantha Kumar <andhraputhra@y...>
Subject: Re: [racchabanda] Re: Learning Telugu
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=174005873
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Approved-By: vcjampala <cjampala@g...> via web; 05 Nov 2004 16:52:52 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.47
X-RB-Message-Num: 10593
Viplav garu,
Enjoyed the fun a loooooooot!
But today's Talakona Adavulu are mixed kichdi what with so many filmi guys from Andhra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu invading them (not to mention the yeomen number of tourists) the languages get muddled up.
Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar
viplavreddy <viplavreddy@y...> wrote:
<snip>
7. Lose them in talakoena aDavaulu or in simmaacalaM koMDalu
intentionally next time when you all visit that place.
<snip>
The idea is fun, but why encourage the pain, knowingly? I don't
understand.
Regards, viplav
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a
vcjampala
> Siva Sagar came close to it
> in one of his poems -- narudo bhaskaruda --
> the only poem that he ever wrote.
A recounting of Sivasaagar about the origin of his another famous
works can be found at
http://www.thatstelugu.com/sahiti/essay/siva.html
A quiz: This particular song is related to the debut of a famous film
personality. Emaa katha? (As usual, paruchoori Sreenivaas is barred
from answering this question; in addition, i think uday bhaskar should be restrained too :).
Regards -- V Chowdary Jampala
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Velcheru Narayana Rao
I have a revision to make to the post I sent last night. I did not mean to
say that the
discussion went out of control, nor that we hit a snag. In fact I was
suggesting we
take examples such as the ones Uday gave from Virasam poetry and compare
them to
similar poetry from other mass movements. They share certain qualities:
you enjoy them only if you are in sympathy with the movement. To put it
differently the ideology of the poem
determines the quality of the poem.
I will give an example from Bhakti. You do not enjoy a stotra to Krishna
unless you belive in him
as God. To a non-believer they are no more than a bunch of names nicely put
together.
If you are a believer every syllable sends you to raptures.
Sanskrit theorists of literature seriously disputed if Bhakti is a rasa.
For something to be poetry,
it should work on all readers/listeners without prerequisites, other than a
certain refined taste.
I don't think Uday's examples pass the test. That's why I said, they are
not poetry.
As for politics -- they of course are.
I meant to move the discussion forward. It was wrong to say that it hit a
dead end.
Sorry,
vnr
-------------
This discussion has gone totally out of control as Lyla said it.
Uday has to separate a lot of strands. If we move with ease from Syliva
Plath to Siva Sagar, via
Rousseau, Whitman, Auden and Spender -- we are in a totally confused world.
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
srini_nagul
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "vcjampala" <cjampala@g...> wrote:
>
> --- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Narasimham Paranandi
> <paalana@y...> wrote:
>
> > What! If you invite Racchabanda to your house, does it really
make
> you see WORLD CRUBMBLING? How does it do it?
> >
> > No! I will not invite RB in that case, if it is true.
> >
> > Moderators! Is it true? Please let me know.
>
> I am afraid that Sri Paalana would have to turn elsewhere to find
> out the truth here.
> We have no idea of knowing what Sri Nagulapalli would see and why.
> After all, it is his 'objective reality'.
> ;-)
అయ్యో అయ్యో, నా మాటా ఎంత పని చేసింది:-) Let me share the 'reality'
I see :-) Last time, I checked RB has 369 members, OK, 368, because
Uday gAru wouldn't count being the host, to get my math right!
Note, I did not even count the infants, toddlers, tantrum-throwers
at all, who all by the way, neither recognize any moderators, nor
any moderators would even venture to monitor them :-) :-) I stayed
away from mentioning better-halves for better reason of keeping my
math simple :-) Yes, it is really my preposterous ignorance to
assume that Sri Uday gAri house cannot hold all of them, and will
fall nothing short of crumbling, if they all eagerly show up!:-)
I leave it to Sri Uday gAru to speak up if I am way off!:-)
Enjoying the show of 'world crumbling' discussion :-)
With best regards
-Srinivas
From vineelg@h... Fri Nov 05 11:48:37 2004
Return-Path: <vineelg@h...>
Received: (qmail 18816 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 19:48:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167)
by m21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 19:48:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n20a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.49)
by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 19:48:36 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.59] by n20.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 19:47:21 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.183] by mailer8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 19:47:21 -0000
X-Sender: vineelg@h...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 87439 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 19:36:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Nov 2004 19:36:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n16a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.45)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 19:36:37 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.2] by n16.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 19:36:36 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.114] by mailer2.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Nov 2004 19:36:36 -0000
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 19:36:34 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cmgko...@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <cme06...@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 2236
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.45
From: "vineelg" <vineelg@h...>
X-Originating-IP: 131.107.71.227
Subject: Re: సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=76368272
X-Yahoo-Profile: vineelg
X-eGroups-Approved-By: mvmachavaram <mvmachavaram@y...> via web; 05 Nov 2004 19:47:19 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.49
X-RB-Message-Num: 10604
Uday garu,
> The American Heritage Dictionary defines politics as "The often
> internally conflicting interrelationships among people in a
society".
> And literature is a relection, an interpretation, and hopefully,an
> attempt at resolution, of these "internally conflicting
> interrelationships among people in the society". From this
> perspective, I believe that there is no such thing as literature
> that is not political.
Your definition of literature sounds very narrow to me. Is it always
about the interrelationships among people??
Does the following poem classify as literature according to you?
"aakulO aakunai..kommalo kommanai.......ee aDavi daaTipOnaa?"
> No self respecting writer will ever say that his or her writings
> are "apolitical". They might embrace the politics of "pluralism",
Can you define "apolitical" a bit more elaborately? How would you
categorize KrishnaSastri? Self -respecting or not?
And of course, I can give you more examples from japanese haiku
poetry which have nothing to do with society/interrelationships.
While you are on it, Here is what "The American Heritage Dictionary"
has to say about literature.
The body of written works of a language, period, or culture. 2.
Imaginative or creative writing, especially of recognized artistic
value: "Literature must be an analysis of experience and a synthesis
of the findings into a unity" (Rebecca West). 3. The art or
occupation of a literary writer. 4. The body of written work
produced by scholars or researchers in a given field: medical
literature. 5. Printed material: collected all the available
literature on the subject. 6. Music All the compositions of a
certain kind or for a specific instrument or ensemble: the symphonic
literature
> Literature - if it is literature at all - must be political in the
> sense that it honestly and faithfully reflects these
This is the exact statement I have problem with. Do you claim that,
any writing is considered as literature only if it has a political
view point? OR
any writing is not considered as good literature if it does not
contain (not uphold/deny) a political viewpoint?
We can discuss hte rest of the mail after your clarification.
thx,
vineel
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
>
> But you were Uday.:-) You have linked me and you with a class and
you
> gave me a prejudice, that I don't have, that i underestimate one
class
> people's ( working class) understanding of literature. But I am a
> working class girl, and i have reasonable understanding of
literature
> and poetry. :-)
>
No Lyla, I never attributed any prejudice to you, or to any one else.
I believe the exact phrase I used was "a naive conception". A
prejudice includes malice, while a naive conception is simply
misguided. And my assertion that you (or for that matter any one who
questions the usefulness of poetry in popular struggles) are
misguided, is based on my own experience of how powerful and
liberating is the experience of good poetry when you are in the thick
of the battle.
You have an appreciation for literature and poetry, but you seem to
think that struggling masses will have no use for that.
>
> I felt over all -i heard two conflicting thoughts - that writers
are
> powerful, they make great predictions, they brought lots of changes
> in governments, peoples lives, peoples' thoughts over centuries in
> many countries, - but if I say then - could they ( not necessarily
> the same ones) also have brought famine, turmoil, brought down the
> quality of life by introducing corrupt thought and ideas and
> promises,some times? i hear you say how can that be, -
> it is the foolish people who brought the bad stuff upon themselves.
>
> In other words writers are simply briliant, infallible,they do only
> good. non-writers are dumb. The brilliant writers are making
> sacrifices for the dumb people . How smart can that be?
>
People can change governments or bring about great changes in
society. People can also cause misery and bring about murder and
mayhem (like what is happening in Iraq today). Neither of these can
be caused merely by writing a poem, or exhorting people to revolt.
But in both cases, writers can play a crucial role in influencing the
course of events.
My objections to your "self fulfiling prophecy theory" was that you
attributed all misery to the fact that writers wrote about misery,
and so misery occured. I am sure you do not seriously believe that,
and thats what I said in my previous post.
> We sure have one thing in common -love for the written word. and I
do
> love writers. I am just smitten.:-)
>
Amen to that.
> Let us say what Voltaire said- 'I disagree with every thing you
said
> but i will protect your right to say it till my last breath.'
> I have not verified the quote.:-) ( I am not sure Voltaire is all
> that liberal.:-) Do you?)
>
Once again, Amen to that (the first part).
As far as Voltaire being a liberal, I am not sure every one uses the
word liberal in the same sense. For an interesting perspective on
that, please read Mao's essay on "Combating Liberalism".
> And I don't disagree with a lot you have said. Very enjoyable
post.
> Hope we talk many times on rb. Thanks again for the post.
>
> regards
> lyla.
>
And that's Amen, three times in a row.
V R Veluri
----- Original Message -----
From: "Krishna Rao Maddipati" <maddipati@w...>
To: "racchabanda" <racch...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [racchabanda] Re: సాహిత్యంలో రాజకీయ దృక్పథాలు
[snip]
Since no two perceptions are identical, how can any poem
pass the universality test to be labeled poetry?
A more mundane question is, what is poetry?
[snip]
I am a great admirer of of Ludwig Wittgenstien's propositions in Tractus
Logico-Philosophicus. Here is one that fits the bill.
Proposition 6.5
When the answer cannot be put in words, neither can the question be put into
words.
The riddle does not exist.
If a question can be framed at all, it is also possible to answer it.
6.51 Scepticism is not irrefutable, but obviously nonsensical, when it tries
to raise doubts where no questions can be asked.
For doubt can exist only where a question exists, a question only where an
answer exists, and an answer only where something can be said.
6.522 There are, in deed, things that cannot be put into words. They make
themselves manifest. They are what is mystical.
Regards, --- V R Veluri
P.S. I know, I am giving a lot of leeway to Kanneganti Ramarao to jump in,
accept or refute right away!
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Velcheru Narayana Rao
This discussion has gone totally out of control as Lyla said it.
Uday has to separate a lot of strands. If we move with ease from Syliva
Plath to Siva Sagar, via
Rousseau, Whitman, Auden and Spender -- we are in a totally confused world.
For Uday, the line he quotes from Siva Sagar "ప్రజల్ని సాయుధులని
చేస్తున్న రివల్యూషనరీ నేడు కవి".
is poetry. And the song he has extensively quoted from: "dikku mokku laEni
janaM etc."
is of the same order.
To me neither is poetry.
I am sympathetic to the movement that produced these songs, and I know that
persons
who wrote these and similar songs were imprisoned and tortured.
In 1970 students in Madison WI marched against the Vietnam War chanting:
One two three four
We don't want this fucking war
and they were tear gassed and arrested.
I am sympathetic to their movement too. But to highlight the absurdity of
calling these examples "poetry"
let me suggest that all mass movements, including the ones we may not like,
produce this kind of "poetry."
Fundamentalists of different varieties produced songs and slogans, which
also moved masses.
But we don't call them poetry. Why not? Is it not because we hate their
movements?
Wherever we are going -- bathroom or ballroom -- we have hit a dead end.
vnr
At 03:45 PM 11/6/2004, you wrote:
> >
> > Does this mean if a poet had written in his poem,some thing like -
> > 'you people are rotten, your life is useless, it is better to die,
> > there is nothing to live for etc.'
> > then the analysis is to see - how many people got the message,
> > realised their life is shot, how much percentage went into deep
> > depression, and how many ended their life- is that how the analysis
> > is done?
> > >
>
>Let us take a familiar real example of this type of poetry that you
>alluded to in many of your previous posts - the poetry of Sylvia
>Plath. Listen to what critic Pamela Annas says about Plath's poetry -
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
>
> "sahitasya bhAvah sAhityaM" ani annAru. AlOcanAmRtaM
Just a little nit pick, Sreenivas - this is Sanskrit, not Telugu ;-)
But in all seriousness, we are discussing issues beyond Telugu, and
we need to communicate in the most effective manner possible. If that
means we reach into the American Heritage Dictionary instead of
ఆంధ్ర శబ్ద రత్నాకరం, or if we quote Christopher Caudwell
instead of వల్లంపాటి వెంకటసుబ్బయ్య, it is simply a matter of
what comes to mind as the most appropriate instrument for that
effective communication. After all, like the great poet once
said, "మంచి గతమున కొంచెమేనోయ్".
It took the genius of SrI SrI to blend rAyaprOlu and gurajADa and
come up with this gem in a movie song -
శ్రీలు పొంగిన జీవగడ్డని మోసపోయిన తమ్ముడా,
దేశమంటే మట్టీ కాదోయ్, దేశమంటే మనుష్యులోయ్!"
sreeniparuchuri
> Paradoxically (and there IS a paradox here), over time, Ismail
became
> the center of an ఆస్థానం himself, and many aspiring writers,
> including several celebrated members of RB, came to be recognized
as
> a part of this school of thought.
Uday gaaru: Isn't it an overstatement that "Ismail became the center
of an ఆస్థానం himself"? And, aren't you going overboard claiming
that "several" members of RB belong to this "Ismail aasthaanaM"?
Could you please name just 2 people on this list who belong to
that 'club'!
Regards,
Sreenivas
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
> > No self respecting writer will ever say that his or her writings
> > are "apolitical". They might embrace the politics of "pluralism",
>
> Can you define "apolitical" a bit more elaborately? How would you
> categorize KrishnaSastri? Self -respecting or not?
> And of course, I can give you more examples from japanese haiku
> poetry which have nothing to do with society/interrelationships.
>
"కట కటా! లొటి పిటా చస్తే
కృ శా విషాద కావ్యం రాయాలా?"
భావ కవిత్వం రాజకీయ కవిత్వం కాదని ఎవరన్నారు సార్! "జయ జయ
జయ ప్రియ భారత జనయిత్రి" రాసిన కృష్ణ శాస్త్రినా మీరు
"Apolitical" అంటున్నారు?
1952లో ఎన్నికలు జరిగిన సందర్భంలో శ్రీ శ్రీ ఒకవైపూ, షుమారు
పాతికమంది పేరుగాంచిన హేమహేమీలొకవైపూ నిలబడి ప్రత్యక్షంగానూ,
పరోక్షంగానూ ప్రచారంలో పాల్గొన్నారు. కమ్మ్యూనిస్టు పార్టీ గెలిచేస్తుందేమో
అని గగ్గోలైపోతున్న సందర్భంలో ఈ పాతికమంది హేమహేమీలూ, ప్రస్తుత
american elections లో జరిగిన బురదజల్లుడు కార్యక్రమాన్ని
తలదన్నే విధంగా శ్రీ శ్రీ మీద దుష్ప్రచారం చేసారు. అప్పుడు శ్రీ శ్రీ
రాసిన కవితలో ఆ హేమాహేమీల్లో ఒకరికి ఇచ్చిన ముద్దుపేరేమిటో
తెలుసా? "కృష్ణశాస్త్రపుటుష్ట్రపక్షి"!
> While you are on it, Here is what "The American Heritage
Dictionary"
> has to say about literature.
>
> The body of written works of a language, period, or culture. 2.
> Imaginative or creative writing, especially of recognized artistic
> value: "Literature must be an analysis of experience and a
synthesis
> of the findings into a unity" (Rebecca West). 3. The art or
> occupation of a literary writer. 4. The body of written work
> produced by scholars or researchers in a given field: medical
> literature. 5. Printed material: collected all the available
> literature on the subject. 6. Music All the compositions of a
> certain kind or for a specific instrument or ensemble: the
symphonic
> literature
>
If you take the quote from Rebecca West from the second definition,
it about sums it up - Literature must be an analysis of experience;
experience is a social process, especially when the author deems it
to be worth sharing with others; further, literature must synthesise
the findings of this analysis into a unity. This pretty much defines
literature as the sacred activity of analysing the cause and effect
relationships of everything that forms a part of one's experience,
and presenting a cogent synthesis of this analysis - i.e., presenting
a world view that addresses the conflicts inherent in such experience.
> > Literature - if it is literature at all - must be political in
the
> > sense that it honestly and faithfully reflects these
> This is the exact statement I have problem with. Do you claim that,
> any writing is considered as literature only if it has a political
> view point? OR
> any writing is not considered as good literature if it does not
> contain (not uphold/deny) a political viewpoint?
>
Please go through my original post one more time - Literature doesnt
necessarily "consciously" have a political view point. But the
political view point of the author injects itself into the way the
author presents the society and its inherent conflicts in his or her
literature.
To get back to kR SA's poem that you quoted, it most certainly
represents a world view, just as much as Wordsworth's nature poetry
does. It represents an intellectual's pre-occupation with individual
liberty and freedom, and a lament that the society's concerns are
hindering them from enjoying what is rightfully theirs. For an
interesting perspective on this, please read Christopher Caudwell's
brilliant analysis of Wordsworth's poetry in "Studies in a Dying
Culture".
> We can discuss hte rest of the mail after your clarification.
>
> thx,
> vineel
Will be glad to discuss.
vcjampala
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "s_pamarty" <pamarty@h...> wrote:
> In other words:
>
> To say that there is no law in literature is in itself propounding
> another law.
I am reminded of the venerable playwright, who defined, "The golden
rule is that there is no golden Rule".
And of JK, who apparently exhorted people not to follow the
exhortations of the various Gurus.
Regards -- V. chowdary Jampala
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
>
> Does this mean if a poet had written in his poem,some thing like -
> 'you people are rotten, your life is useless, it is better to die,
> there is nothing to live for etc.'
> then the analysis is to see - how many people got the message,
> realised their life is shot, how much percentage went into deep
> depression, and how many ended their life- is that how the analysis
> is done?
> >
Let us take a familiar real example of this type of poetry that you
alluded to in many of your previous posts - the poetry of Sylvia
Plath. Listen to what critic Pamela Annas says about Plath's poetry -
"Sylvia Plath's sense of entrapment, her sense that her choices are
profoundly limited, is directly connected to the particular time and
place in which she wrote her poetry. Betty Friedan describes the late
fifties and early sixties for American women as a "comfortable
concentration camp"--physically luxurious, mentally oppressive and
impoverished. The recurring metaphors of fragmentation and
reification--the abstraction of the individual--in Plath's late
poetry are socially and historically based. They are images of Nazi
concentration camps, of "fire and bombs through the roof" ("The
Applicant"), of cannons, of trains, of "wars, wars, wars" ("Daddy").
And they are images of kitchens, iceboxes, adding machines,
typewriters, and the depersonalization of hospitals. The sea and the
moon are still important images for Plath, but in the Ariel poems
they have taken on a harsher quality. "The moon, also, is merciless,"
she writes in "Elm."
This is the kind of analysis that I am referring to - this is an
analysis of the social context of the depression depicted in her
poetry, the understanding of the social and historical basis of the
author's positions, and an interpretation of the alienation of the
individual in the modern world.
> who is measuring here? The writers and the critics or the readers?
> what is being measured? give a few examples here, how it happens.
In the triangular relationship of the writer, the reader, and the
critic, the critic's role is the most difficult to understand. In one
sense, the critic is the intruder who injects himself or herself into
the conversation between the writer and the reader. Yet, because of
the asynchronous nature of the communication between the writer and
the reader, it is often necessary to have an interpreter in between,
whose job it is to help the reader understand what the writer
intended to communicate, and at the same time, help the writer
understand how to communicate better with the reader.
In that sense, the role of the critic is not much different from that
of a financial analyst who interprets all the hidden facts behind a
stock, and helps an investor decide what are the merits and risks
involved before buying a stock.
In the case of the literary critic, what I am contending is that it
is his or her job to analyse the hidden nuances of the work being
reviewed, and measure how well the work will benefit the reader, so
that as a critic, he or she can make an informed recommendation to
the reader.
To stay one more minute with the analyst analogy, the trouble with a
critic not looking at the work from the reader's perspective is the
same as what happens when the analyst recommends a stock based on how
much commission his firm gets from the company, rather than how much
money the investor is likely to make by buying the stock.
So to answer your question, it is the critic whose job it is to
measure, it is the piece of literature that is being measured, and it
is the usefulness of this piece of literature to the readers that is
the measure.
> You sure it is not a self fullfilling prophecy? You sure
pessimistic
> writers are not the cause of some down turns of economy, creation
of
Let me see if I understand the drift of your reasoning - the
intellectuals who predicted that the euphoria about the "new economy"
during the mid '90s would result in a melt down were the reason for
the burst of the internet bubble, and not the stupid greed of people
who were willing to put millions of dollars into hare brained schemes
concocted by high school drop outs who could barely put together a
decent powerpoint presentation.
Gosh, I hope you are not serious!
> > >
>l > "ప్రజల్ని సాయుధులని చేస్తున్న రివల్యూషనరీ నేడు కవి".
> >
> > In my own poem, this is how I tried to present this perspective -
> >
> > "ప్రతి అక్షరం దుందుభిలా మ్రోగినప్పుడు మాత్రమే
> > కవిత్వం నినాదమవుతుంది
> > నినాదమై పోరు బాటలోని బాటసారికి బాసటగా నిలిచినప్పుడే
> > అక్షరం సార్థకమవుతుంది"
> >
> > what in the world does the above poetry mean? what is the
> perspective being presented? what weapons is the poet giving to the
> people and for what purpose. How can each letter become a drum and
> what shout is it sending out? who is the traveller? what is the
> fight? what hand is the poet giving the traveller?
>
Lyla Garu, I dont mean to be uncharitable, but the typical middle
class intellectual has a naive conception of the level of
understanding that the working class has of literature and poetry. A
textile worker working in the powerlooms of Surat, living in a dirty
slum, once gave me a more inspiring lecture on SrI SrI's
mahAprasthAnaM than I can ever hope to hear from the academic pundits
anywhere in the world.
Now coming to my poem and the line from SivasAgar that you are asking
for interpretation, let me see if I can clarify - literature, and in
particular, poetry, has played a far more active role in popular
struggles than people realise. This is true about struggles anywhere
in the world - can you imagine the French Revolution without the
writings of Voltaire and Roussou, or the Civil War in the US without
the poetry of Walt Whitman or Oliver Wendell Holmes, or the Spanish
Civil War without writers like Auden, Spender, Day Lewis, etc, or our
own Freedom struggle without Bankim's వందే మాతరం, or Iqbal's
సారే జహాన్ సె అచ్ఛా?
Call it native pride, or simple chauvinism, we Telugus seems to be
particularly partial to using poetry in every aspect of our lives. We
have poems for every occasion - we even have a festival that is not
complete without poetry recitation. And all popular struggles in
Andhra drew enormous inspiration from songs and poems written by the
intellectuals of the times specifically for that purpose. We had
గరిమెళ్ళ singing his heart out with మాకొద్దీ తెల్ల దొరతనము; we
had suMkara and vAsireDDi with their మా భూమి during the Telangana
struggles.
And when we come to the naxal movement, this is one movement that has
literally taken literature to the streets. Since the early '70s, the
walls of Andhra have had the most inspiring literature hastily
written on them by hands that you would expect to operate lathes in a
factory, or drive buses or trucks, but not write serious poetry (and
I seriously mean literature, not rhetoric or prescriptions).
A few small examples -
"దిక్కు మొక్కు లేని జనం
ఒక్కొక్కరు అగ్నికణం
సిమ్హకంఠ నాదంతో
వస్తారిక కాచుకోండి"
"అరెస్టులని సాగించి
ప్రజాశక్తినడ్డలేరు
అరచేతిని అడ్డుపెట్టి
సూర్యకంతినాపలేరు"
"చిరకాలం సాగిన మోసం
ఇంకానా! ఇకపై సాగదు"
These were all written by famous poets, whose poetry is regularly
taught and analysed in the universities and academies. Yet, the
people who wrote these poems on the walls of the cities risked
arrests and worse whenever they were caught doing this.
I know one particular wall in Warangal where there was a sort of
contest going on between the police and the naxalites, where every
week they would come out in the night and paint these slogans, and
the police would come back the next morning and white wash these
walls. Each time they would catch some one with a bucket full of
paint and a brush, they would arrest them and torture them. Yet, they
kept coming back and putting this poetry back on the wall. So it must
have meant something for them. It must have helped them in their
struggles.
> It looks like some people ( sorry! poets, writers) who don't know
> their way to the bathroom, are trying to show some people the way
to
> the grand ball room!
>
> regards
> lyla.
I wish I had SivAreDDi's కవులేం చేస్తారు? handy. Hopefully some one
will be able to post that here.
Well, I can only tell you that the Government of Andhra Pradesh
thought that a group of poets and writers were so dangerous that they
needed to be jailed - worse still, they needed to be charged with the
worst possible crime - conspiracy to wage a war against a lawfully
elected government. The Secunderabad Conspiracy Case lasted more than
a decade. More than 30 intellectuals were arrested and charged under
this case. Their crime? writing poems and stories against those in
power. One of them was a teacher, who wrote tender love poetry, and
once went to Shanti Niketan to pursue a career in art. Of course, he
also wrote some of the poems that found their way to the walls of
Warangal (and Karim Nagar, and Hyderabad, and all the other cities
and towns and villages of Andhra). He was also the author of the poem
that we discussed earlier on this thread - వందే మాతరం. His
crime, he loved his motherland so dearly that he was willing to die
for her - and he did. He died, not because he did not know the way to
the bathroom, but because he was not afraid to speak out against what
he saw was rampant injustice and oppression.
Lyla Garu, I (and many of my ilk) may or may not know the way to the
bathroom, but our goal is not to reach the grand ball room.
Regards,
Uday
From sreeni@g... Sat Nov 06 14:39:19 2004
Return-Path: <sreeni@g...>
Received: (qmail 97609 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2004 22:39:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2004 22:39:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n3a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.37)
by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2004 22:39:18 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.4] by n3.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 22:39:18 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.169] by mailer4.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 22:39:18 -0000
X-Sender: sreeni@g...
X-Apparently-To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 36428 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2004 22:37:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
by m18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2004 22:37:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n9a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.43)
by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2004 22:37:12 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.59] by n9.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 22:36:23 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.153] by mailer8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Nov 2004 22:36:23 -0000
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:36:23 -0000
To: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <cmjjl...@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <008501c4c445$91f003f0$1108a8c0@Sreenadhdell>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 857
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.43
From: "sreeniparuchuri" <sreeni@g...>
X-Originating-IP: 80.141.21.182
Subject: Re: copyright and such
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=45796058
X-Yahoo-Profile: sreeniparuchuri
X-eGroups-Approved-By: sreeniparuchuri <sreeni@g...> via web; 06 Nov 2004 22:39:16 -0000
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.37
X-RB-Message-Num: 10624
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Sreenadh Jonnavithula wrote:
> I call upon the moderators to make this the policy of the group,
> that any postings made to this board are free for republication,
> either online or offline, provided an
> acknowledgement is made to RB and to the original author(s).
Sreenadh,
I doubt if the moderators can simply make it a policy, for, IMO, they
donot own the content. We just try to provide a platforum. IMO, Sri
Mohanarao is right that author's permission 'must' be sought.
> Besides, several times in the past, posts have been made (thought
not by
> Mohanarao garu) citing RB posts that appeared in mainstream Telugu
> magazines; No one objected then;
Except for one reference by Varavararao (in his poem on Iraq war,
published in VIVIDHA) I can't think of any other examples. Any more?
harita_n
> I am a great admirer of of Ludwig Wittgenstien's propositions in
Tractus
> Logico-Philosophicus. Here is one that fits the bill.
>
> Proposition 6.5
>
> When the answer cannot be put in words, neither can the question
be put into
> words.
> The riddle does not exist.
> If a question can be framed at all, it is also possible to answer
it.
>
Since the question has been framed, let me see if I can answer it.
To me, poetry is the highest form of communication. And conversely,
communication is the essence of poetry. What distinguishes good
poetry from bad poetry is the intensity with which the feeling
within the poem is communicated to the reader. As Krishna Rao Garu
said in his review of Ghantasala Nirmala, "భావ సాంధ్రత
కవిత్వానికి ఆయువుపట్టు".
నా దృష్టిలో మాటల కూర్పుని కవిత్వంగా మలిచే అద్భుత రసాయనం భావ
సాంధ్రత. (I said this in a recent article that I presented to the
Texas Telugu Sahiti Sadassu, and time permitting, I will post it to
RB).
IMHO, poetry or not, every poem I cited on this thread meets this
criteria.
Narasimham Paranandi
vcjampala <cjampala@g...> wrote:
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Narasimham Paranandi
<paalana@y...> wrote:
>I am afraid that Sri Paalana would have to turn >elsewhere to find
>out the truth here. >We have no idea of knowing what Sri >Nagulapalli would see and why. >After all, it is his >'objective reality'. ;-)
>Regards -- V. Chowdary Jampala, on behalf of >moderators.
Sri Jampala gAru (ముందు శ్రీ, వెనుక గారు)! Thanks!
I always make Racchabanda crumbling but I seldom see it happening the other way. I am very very happy that RB still approves my crumblingable (created this) messages. Sri Nagulapalli gAri message prompted me to reply to his message. This gives me an opportunity to at least question who is crumbling whom.
తీతువు పిట్ట, కాళ్ళు మీదకి పెట్టి ఆకాశాన్ని చూస్తూ, తనే ఆకాశాన్నంతా మోస్తున్నాననుకుంటుంది. దాన్ని చూసి, పుణ్యపురుషుడు తనే ప్రపంచాన్ని ఉద్ధరిస్తున్నానకుంటాడు
--pAlana
Got to go to have a cup of coffee and bAbA!
To Post a message, send it to: racch...@yahoogroups.com
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
harita_n
> Could anyone tell me why you thought SivaReddy's poem quoted here
is a poem?
> vnr
I believe I can. It is a poem, because it came to mind unbeckoned (if
there is such a word), when some one questioned whether poetry has a
place in popular struggles. Just like Castro's statement in the court
came to mind unbeckoned; just like guDihALaM raGunAthaM's
poem "పద్యంలో ఇమడాల్సిన అందం" came unbeckoned; just like your
own "అపస్వరాలు" came unbeckoned.
Because it communicated - and communicated extremely well - why it is
important to write poetry. Why tyrants the world over have feared the
written word. Why people went to extremes to protect their right to
express themselves in poetry.
Once again, my definition of poetry (I dont believe it raises any
further questions to its validity, although you might question
whether it is comprehensive - to me it is) is simply this -
మాటల కూర్పుని కవిత్వంగా మలిచే అద్భుత రసాయనం భావ సాంధ్రత.
Regards,
Uday
PS:
"పోరు బాటలోని బాటసారికి బాసటగా నిలిచినప్పుడే అక్షరం
సార్థకమవుతుంది".
Courtesy: http://www.kanneganti.com/
Hemantha Kumar
By not counting the infants, toddlers and tantrum throwers (whoever they are and how many there are), is it implied that these people are not to be taken as RBits or that they are not to be invited to invade as guests? :) And why? :)
And even if they are not to be invited, is that not the privilege of Uday garu? :)
Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar
srini_nagul <srini_nagul@y...> wrote:
<snip>
Let me share the 'reality' I see :-) Last time, I checked RB has 369 members, OK, 368, because Uday gAru wouldn't count being the host, to get my math right! Note, I did not even count the infants, toddlers, tantrum-throwers at all, who all by the way, neither recognize any moderators, nor any moderators would even venture to monitor them :-) :-)
<snip>
Enjoying the show of 'world crumbling' discussion :-)
With best regards
-Srinivas
harita_n
>
> After this clever argument from SrI uday, I must confess that I am
> more confused now than I ever was. Where is the catch in the paradox
> here? ;-)
>
> With best wishes
>
> Satya
Satya Garu,
There is no paradox here, nor is my argument "clever" in anyway. I
was dead serious when I made this point. I would urge you to consider
this - if you are of the belief that no one should impose their views
on others, then in all fairness, you should not try and impose that
view on any one else - right?
Ismail, the venerated poet who passed away last year, had this theory
that Telugu literature was plagued by two ఆస్థానాలు - one from the
establishment represented by the universities and the Sahitya Academy
etc., and the other represented by the left wing organizations like
virasam. In his view, between these two special interest
groups, "real" literary values suffered, and unless a serious writer
paid homage to one or the other ఆస్థానం, they could not hope to
gain a foothold in the literary world.
Paradoxically (and there IS a paradox here), over time, Ismail became
the center of an ఆస్థానం himself, and many aspiring writers,
including several celebrated members of RB, came to be recognized as
a part of this school of thought.
I am not for a moment suggesting that Ismail was insincere in his
criticism of the two "AsthAnAlu", nor am I saying that this
third "AsthAnaM" was a deliberately formed special interest group. It
is just that literature is a social art, and by its very nature, it
acts as a lightning rod that brings together people of similar world
views.
As long as we are on the subject of paradoxes, here is my favorite
one - Will Durant, in his Pleasures of Philosophy, tells us the story
of an ancient Greek Philosopher (I think it was Protagoras) whose
philosophy was that there was no such thing as objective reality, and
that one could never be sure that what they perceived was really the
truth. Eventually, this much respected and much followed philosopher
passed away. And even as his body was rotting, no one would bury him,
as his disciples could never be sure that he was indeed dead.
harita_n
> A quiz: This particular song is related to the debut of a famous
film
> personality. Emaa katha? (As usual, paruchoori Sreenivaas is
barred
> from answering this question; in addition, i think uday bhaskar
should be restrained too :).
>
> Regards -- V Chowdary Jampala
Am I allowed to say that the movie was భూమి కోసం? (and I havent
followed the Indian elections closely enough, but that famous film
personality is most likely now an MP?)
viplavreddy
--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Velcheru Narayana Rao
<vnrao@w...> wrote:
> Could anyone tell me why you thought SivaReddy's poem quoted here
is a poem?
It is time unknown since people started resisting any kind of
authority. Poets are humans first before they became anything. That
much we all see, I hope.
Poets have this gift with words let us say, either it is honed into
perfection or exposed with a lot of rough edges – it is nevertheless
a gift they have. They express things in a way others don't and
react using their gift, some laboring on it more to get it to their
own satisfaction and some in a rush to get it out there fast.
It is natural to use a gift they have in the way they see fit. If
someone who lived through the Great War writes about it in a moving
way, it could be poetry or prose but sure will have done a lot of
good. If the same guy goes into some kind of a trans and writes
about Bhakti, that is his personal way of living the pain or
pleasure. Both may have made that attempt at their own personal
level but in the process moved those within their sphere of influence
together with them. The perception as well as the experience (out of
reading it) of those around them makes it what it is, perhaps.
I am not convinced that the quoted poetry from Shiva Reddy కవులేం
జేస్తరు has that touch.
కవులేం జేస్తారు
చట్టాన్ని ధిక్కరిస్తారు
ఎడారి మీద పద్యాలు రాస్తారు
ఎడారి క్రమక్రమంగా
సజీవ దేశంగా రూపొందుతుంది
కవులేం జేస్తారు
గోడలకు నోరిస్తారు
చెట్లకు కళ్ళిస్తారు, గాలికి గొంతిస్తారు
ప్రజలకు చేతులిస్తారు
ప్రజల చేతుల్లో
అనంతశక్తి సంపన్నమయిన పద్యాన్ని పెడతారు
I do not care as much if it is the experience he is living through or
not. I care enough about whether his words evoked any feelings in
me, which amounts to relatively none. I feel the same as before and
after I read it. Worse yet, I feel like turning the page. I however
retained a few words from what he said. He is expressing something I
feel everyday, I resist authority everyday. I do not need him to put
words in my mouth and ask me to recite what I feel in his words. A
few of his words however stick with me – not the complete feeling he
aimed at (because I already had those feelings), but just a few
words, if days are good to me, one day I will borrow some of those
words to build my own wasteland.
His lines do not evoke passion in me, yet can be called a poem/work
of literature, if you were to use VNR's definition ("If a work rouses
passions of one kind or the other, it is either a failure as a work
of literature, or alternately, failure of the reader."). The above
is not rejected as a failure based on my reading of it by this
definition.
It is the same symptom I have seen from those who wrote about Iraq –
can I call it post mosapoTaemiyaa disorder –
I am not convinced that VNR wrote poetry when he wrote ప్రతి (ఘటన)
either.
సర్పయాగం జరగబోతోందని ఎదురు చూడకు
అందులో చచ్చేవి చిన్నపాములు
తక్షకుణ్ణి ఎవరూ ఏం చెయ్యలేరు
అతన్ని ఇంద్రుడు కాపాడుతాడు
* * *
ఇది యుద్ధంలో చచ్చిపోయిన వాళ్ళకోసం కట్టారు.
వాళ్ళకి గుర్తుగా
ఇందులో వాళ్ళ పేర్లన్నీ రాసారు
వీళ్ళు చంపిన వాళ్ళు –
వాళ్ళ పేర్లు ఎవరికీ తెలియవు
* * *
I am not sure if he lived through that experience himself. Does he
believe in it? Who cares?
But it evokes poetry in me as I read it. I do not care if anyone
calls it a poem or not, but I certainly think I am not the same as I
was before I read it.
Worse yet, I do not think he wrote it keeping me in his view. I can
not carry any of his words back today. But I think I will carry the
message, in its entirety – vaaLLa paerlu evarikii teliyavu – to my
grave.
Going by his own definition one more time, "If a work rouses passions
of one kind or the other, it is either a failure as a work of
literature, or alternately, failure of the reader." -- I can not
accept or reject his thesis here because I could be a failure as a
reader instead of his work -- in which case I wonder if Siva Reddi
got a fair treatment from me as a reader.