ஒடுக்கப்பட்டவர்களின் குரல்

ஆக்ஸ்ஃபோர்ட் யுனிவெர்ஸிட்டி ப்ரெஸ், அண்மையில், அதன் மொழிபெயர்ப்புத்துறை இயக்குநர் திருமதி மினி கிருஷ்ணன் முயற்சியின் விளைவாக, ‘தமிழில் தலித் எழுத்தாளர்களின் படைப்பாக்கம்’ என்ற நூல்வெளியிட்டிருக்கிறது. எழுத்தாளர் ரவிக்குமாரும் பேராசிரியர் அழகரசனுமஇந்நூலைத் தொகுத்தளித்திருக்கிறார்கள்.

கவிதை,குறுநாவல், நாவல்களிலிருந்து சில பகுதிகள்,நாடகம்,உரைநடை, ஆவணம், சொற்பொழிவு, கட்டுரை என்ற தலைப்புக்களில், தொகுக்கப்பெற்றுள்ள இந்நூலுக்கு ரவிக்குமார் வரலாற்றுப் பின்னணியில் ஓர் ஆழமான முன்னுரை எழுதியிருக்கிறார்.

இவர் கருத்தின்படி ’தீண்டாமை’ தமிழ் நாட்டில், வேதியப் பிராமணியம் பரவத் தொடங்கிய பிறகுதான் வந்திருக்க வேண்டுமென்று தெரிகிறது. அதாவது, பல்லவ, பிற்காலச் சோழ,பாண்டியப் பேரரசுகள் தோன்றத் தொடங்கிய பிறகு. கோயில் கலாசாரம் வேரூன்றிய பிறகு. ,

சங்க காலத்தில் பொருளாதார ஏற்றத் தாழ்வுகள் இருந்திருக்கலாமே தவிர, பிறப்பினால் ‘தீண்டாமை’ என்கிற கோட்பாடு இருந்த்தற்குச் சான்றுகளே இல்லை. தமிழ் நாட்டில்,  வர்ணாஸ்ரம தருமத்தின் classical வடிவம், அதாவது, பிராம்மண, க்ஷத்திரிய, வைசிய,சூத்திரப் பிரிவுகள் என்றுமே இருந்ததில்லை. இதுவே வேதியப் பிராமணீயம் பிற்காலத்தில்தான், சோழப்பேரரசு காலத்தில்தான் வந்திருக்க வேண்டுமென்பதற்கு எடுத்துக் காட்டு.

அப்படியானால், சங்க காலத்தில் குறிப்பிடப் படும் ‘பார்ப்பான்’ என்பவர் யார் என்ற கேள்வி எழக் கூடும். கேரள அறிஞர் இளங்குளம் குஞ்சன் பிள்ளை கருத்தின்படி, இவர்கள் திராவிட இனம் சார்ந்த பார்ப்பனர்களாக இருக்க வேண்டும். ‘வேளா பார்ப்பான்’ என்றால் ‘வேள்வி செய்யாத

பார்ப்பான்’. வேள்வி செய்யும் பார்ப்பனர்கள், ‘வேதியர்’. ,’மறையவர்’ போன்றோர். ’பார்ப்பான்’ என்று குறிப்பிடப்படும் திராவிடப் பார்ப்பனர்கள், கணியர்களாகவும், கல்விப் பொறுப்பு உடையர்களாகவும் இருந்திருக்கலாம்.’மறப்பினும் ஓத்துக் கொளலாகும் பார்ப்பான்’ என்ற குறளில், ‘ஓத்து’ என்பது வேத உச்சாடனமாகத்தான் இருக்க வேண்டுமென்ற அவசியமில்லை. ’ ‘புலனழுக்கற்ற அந்தணாளன்’ என்று குறிப்பிடப்படும் கபிலர் திராவிடப் பார்ப்பன இனத்தைச் சேர்ந்தவர்.

சங்க காலத்திலேயே வேள்வி செய்யம் மரபு அருகலாக இருந்திருக்கிறது என்பதும் உண்மைதான். ‘பல்யாக சாலை முதுகுடுமிப் பெருவழுதி’ என்று ஒரு பாண்டிய மன்னன் குறிப்பிடப் படுகிறான்.  ஒரு சோழ அரசன் இராஜசூய யாகம் செய்ததாகவும் தெரிகிறது.

ரவிக்குமார் இந்நூலில் ஆவணப் பகுதியில் அயோத்தி தாஸர் கருத்துக்களைப் பிரசுரித்திருக்கிறார். அயோத்திதாஸர், டாக்டர்அம்பேத்கார், மகாத்மா பூலே, பெரியார் ஆகிய தனித்தன்மை வாய்ந்த சிந்தனைவாதிகள் அனைவருக்கும் முன்னோடி. தமிழ்நாட்டில்,  வைதிக மதத்தை எதிர்த்த பௌத்தமதம் வேரூன்றி இருந்ததென்றும், சநாதன தர்மம் கோலோச்சியத் தொடங்கிய பிறகு, சிறுபான்மையனராகிவிட்ட , வைதிக மத எதிரிகள் ‘தீண்டத் தகாதராக’ ஆகியிருக்கக் கூடுமென்பது அவர் கருத்து. பக்தி இயக்கக் காலத்தில், பௌத்தர்களும் சமணர்களும் ‘மிலேச்சர்கள்’ என்றே சில பகதிப் பாசுரங்களில் குறிப்பிடப் படுகின்றனர் என்பது கவனிக்கத் தக்கது. பௌத்தமும் சமணமும் தமிழ்நாட்டில் பதினைந்தாம் நூற்றாண்டு வரை சிறப்பான நிலையிலிருந்தது என்பதைத் தமிழ்நாட்டு ஊற்ப் பெயர்களிலிருந்தே அறியலாம். ‘பள்ளி’ என்ற பெயர்விகுதி உடைய ஊர்கள் அனைத்திலும் இம்மதங்கள் உயர் நிலையிலிருந்தன. ‘திருச்சிராப்பள்ளி’, ‘திருக்காட்டுப்பள்ளி’, போன்றவை. ‘பள்ளி’ என்றால், ‘ பௌத்த,சமண கல்விச் சாலை’. குறிப்பாகச் சொல்லப் போனால், ‘monastry’ ‘residential schools’ .சோழ, பாண்டிய ஆட்சிகளின் போது, இப்பள்ளிகளை இந்துக் கோயில்களாக மாற்றிவிட்டார்கள்.

’ தமிழ் தலித் படைப்பாக்கம்’ என்றால்,  கலாசார ரீதியாகவும்,சமூக ரீதியாகவும்,ஒடுக்கப்பட்டவர்களுடைய எழுத்து அவர்களுடைய சமூகக் கட்டமைப்புக்கு உட்பட்டிருந்தாலும், இலக்கியம் என்றளவில் உலகளாவிய பார்வையுடன் இருக்கிறது. அகில இந்தியத் தரத்துக்கு இது வலு சேர்க்கும்.

A review of past history

A few years ago Prof.Sydney Pollock of Chicago University edited an anthology of insightful essays by eminent western Indologists  that I found interesting.

This learned anthology of essays on South Asian Literature edited by Prof.Sheldon Pollock  is a welcome departure from many of the books  which have so far been published on this subjectstarting from the colonial period  to the present era.

Sanskrit came as a revelation to the Westerscholars in the nineteenth century and this led them to look  at India as the repository of Europe’sanishing spirituality. Max Muller introduced the study of the Vedas, the ancient texts in Sanskrit,  ‘as the dawn of the religious consciousness of man’ , while at the same time providing themissionary with a knowledge ‘as indispensable as a knowledge of the enemy’s country is to general’.  Although Hinduism is not strictly a religion in the Western sense inasmuch as it does nohave scriptures as the arbitrary authority, the early Western missionary Indologists associate the Vedas with religion, which, were, in fact, social documents depicting the way of living of aprimeval  tribe. Once Sanskrit was associated with religion, it became a natural tendency on the parof the later Western missionary scholars to look at  literature in the vernacular languages of Indi through the same ‘religious’ lens and they confused the issue  further.. Sheldon Pollock and hi fellow contributors to this remarkably- communicating book have set their aim in the rightdirection to clear many of the cobweb  problems that contemporary students of the literary  historiography South Asia have inherited from the early European scholars in this regard.

A history of literature in any language does not mean merely narrating the succession of books ina chronological order to claim antiquity and archival superiority for the concerned language. It has todeal with the  continuity of relevance of  any great book in that language  not only for the period iwhich it was written but also for the succeeding eras and how each of them had responded  to it in accordance with the changing values of the  given period.  Literature in a text is not of absolute an permanent nature but very much depends upon how the reader at a given era relates to it. Pollock illustrates this with an interesting quotation from Terry Eagleton: ‘’ Literature is like weed; one  person’s pest is another’s flower and yet another’s dinner’’.

Considering every specific situation ihistorical, the literary   have  a functional meaning and validity and cannot claim to have an ontological existence of its own, unrelated to the changing social values.  So, instead of assumin critical positions before approaching the subject and demanding answers from the texts only t justify the stand already taken,  this book is oriented toward focussing on the critical processes themselves and “ listen to the questions the texts themselves  raise”. Such an innovative reading practices have led the contributing authors of this book   to critically appreciate and understand what the texts of South Asian literature meant to “ the  people who wrote, heard ,saw or read them, and how the meanings may have changed  overtime.”

This is precisely what Norman Cutler has done in his subtle and sophisticated reading of th  Tamil texts under a dramatic title, ‘ Three moments in Tamil Literary Culture’. He deconstructthe genealogy  of Tamil culture by focussing on (1) the autobiography of U.Ve. Swaminath Iyer,(2) histories of Tamil literature that emerged as a genre of scholarship in the twentieth Century, and (3) a fifteenth century literary anthology titled ‘Purathirattu’. U.Ve. Swaminatha Iyer is forever visualised by the Tamils as the grand old man of the Tamil   language,not only because he lived up to a ripe old age  but also for his reclaiming  the grand ol    Tamil texts of a very distant past. He provided a long history for the Tamil language and also   cultural politics for the Tamils, though unwittingly.

Thanks to the early British historians and  missionary  philologists, a dubious theory  of Aryan-Brahman- Sanskrit versus Dravidia  non-Brahman- Tamil conflict got so ingrained in the psyche of the many of the English-educated  Tamil scholars of that period that the first history of the Tamil language(1904) is informed by a  chronological obsession and an abundant zeal for establishing that Tamil antidated Sanskrit. The  irony was that this culture war became only possible after Swaminatha Iyer resurrected  many of the   ancient  literary works in Tamil belonging to the Cankam age. M.S. Purnalingam Pillai’s  primer of the history of Tamil literature became the blue print for many of the histories that succeeded it in which the bottom line of discussion  was the date of the literary works, marked by aggressive  arguments  in favour of an earlier or later date.  This historicized perspective is unique to Tami and forms the essential part of the Tamil literary culture

.Summing up the essential feature of Iyer’s autobiography, Cutler says: “ Caminatha Iyer’s accountof his own life suggests that during the 19^th century the cultural activities of at least some Brahmans and high-caste non-Brahmans were largely congruent, much more so than  one might expect from  certain modern-day politicized readings of Tamil cultural history, according to which Vellalas and   members of other non-Brahman castes are true sons of the Tamil soil and Brahmans are interlopers  from the North”.

Cutler refers to the fifteenth century Tamil anthology ‘Purathirattu’(Anthology of poems on the exterior world as opposed to the interior landscape i.e. ‘akam’) compiled by an anonymous    editor. According to him  the Purathirattu collection reveals  “a much greater consciousness of    a literary heritage than in the case with either the canonization of bhakti poetry or the compilation  of Saiva Siddhantha Sastras”. That the spontaneous outpourings of the bhakti poets becam    liturgical texts much later does not reflect that they  were in any way of less of literary heritage than    ‘Purathirattu’, which includes poems from the cankam ‘Purananuru’ and ‘Pathirruppaththu’ and      poems from some of the later didactic works like ‘Naladiyar’ and ‘Pazhamozhi’ and also from the   epics, ‘Kamba Ramayanam’ and ‘Civaka Cinthamani’. The mystical  poems of the bhakti saints     can claim their lineage from the cankam love poetry(‘akam’) and as such, are endowed with a rich   literary heritage no less significant than the Purathirattu poems which are in the ‘puram’ stream as   codified  in the cankam tradition. It looks like Norman Cutler has made rather a sweeping  generalization , while  comparing the consciousness of literary heritage of the bhakti hymns and   ‘Purathirattu’. Of course the fifteenth century anthology shows that there existed a nonsectarian  culture during this period as was evident from the nature of the poems that have been compiled,       which belonged to different faiths as Saivism, Vaishnavism, Buddhism and Jainism and the role model for this great work was ‘Thirukural’, a transsectarian masterpiece, though surprisingly, not a single couplet from this great work has been included in ‘Purathirattu’.

Perhaps, for the first time in a book on Indology, English has also been treated  as one of the South Asian languages and befittingly so. The Anglo-Indian literature has a distinctive culture of its ow   that constitutes an intrinsic part of  the Indian  consciousness. To associate a language with a   nation-state is no longer valid for much of the literatures in languages like English and Spanish     have become  ‘’resolutely supra-national’’, to quote Sheldon Pollock.

‘

 

Kamban’s golden touch

———————————————

The story of Rama, perhaps, began in the collective unconscious of the ancient tribes, who inhabited India in the distant past.. The story could have remained as an oral tradition for a long time that later found expression in a written form in the Buddha Jataka tales (5^th century BCE). It was an essential part of the spiritual mythography of Buddhism. It was a simple and straightforward fable, wherein Rama represented one of the evolutionary stages of Gautama, the Buddha, before he attained Nirvana. There was only one twist in the story, the self- exile of Rama to the Himalayas to avoid the wrath of his step-mother. The Buddhist version scrupulously avoided war and violence befitting its satvic tradition

Valmiki, hailed as Atikavi (‘the first poet’), collected the various myths and legends of his time, obtained in the different parts of the Indian sub-continent and integrated them with the Rama story, bringing to bear upon the narration a thematic continuity, set in a vast canvass that spread over from Nepal in the north to SriLanka down under. Because of this inclusive setting, all the regions identified themselves with the epic, each in its own distinctive way, that when it got rendered in the language of the region, this impact of various cultural and linguistic diversities helped the story acquire a pan-Indian character. Ramayana became the intrinsic aspect of the Indian cultural psyche.

In the West, when they brought out Homer and Virgil in the European languages, the yardstick that was used to consider the quality of such works was their fidelity to the original in form and content. In the Indian context, our cultural tradition conceded a certain amount of literary freedom to those who rendered the original in their languages because those who were engaged in this stupendous task, were, invariably poets in their own right.

Ramayana exists in thirteen languages of the country and in innumerable folk versions. Each one offers us, a distinctive regional flavour, that happily integrates with the main theme.

Kamban (12^th century CE), who all that was the best in the Tamil literary tradition,( the Sangam classics belonging to the early centuries of the Christian era, Thirukural, the unparalleled literary manual for personal and social conduct, Cilappadikaram, the most elegant and sophisticated epic by a Chera prince called Ilango and most of all, the spontaneous devotional outpourings of the mystic poets of the bhakti period), chose to write the Rama story, not merely for ‘justifying the ways of God to man’ but out of ‘sheer love for narrating the story’ and ‘ poetic tribute and respect for Valmiki, the Atikavi’, as he did declare at the beginning of the epic. But Kamban did not translate the Valmiki’s Ramayana but trans-created it with masterly and subtle structural changes to suit his own literary views and concepts, without offending the sequential order of narration in the original

Kamban was a conscious literary artist, who had this thing clear in his mind that what he proposed to write was a literary piece and not a religious work that was how Valmiki’s Ramayana came to be known, during the period of Kamban, though Valmiki might not have intended it so.. The commentators for the religious works, at the time of Kamban, profusely quoted from Valmiki to drive home their sectarian views, which could have, perhaps, unsettled Kamban that he decided his work should be uncompromisingly literary giving no leeway for religious hijacking.

Though Rama had begun to be worshipped as the incarnation of Vishnu by the time Kamban wrote Ramayana, he, in his invocation poems, did not refer to any sectarian deity, but saluted the One that went on creating, protecting and annihilating the Universe and which was an endless game by itself.. Throughout the epic at several places, he  referred to this One guiding principle of the Universe, which, he categorized as the Supreme Reality.

A romantic as well as a philosophical description of a dramatic incident occurring in the Rama story, as described by Kamban, could sum up his view on religion. Rama, as he was on his way to the court of Janaka, the beautiful women of Mithila rushed to their balconies to catch a view of this handsome young man. Those, who looked at his shoulder continued to be looking at it, because it was so beautiful. Those, who looked at his feet could not take away their stare elsewhere. And the same story with those, who caught a glimpse of his sinewy hands. No one saw the complete fascinating figure of the Ayodhya prince. Kamban did not stop with this romantic imagery. He declared that like the sectarian views of different religions on God that failed to comprehend the Oneness of the Ultimate Principle, the women of Mithila saw only one physical aspect of Rama and not
his whole figure.

It is often said by the critics of the Rama legend, that whereas, Valmiki treated Rama as a

human-being, the later poets who retold the story raised him to divinity by making him an incarnation of Vishnu. It is true that at the time Kamban wrote his Ramayana, Rama was worshipped as an avatara of Vishnu, but to the credit of Kamban it must be said he treated Rama as one of the most loveable human characters, who befriended all, high and low, as his fellow brethren irrespective of their station in life.

Guha, the hunter, who helped Rama cross the river, was so friendly and affectionate towards him that Kamban’s Rama, treating him as his equal told him, ‘ My brother Lakshmana is your younger brother, my wife Sita is your sister-in-law and all of us belong to the same fraternity’. In Valmiki’s Ramayana, one feels the comradeship between Rama and Guha as described by Kamban is somewhat missing. Rama’s love for Guha left such an impact on Sita, that, when she was imprisoned in Asokavana by Ravana, she recollected this incident in her nostalgic odyssey .

Kamban’s delineated even the minor characters with deft touches of psychological insights. He crafts Kumbakarna, the brother of Ravana, as a tragic hero torn between loyalty and justice, totally unlike the character as appearing in Valmiki’s Ramayana.

Kumbakarna was an uncouth figure, a man-mountain, a glutton and a demon in Valmiki’s Ramayana. But with Kamban’s golden touch, he emerged to dizzy heights of glory, becoming as great as Bishma Pithamaha and Radheya(Karna) in Mahabharata. As one sees Kamban’s  portrayal of Kumbakarna, he cannot but conclude that all these three characters(Kumbakarna , Bhishma and Radheya) were Destiny’s children, cursed, as they were, to fight for the wrong side. Towards presenting Kumbakarna this way, Kamban deviated from the original and set up a scene in which Vibhishana met Kumbakarna in the battle-field to request him to join Rama, as he was also opposed to the abduction of Sita by Ravana.

Kamban achieved two objectives by presenting this scene  One, Vibhishana had to be justified  in his action for deserting his brother and joining his enemy and the other ,the character of Kumbakarna had to be glorified, as an heroic man of great integrity, full of love and compassion for his brothers.

Refusing to join the Rama camp, Kamban’s Kumbakarna replied : ‘No. What you have done is right by joining Rama. Because you were always a peace-loving man and against all illegal battles. You tried your best to convince Ravana to leave Sita and avoid war, but he exiled you and threatened to kill you if you did not leave the country. In your case, it is a question of ideology. Right versus Wrong. For such people, love for the kin or country does not matter. People who stand by justice transcend such narrow barriers. But, I had been participating in all the wars that our brother was engaged, whether they were for right or wrong causes. True, I protested against this unethical behaviour of our brother in abducting another man’s wife. But, having fought with him all along, I cannot desert him and especially now, when he is facing defeat. It would be selfishness on my part to do so. So leave me now to face my fate. From this.moment we are not brothers, we are enemies. I will not hesitate to vanquish Rama’s army.. Life is transitory but values are eternal.’

At the time, when Kamban’s Kumbarna lay dying, he said to Rama: ‘ I request you to promise me two things. The first is to aim an arrow to throw my body into the sea, as I do not want my enemies to see my much mutilated body. Secondly, I leave my dear brother Vibhishana in your trust, as I know, he would be the first target for Ravana, when he arrives at the battle-field to fight with you.’

Kumbarkana’s defence of Vibhishana raises an issue in the modern text. What is

patriotism? Were all the good citizens of Germany, who left their country during Hitler’s rule, unpatriotic? Kamban’s Kumbakarna has the answer; ‘People who stand by justice transcend such narrow barriers’ as patriotism, nationalism etc one may add.

Kamban’s concept of fraternity cut across not only the caste regulations, as we saw earlier as in the case of Guha, but national borders as well. Kamban continued expanding this theme of fraternity by making Rama claim Sugriva, the monkey chief as his sixth brother and later, Vibishana, the  asura prince and brother of his mortal enemy Ravana as his seventh brother. ‘Now that we are seven, your father in heaven Dasaratha would feel immensely happy”, Rama told Vibhishana.  Kamban had a way with words, which is evident here by the way Rama addressed Vibhishana in an inclusive manner by his reference to Dasaratha as Visbishana’s father that was a master stroke which could have put the latter completely at ease with himself, overcoming a possible sense of guilt he might have had for deserting his brother, Ravana.

This valuable lesson of universal brotherhood was a favourite theme of Kamban that he stressed it at several places. He had this inspiration from one of the most famous Tamil poems in Sangam poetry, in which the poet sang,’ I belong to all the cities in the world and all are my kin.’

Kamban’s Rama did not feel humiliated or perturbed when Ravana disparagingly dismissed him as one belonging to the lowliest of the low, a human-being after all. He, in fact, had a sense of pride in being a man and his ultimate triumph over the asura who was blessed with the boons given to him by the mighty gods in heaven, was hailed by the poet, as the victory of Man over divinity. God, in his descent as a human-being in this very earth had more relevance and significance for the alvars, the Tamil bhakti poets(7^th century CE to 9^th century CE) than in his being an abstraction in the form of a deity in the distant heavens. In their view, man had immense potential in him, which, when properly tapped and exploited could help him attain godhood. Kamban showcased the blueprint of such a man in the form of Rama, who, like any one of us, met with lots of emotional problems and existential dilemmas before overcoming all of them to achieve success at the end.

Kamban’s characters, whether they were heroes or villains were not either totally white or totally .black. Rama had his own blemishes like his killing Vali, when the latter least expected it. Kamban’s Vali told his wife,Thara, before he accepted the challenge of his brother to fight with him, when she reminded him that Sugriva had Rama’s support, ‘ Do you think that such an exalted soul as Rama, who did not hesitate to give his kingdom to his brother would descend so low as to commit an heinous crime?’

But the irony was, he did kill Vali stealthily. He could not defend himself, when Vali, surprised and shocked, expressed his disappointment in no uncertain terms. Kamban very

subtly had drawn this picture of a guilty Rama with artistic maturity..

Kamban’s Ravana was not a hard-hearted, brutal villain merely given to lust and violence. He was a magnificent warrior whose tragedy was that he fell in love with Sita even before he met her. His sister Surpanaka described her beauty in such a picturesque manner, that he saw Sita’s illusion even while she was talking. He asked her whether the one he was seeing before his mind’s eye was Sita but she replied it was Rama, because when she was describing Sita, she had Rama in her mind with whom she had fallen in love!  It is one of the most beautiful romantic passages in Kamban’s Ramayana. Since this incident was going to seal the fate of Ravana, Kamban dramatized the whole scene in an exquisite manner.

For the sake of love, he was prepared to lose a kingdom. When his son Indrajit told him to give up Sita, as at that time the war was almost lost, Ravana replied,’ I have chosen my enemy not in the hope that you and your uncles and my mighty army are going to support me, but I have done it on my own mental strength, energized by a feeling of all-consuming love. So long as Rama’s name will remain that he fought to the end to get back his wife, my name will also be there that I did not yield unto the last.’ This reminds us of Milton’s Satan, who thundered, ‘What though the field be lost? All is not lost, the unconquerable will, and study of revenge, immortal hate, and courage never to submit or yield.’

Kamban lost no opportunity in emphasizing over and again that Ravana’s love for Sita was not just physical infatuation but a pure, unadulterated tender feeling of the mind and even before keeping her a prisoner in Asokavana, he had kept her a prisoner in his heart! So when Rama’s arrow pierced Ravana’s chest at the end, Kamban said, it scouted for the feeling of love he had for Sita in his heart of hearts and took it away, making an exit through his back! Kamban beautifully captured the great fall of the mighty Ravana and contrasted it with his once glorious past, when he lifted the Kailash mountain, the abode of Shiva and what a fall was there and all for the sake of love!

Kamban lived during the period of Imperial cholas but, considering that he dedicated his epic, in a way, to an ordinary, simple philanthropist,  by mentioning his name ten times in the course of his narration, one may be tempted to conclude that he did not enjoy royal patronage as many other inferior poets of his period and apocryphal stories about the master poet  are not wanting, to strengthen this view.

The Rama story as embellished by Kamban

————————————————

Indira Parthasarathy

The story of Rama, perhaps, began in the collective unconscious of the ancient tribes, who inhabited India in the distant past.. The story could have remained as an oral tradition for a long time that later found expression in a written form in the Buddha Jataka tales (5^th century BCE). It was an essential part of the spiritual mythography of Buddhism. It was a simple and straightforward fable, wherein Rama represented one of the evolutionary stages of Gautama, the Buddha, before he attained Nirvana. There was only one twist in the story, the self- exile of Rama to the Himalayas to avoid the wrath of his step-mother. The Buddhist version scrupulously avoided war and violence befitting its satvic tradition

Valmiki, hailed as Atikavi (‘the first poet’), collected the various myths and legends of his time, obtained in the different parts of the Indian sub-continent and integrated them with the Rama story, bringing to bear upon the narration a thematic continuity, set in a vast canvass that spread over from Nepal in the north to SriLanka down under. Because of this inclusive setting, all the regions identified themselves with the epic, each in its own distinctive way, that when it got rendered in the language of the region, this impact of various cultural and linguistic diversities helped the story acquire a pan-Indian character. Ramayana became the intrinsic aspect of the Indian cultural psyche.

In the West, when they brought out Homer and Virgil in the European languages, the yardstick that was used to consider the quality of such works was their fidelity to the original in form and content. In the Indian context, our cultural tradition conceded a certain amount of literary freedom to those who rendered the original in their languages because those who were engaged in this stupendous task, were, invariably poets in their own right.

Ramayana exists in thirteen languages of the country and in innumerable folk versions. Each one offers us, a distinctive regional flavour, that happily integrates with the main theme.

Kamban (12^th century CE), who all that was the best in the Tamil literary tradition,( the Sangam classics belonging to the early centuries of the Christian era, Thirukural, the unparalleled literary manual for personal and social conduct, Cilappadikaram, the most elegant and sophisticated epic by a Chera prince called Ilango and most of all, the spontaneous devotional outpourings of the mystic poets of the bhakti period), chose to write the Rama story, not merely for ‘justifying the ways of God to man’ but out of ‘sheer love for narrating the story’ and ‘ poetic tribute and respect for Valmiki, the Atikavi’, as he did declare at the beginning of the epic. But Kamban did not translate the Valmiki’s Ramayana but trans-created it with masterly and subtle structural changes to suit his own literary views and concepts, without offending the sequential order of narration in the original

Kamban was a conscious literary artist, who had this thing clear in his mind that what he proposed to write was a literary piece and not a religious work that was how Valmiki’s Ramayana came to be known, during the period of Kamban, though Valmiki might not have intended it so.. The commentators for the religious works, at the time of Kamban, profusely quoted from Valmiki to drive home their sectarian views, which could have, perhaps, unsettled Kamban that he decided his work should be uncompromisingly literary giving no leeway for religious hijacking.

Though Rama had begun to be worshipped as the incarnation of Vishnu by the time Kamban wrote Ramayana, he, in his invocation poems, did not refer to any sectarian deity, but saluted the One that went on creating, protecting and annihilating the Universe and which was an endless game by itself.. Throughout the epic at several places, he  referred to this One guiding principle of the Universe, which, he categorized as the Supreme Reality.

A romantic as well as a philosophical description of a dramatic incident occurring in the Rama story, as described by Kamban, could sum up his view on religion. Rama, as he was on his way to the court of Janaka, the beautiful women of Mithila rushed to their balconies to catch a view of this handsome young man. Those, who looked at his shoulder continued to be looking at it, because it was so beautiful. Those, who looked at his feet could not take away their stare elsewhere. And the same story with those, who caught a glimpse of his sinewy hands. No one saw the complete fascinating figure of the Ayodhya prince. Kamban did not stop with this romantic imagery. He declared that like the sectarian views of different religions on God that failed to comprehend the Oneness of the Ultimate Principle, the women of Mithila saw only one physical aspect of Rama and not
his whole figure.

It is often said by the critics of the Rama legend, that whereas, Valmiki treated Rama as a

human-being, the later poets who retold the story raised him to divinity by making him an incarnation of Vishnu. It is true that at the time Kamban wrote his Ramayana, Rama was worshipped as an avatara of Vishnu, but to the credit of Kamban it must be said he treated Rama as one of the most loveable human characters, who befriended all, high and low, as his fellow brethren irrespective of their station in life.

Guha, the hunter, who helped Rama cross the river, was so friendly and affectionate towards him that Kamban’s Rama, treating him as his equal told him, ‘ My brother Lakshmana is your younger brother, my wife Sita is your sister-in-law and all of us belong to the same fraternity’. In Valmiki’s Ramayana, one feels the comradeship between Rama and Guha as described by Kamban is somewhat missing. Rama’s love for Guha left such an impact on Sita, that, when she was imprisoned in Asokavana by Ravana, she recollected this incident in her nostalgic odyssey .

Kamban’s delineated even the minor characters with deft touches of psychological insights. He crafts Kumbakarna, the brother of Ravana, as a tragic hero torn between loyalty and justice, totally unlike the character as appearing in Valmiki’s Ramayana.

Kumbakarna was an uncouth figure, a man-mountain, a glutton and a demon in Valmiki’s Ramayana. But with Kamban’s golden touch, he emerged to dizzy heights of glory, becoming as great as Bishma Pithamaha and Radheya(Karna) in Mahabharata. As one sees Kamban’s  portrayal of Kumbakarna, he cannot but conclude that all these three characters(Kumbakarna , Bhishma and Radheya) were Destiny’s children, cursed, as they were, to fight for the wrong side. Towards presenting Kumbakarna this way, Kamban deviated from the original and set up a scene in which Vibhishana met Kumbakarna in the battle-field to request him to join Rama, as he was also opposed to the abduction of Sita by Ravana.

Kamban achieved two objectives by presenting this scene  One, Vibhishana had to be justified  in his action for deserting his brother and joining his enemy and the other ,the character of Kumbakarna had to be glorified, as an heroic man of great integrity, full of love and compassion for his brothers.

Refusing to join the Rama camp, Kamban’s Kumbakarna replied : ‘No. What you have done is right by joining Rama. Because you were always a peace-loving man and against all illegal battles. You tried your best to convince Ravana to leave Sita and avoid war, but he exiled you and threatened to kill you if you did not leave the country. In your case, it is a question of ideology. Right versus Wrong. For such people, love for the kin or country does not matter. People who stand by justice transcend such narrow barriers. But, I had been participating in all the wars that our brother was engaged, whether they were for right or wrong causes. True, I protested against this unethical behaviour of our brother in abducting another man’s wife. But, having fought with him all along, I cannot desert him and especially now, when he is facing defeat. It would be selfishness on my part to do so. So leave me now to face my fate. From this.moment we are not brothers, we are enemies. I will not hesitate to vanquish Rama’s army.. Life is transitory but values are eternal.’

At the time, when Kamban’s Kumbarna lay dying, he said to Rama: ‘ I request you to promise me two things. The first is to aim an arrow to throw my body into the sea, as I do not want my enemies to see my much mutilated body. Secondly, I leave my dear brother Vibhishana in your trust, as I know, he would be the first target for Ravana, when he arrives at the battle-field to fight with you.’

Kumbarkana’s defence of Vibhishana raises an issue in the modern text. What is

patriotism? Were all the good citizens of Germany, who left their country during Hitler’s rule, unpatriotic? Kamban’s Kumbakarna has the answer; ‘People who stand by justice transcend such narrow barriers’ as patriotism, nationalism etc one may add.

Kamban’s concept of fraternity cut across not only the caste regulations, as we saw earlier as in the case of Guha, but national borders as well. Kamban continued expanding this theme of fraternity by making Rama claim Sugriva, the monkey chief as his sixth brother and later, Vibishana, the  asura prince and brother of his mortal enemy Ravana as his seventh brother. ‘Now that we are seven, your father in heaven Dasaratha would feel immensely happy”, Rama told Vibhishana.  Kamban had a way with words, which is evident here by the way Rama addressed Vibhishana in an inclusive manner by his reference to Dasaratha as Visbishana’s father that was a master stroke which could have put the latter completely at ease with himself, overcoming a possible sense of guilt he might have had for deserting his brother, Ravana.

This valuable lesson of universal brotherhood was a favourite theme of Kamban that he stressed it at several places. He had this inspiration from one of the most famous Tamil poems in Sangam poetry, in which the poet sang,’ I belong to all the cities in the world and all are my kin.’

Kamban’s Rama did not feel humiliated or perturbed when Ravana disparagingly dismissed him as one belonging to the lowliest of the low, a human-being after all. He, in fact, had a sense of pride in being a man and his ultimate triumph over the asura who was blessed with the boons given to him by the mighty gods in heaven, was hailed by the poet, as the victory of Man over divinity. God, in his descent as a human-being in this very earth had more relevance and significance for the alvars, the Tamil bhakti poets(7^th century CE to 9^th century CE) than in his being an abstraction in the form of a deity in the distant heavens. In their view, man had immense potential in him, which, when properly tapped and exploited could help him attain godhood. Kamban showcased the blueprint of such a man in the form of Rama, who, like any one of us, met with lots of emotional problems and existential dilemmas before overcoming all of them to achieve success at the end.

Kamban’s characters, whether they were heroes or villains were not either totally white or totally .black. Rama had his own blemishes like his killing Vali, when the latter least expected it. Kamban’s Vali told his wife,Thara, before he accepted the challenge of his brother to fight with him, when she reminded him that Sugriva had Rama’s support, ‘ Do you think that such an exalted soul as Rama, who did not hesitate to give his kingdom to his brother would descend so low as to commit an heinous crime?’

But the irony was, he did kill Vali stealthily. He could not defend himself, when Vali, surprised and shocked, expressed his disappointment in no uncertain terms. Kamban very

subtly had drawn this picture of a guilty Rama with artistic maturity..

Kamban’s Ravana was not a hard-hearted, brutal villain merely given to lust and violence. He was a magnificent warrior whose tragedy was that he fell in love with Sita even before he met her. His sister Surpanaka described her beauty in such a picturesque manner, that he saw Sita’s illusion even while she was talking. He asked her whether the one he was seeing before his mind’s eye was Sita but she replied it was Rama, because when she was describing Sita, she had Rama in her mind with whom she had fallen in love!  It is one of the most beautiful romantic passages in Kamban’s Ramayana. Since this incident was going to seal the fate of Ravana, Kamban dramatized the whole scene in an exquisite manner.

For the sake of love, he was prepared to lose a kingdom. When his son Indrajit told him to give up Sita, as at that time the war was almost lost, Ravana replied,’ I have chosen my enemy not in the hope that you and your uncles and my mighty army are going to support me, but I have done it on my own mental strength, energized by a feeling of all-consuming love. So long as Rama’s name will remain that he fought to the end to get back his wife, my name will also be there that I did not yield unto the last.’ This reminds us of Milton’s Satan, who thundered, ‘What though the field be lost? All is not lost, the unconquerable will, and study of revenge, immortal hate, and courage never to submit or yield.’

Kamban lost no opportunity in emphasizing over and again that Ravana’s love for Sita was not just physical infatuation but a pure, unadulterated tender feeling of the mind and even before keeping her a prisoner in Asokavana, he had kept her a prisoner in his heart! So when Rama’s arrow pierced Ravana’s chest at the end, Kamban said, it scouted for the feeling of love he had for Sita in his heart of hearts and took it away, making an exit through his back! Kamban beautifully captured the great fall of the mighty Ravana and contrasted it with his once glorious past, when he lifted the Kailash mountain, the abode of Shiva and what a fall was there and all for the sake of love!

Kamban lived during the period of Imperial cholas but, considering that he dedicated his epic, in a way, to an ordinary, simple philanthropist,  by mentioning his name ten times in the course of his narration, one may be tempted to conclude that he did not enjoy royal patronage as many other inferior poets of his period and apocryphal stories about the master poet  are not wanting, to strengthen this view.

The Rama story as embellished by Kamban

————————————————

 

 

கலாசார மாற்றங்கள்-வரலாற்றுப் பார்வையில் புரிதல் வேண்டும்

புதுவை ஃப்ரென்ச் மொழியியல் நிறுவனம் வெளியிட்ட தமிழ்-சம்ஸ்கிருதம் பற்றிய ஒரு கருத்தரங்குத் தொகுதியில், தமது முன்னுரையில், எம்.கண்ணன்,,’தமிழ் சம்ஸ்கிருதம் உறவு பற்றிய ஒப்பீட்டு ஆய்வு செய்வதற்கான தகுதி பெற்றவர்கள் இந்தியாவில் அநேகமாக இல்லை என்பதால், அயல்நாட்டு ஆய்வாளர்களின் கட்டுரைகள்தாம் இந்நூலில் இடம் பெற்றிருக்கின்றன’ என்று குறிப்பிட்டிருந்தார். இது மறுக்கவியலாத கூற்று என்றுதான் தோன்றுகிறது. மொழிகளை உணர்ச்சிகரமாகவோ அல்லது ஓர் அரசியல் கோஷ அணுகுமுறையில் பார்க்கத் தொடங்கினால் சிந்தனை வயமான ஆய்வுக்கு அங்கு இடமிருக்காது. இதுதான் இப்பொழுது தமிழ்நாட்டுப் பல்கலைகழகக் கூடாரங்களில் நாம் காணும் அவல நிலை. இதனால் தமிழில் உள்ள நம்முடைய செவ்வியல் இலக்கியங்களை கூட விமர்சனக் கண்ணோட்டத்தோடு ஆராயும் பயிற்சியும் இல்லாமல் போய்விட்டது.

தமிழைத் தவிர வெறொன்றுமறியேன் பராபரமே என்றிருந்து விட்டால், தமிழின் முழு அருமையையும் கூட நம்மால் அறிந்து கொண்டுவிட்டதாகச் சொல்ல முடியாது.

மொழி, ஒரு குறிப்பிட்ட சமூகத்தின் கலாசார வெளிப்பாடே யன்றிச் சாதி,,மதம் ஆகியவற்றுக்கும், அதற்கும் எந்த சம்பந்தமும் கிடையாது. அம்பேத்கார், ஒரு மிகச் சிறந்த சிந்தனையாளராக உருவாகி, ஹிந்து மதத்தின் ஆணி வேர்களை அசைத்துப் பார்க்க முடிந்ததென்றால், அவருடைய சம்ஸ்கிருத புலமையே இதற்குக் காரணம்.

சேக்கிழார் இயற்றிய, ’பெரிய புராணத்’ துக்கு சம்ஸ்கிருத மொழியிலிருந்த ‘உபமன்யு பக்த விலாஸமே ’ மூல நூல் என்று பலர் சொல்லி வந்திருக்கிறார்கள். காரணம், சமயம் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட எந்த நூலாக இருந்தாலும் அது வட மொழியில்தான் முதலில் தோன்றியிருக்க வேண்டும் என்ற நம்பிக்கை.

‘உபமன்யு பக்த விலாஸம்’ என்ற நூல், ஸ்ரீநிவாச கவி என்பவரால், விஜயநகர அரசர் அச்சுத ராயன்(கிருஷ்ணதேவராயர் மகன்) காலத்தில பதினாறாம் நூற்றாண்டில் சாம்ஸ்கிருத்த்தில் எழுதப்பட்டது. அவர் அப்படியே சேக்கிழாரின் ‘பெரிய புராணத்தை  வடமொழியில் மொழி யாக்கம் செய்திருக்கிறார்,அவ்வளவுதான்.  காஞ்சிபுரம் ஏகாம்பரநாதர் கோயிலிலுள்ள அச்சுதராயன் காலத்திய சம்ஸ்கிருத கல்வெட்டு(பதினாறாம் நூற்றாண்டு)) இதைக் குறிப்பிடுகின்றது, மேலும், சேக்கிழார், குலோத்துங்க சோழனை(பன்னிரெண்டாம் நூற்றாண்டு) க் குறிப்பிடும் செய்யுளும் ஸ்ரீநிவாச கவியின் நூலில் அப்படியே மொழியாக்கம் பெற்றிருக்கிறது. ’உபமன்யு பக்த விலாஸம்’ ‘பெரிய புராணத்’ துக்கு முந்தி என்றால் குலோத்துங்கனைப் பற்றிய குறிப்பு அதில் எப்படி இருந்திருக்க முடியும்? சம்ஸ்கிருத அறிவு மூலமாகத்தான் நம்மால் இதைத் தெளிவுபடுத்திக் கொள்ள முடிகின்றது.

அடுத்ததாகத் ,தமிழில் உள்ள பெரும்பான்மையான செவ்வியல் இலக்கிய நூல்களுக்கு செம்பதிப்பு இல்லை. சான்றாகத், தொல்காப்பியப் ’பொருளதிகாரத்’திலும், பதிற்றுப்பத்திலும் பிற்சேர்க்கைகள்( பதிற்றுப்பத்துப் பதிகங்ளில் பெரும்பகுதி, காலத்தால் பிந்தியவை) உள்ளன. ’பக்தி இலக்கியம்’ என்றறியப்படும் நாலாயிர திவ்யப் பிரபந்தத்தில் காணும் முத்திரைப் பாடல்கள்(Signature songs) அனைத்தும் பிறகு சேர்க்கப்பட்டிருக்க வேண்டும். ‘நாலாயிரம் என்ற கணக்கிற்காக அவையும் கவிஞர்களின் பாடல்களாக வைத்து எண்ணப்.படுகின்றன. பக்தி இலக்கியங்கள், ஒவ்வொரு குறிப்பிட்ட சமயத்துக்குரிய வழிபாட்டு நூல்கள் என்று ஆகிவிட்ட படியால் ஆராய்ச்சி உலகம் செவ்வியல் வழியவையான இப் ‘பக்தி நூல்களை’ ((பன்னிரு திருமுறைகளையும் சேர்த்தே சொல்லுகிறேன்) சமூக-இலக்கிய விமர்சனப் பார்வையோடு அணுகுவதில்லை. பேராசிரியர் வையாபுரிப்பிள்ளை  பதிப்பித்த ‘மர்ரே’பக்தி நூல் வெளியீடுகளிலும் குரு பரம்பரை பார்வையைத்தான் நம்மால் காண முடிகிறது.

சிலப்பதிகாரத்துக்கும்  ஒரு செம்பதிப்புத் தேவை. அதில் காணும் பதிகமும். சமஸ்கிருத மயமாகிவிட்ட,’மதுரைக் காண்ட்த்தி’ன் ‘பிற்பகுதியும், ‘வஞ்சிக் காண்டமும்’ பிற்சேர்க்கைகளாகவோ அல்லது கலாசார மாற்றங்களுக்கு உட்பட்டவைகளாகவோ தோன்றுகின்றன. இது குறித்து ஆழமான ஆய்வு தேவை. ‘வஞ்சிக் காண்டத்தை’ நிறுவதற்குத் தான், சிலப்பதிகாரப் பதிகத்தில்  இக்காவியத்தின் செய்திகளாக மூன்று உண்மைகள் வற்புறுத்தப் படுகின்றன.  சேரன் செங்குட்டுவன் பற்றி பரணர் பாடலாக அறியப்படும் பதிகத்தையும் இதன் பின்னணியில்தான் பார்க்க வேண்டும். சேரன் வடவர் மீது வெற்றி கொண்டான் என்ற அரசியல் செய்தியைக் காட்டிலும் சேர நாடு, கலாசார வழியாகப், பெரும் மாற்றத்துக்கு உள்ளானது என்பதுதான் முக்கியமான செய்தி..

எப்பாலும் கோடாமல் ஆய்வுக்கென்றே   தம்மை அர்ப்பணித்துக் கொண்ட செவ்வியல் இலக்கியங்களில் தேர்ச்சி கொண்ட அறிஞர்கள் இப்பணிக்குத் தேவை.

சடங்கும் கலாசாரமும்

அண்மையில, அரசாங்கம், ஒரு சிற்றூர் கோயில் திருவிழா ஒட்டி நடக்க இருந்த எருதுச் சண்டையைத் தடை உத்தரவு போட்டு நிறுத்தி விட்டது. இதனால், மனம் தளராமல், அவ்விழா அன்று, ஆயிரம் கோழிகளை அக்கோயில் தெய்வமான முனியப்பனுக்குக் காணிக்கைக் கொடுக்கும் சடங்கை அந்தக் கிராமத்து மக்கள் நிகழ்த்தினார்கள் என்பது செய்தி.

எருதுச் சண்டை என்பதை சமயம் சார்ந்த ஒரு கலாசார வைபவமாக அவ்வூர் மக்கள் மக்களின் அடிமனத்தில் காலங்காலமாக நிழலாடிக் கொண்டிருக்கக் கூடும். அரசாங்கத் தடை அவர்களுடைய அக்கலாசார அடையாளத்துக்கு விடுக்கப்பட்ட சவாலாக அக்கிராமத்து மக்கள் நினைத்திருக்கலாம். கோழியைக் கொல்வதை யாரும் தடுக்க முடியாது. ஹிந்து முன்னணியினர் பசுவைக் கொல்வதற்குத் தான் ஆட்சேபணை தெரிவிக்கக் கூடும். மதத்தின் பேரில் நிகழும் மனிதக் கொலைகளைக். கோட்பாட்டு யுத்தமாகத்தான் பெரும்பாலான அரசியல் கட்சிகள் நினைக்கின்றன.கோழிக்கு ஆதரவாக இன்னும் எந்த அரசியல் கட்சியும் உருவாகவில்லை. அதனால்தான், தங்கள் எதிர்ப்பைத் தெரிவிக்கும் வழியாக ஆயிரம் கோழிகளை முனியப்பனுக்குக் கடன் நேர்த்தியாகச் செலுத்தியிருக்கிறார்கள் அவ்வூர் மக்கள்.

தொல்குடிமக்கள் அடிமனத்தில் சடங்கு என்பது அவரள் கலாசாரத்தின் இன்றியமையாத அம்சம்,அடையாளம்.  இந்தத் தொல்குடிக் கலாசாரமே பிறகு உருவான ,ஹிந்து சமயத்தின் பல்வேறு விழாக்களின் அடிவேராகவும் இருக்கின்றது. அழகர் ஆறு கடப்பதை நிகழ்த்தாமல், மீனாட்சிக் கல்யாணம் நடைபெறுமா? மீனாட்சிக் கல்யாணத்தை தடை உத்தரவு போட்டு நிறுத்தி விட முடியுமா?

ஒருவகையில், பார்க்கப்போனால், இந்நிகழ்வுகள் அல்லது சடங்குகள் அக்காலத்திய நாடகங்கள்.

ஆகவே தங்கள் கலாசாரத்துக்கு விடுக்கப்பட்ட எந்தச் சவாலையும் மக்கள் அவ்வளவு சுலபமாக ஏற்றுக் கொள்ள மாட்டார்கள்

jeyamohan’s ‘Aram’.

Jeyamohan,  one of the most significant and trend-setting Tamil writers of the present era, announced his arrival  in the field of serious and sophisticated writing by his, what is now hailed as his magnum opus by discerning critics, ‘ Vishnupuram’. Conceived as a non-linear fiction, where events are projected in a cyclic order, synchronizing  with the concept of history in the Indian cultural tradition, this novel explores the multi[le layers of meaning and substance in the three primary cosmic principles of creation, preservation and annihilation. It is a novel of epic dimension crafted in an innovative style.

‘Aram’ (‘Righteuousness’)  is a collection of twelve long short stories, thematically linked with the title.

In this era of ethical relativism, the philosophical issues such as which is absolutely good and which is absolutely bad may seem apparently irrelevant. But, yet, righteousness as an intrinsic trait of an individual(such rare specimens who are not yet wanting) does not fail to find expression in the form of indignation, compassion, infinite perseverance, capacity for suffering, sense of beauty for its own sake, humanism,, gratitude and world vision. Like’ the quality of mercy’, it affects both, the one who has this trait and the one who is provoked to narrate  his/her story and in this case the writer himself who has this existential dilemma of reconciling between romantic idealism and the practical worldly outlook. . . The author mentions this in his afterword. I feel he should have included the reader also. After finishing reading this book  ,I felt that one cannot write off humanity as yet!

All the twelve stories are written based on real characters, the sequential narration of events are fictionalized with nuanced skill to add aesthetic charm and literary elegance.

Evergreen Devan

Reading Devan’s short stories was a rewarding experience for me,

when  I was a student in the school in the forties of the last century.

Yes, a rewarding experience, literally.

I need explaining this.

My paternal grandmother was fond of reading books. Her reading

habit was not confined to reading the prayer chants dedicated to the

various gods and goddesses, as what her contemporaries were

doing at that time, but to  include  in her reading schedule

modern Tamil fiction. She gradually got graduated from reading

the shilling shockers and penny thrillers to reading Ananda Vikatan,

and Kalki, the most popular weeklies of that era.

Soon, cataract interfered with her reading habit. She refused to go

for a surgery ,as it was her firm conviction not to interfere with what

had been ordained by Nature. She requisitioned my services at this

stage and I was commissioned to read for her the serials written by

the celebrated writers, Kalki and Devan in those illustrious weeklies.

‘Thuppariyum Sambhu’ by Devan was her hot favourite. My

grandmother, like an American grandma, believed that everything

had a price. She paid me one anna and a quarter for every hour.

This compensation went a long way those days, as it could fetch two

idlis and a masala dosa

This what I meant when I said reading Devan was a rewarding

experience for me when I was young. This was doubly rewarding in

the sense, I got initiated into the world of  Tamil literary fiction.

‘Thuppuariyum Sambhu’ was, perhaps, the first Tamil novel, with a

bungling , clumsy, common man as the hero, who  gate crashes

by accident into the world of mystery ,thrill and adventure with all

those very blundering qualities standing him in good stand and

accounting for his incredible success in solving crimes. My parents

used to very often call me clumsy and at that age, finding a kindred

soul in Sambhu, I felt proud and optimistic.

‘Thuppuariyum Sambhu’ is one of the masterpieces in Tamil fiction.

Till then, the Tamil fiction was a portrait gallery of inimitable

handsome heroes of noble birth, high learning and chivalry. No one

could have imagined at that time a lowly bank clerk with a face

looking crowded  by  such a prominent nose would have kept the

readers  on their toes every week .Devan, perhaps, hit the jackpot

when in the very first episode Sambhu found the diamond necklace

in the cashew nut cake !

There was no stopping him after that!

I do not know whether those Hollywood guys who produced

Inspector Jaques Clouseau in 1963  could have been familiar with

Sambhu. When I saw Peter Sellers as Clouseau, he strongly reminded

me of our own Sambhu in his injured-innocent looks and other

mannerisms. I recollect in yet another movie, Peter Sellers

imitated the Indian accent while speaking English in the most

brilliant manner.

Later, when I got acquainted with Charles Dickens in the college, I

found  there was a good deal in common between Devan’s

characters set in the Tamil milieu and Dickensian portrayals of the

Victorian era.

Eccentric and at the same time pathetically comical and helpless,

many of them provoke our sympathy and laughter at one and the

same time. The common temptation of a Devan reader is to compare

him with P.G.Wodehouse, the British humourist of the 20^th century.

No doubt, both of them are great humourists. But the comparison

stops here. Wodehousian characters like Lord Elmsworth, Bertiee

Wooster, Psmith (with ‘P’silent) and the innumerable spinster aunts

are stylised,  one-dimensional and static  caricatures

indicating no evolving at all, with the progress of the story and they

are predictable. They look like frozen victims caught in a time warp

Devan’s  characters,on the other hand,  are not stagnated but evolve

gradually, drawing strength from their inner potential and

experiences, evidence for which we see in his ,what  I would consider

as his masterpiece ‘Mr.Vedantham’

Maybe, a hard-nosed literary critic would not agree with me in

calling a romantic and sentimental novel belonging to the popular

genre as a literary masterpiece. In fact, we learnt to throw such

literary jargons such as ‘popular writing’ and’ literary writing’ after

westernization. Even in the west, such literary classifications came

only afterthe Industrial Revolution, when the privileged classes kept

their identity alive by such critical branding. So Dickens, because he

was a great hit with the working classes, was called a ‘popular’ writer

and Virginia Woolf ,who had selected readership called ‘a serious

writer’. It may be pertinent to ask at this juncture, whether

Shakespeare was a popular writer or an ivory tower bard condemned

to be read only by a few? Even during the period he lived and wrote

he was extremely popular with the masses. ‘Sweetest Shakespeare,

Fancy’s child’ says John Milton, one of the most learned among the

English poets. So such categorizations as ‘popular writing’ as against

‘serious’ writing’ is of recent origin in the west and imported by the

self-styled intellectual elite to convince themselves of their  own

literary credibility.

In the thirties and forties of the last century, the Tamil critics, fed on

a  fat diet of western literary  criticism, and totally ignorant of our

own  Indian poetics, held the view that any  work with a

readership  of more than five hundred, could not be considered as

‘literary’.

Kalki and Devan, as popular editors of two very popular Tamil

Weeklies had a huge following, a fact that did not go well with the

estimate of these elitist eggheads. Their novels were dismissed by

them as ‘popular writing’ as if ‘popular’ is a dirty word synonymous

with pornography.

Devan wrote  “Mr.Vedantham’ as a serial to cater to the hungry

needs of thousands  of middle- brow readers belonging to the urban

middle- class. As a non-proprietry editor of a popular weekly Devan

had two commitments; one, to himself that he could feel proud of

what he had written and two, that he had to have an eye on the

circulation of the weekly, conforming to the laws of magazine

economics. Studying all the novels that Devan wrote in this context,

one could say he had done a remarkable job by arriving at the golden

formula  to provide good reading for his readers and with

commendable literary flair.

This novel describes the struggles, travails, disappointments and

ultimate  success of a rural middle class Brahmin youth Vedantham.

By narrating his story, the author provides subtle, insightful details

of the social, cultural and economic structure of the Tamil society

during the forties of the previous century.

The Brahmin community, caught between two stools of culture

that were at variance at each other during the colonial rule. opted

for their survival by adopting the benefits of a western education

by forsaking their own cultural mores that led to their social

degradation. This is beautifully illustrated by some of the Brahmin

characters portrayed in this novel.

But Vedantham has not set forhimself very big ambitions like

achieving wealth and power to reach the top of the social hierarchy

but, he just dreams of becoming a good journalist  and get married

to his aunt’s daughter, whom he loves. The story centres around this

simple theme and within this frame, Devan introduces a panoramic

picture  of various characters representing  different cross-sections

of the Tamil society, each one distinctive in his/her own way.

Two brothers, Swamy and Singham play a very significant role

in Vedantham’s life. Both are aggressive, egoistic, unbending and

at the same with hearts of gold. They feel too proud even to accept

expressions of gratitude from their beneficiaries. Such characters

may belong to the category of vanishing species in the present

context of values, the bottom line of which assures that there cannot

be  free lunches.

Devan was at his creative best in some of his later works like

‘Rajathin Manoradham’, in which the mundane experiences of

constructing a middle class family dwelling brings into focus all

the cultural aspects of such a venture and narrated with such a

delightful humour that only Devan could.

A comprehensive study of all Devan’s works should be undertaken.

 

Reading Devan’s short stories was a rewarding experience for me,

when  I was a student in the school in the forties of the last century.

Yes, a rewarding experience, literally.

I need explaining this.

My paternal grandmother was fond of reading books. Her reading

habit was not confined to reading the prayer chants dedicated to the

various gods and goddesses, as what her contemporaries were

doing at that time, but to  include  in her reading schedule

modern Tamil fiction. She gradually got graduated from reading

the shilling shockers and penny thrillers to reading Ananda Vikatan,

and Kalki, the most popular weeklies of that era.

Soon, cataract interfered with her reading habit. She refused to go

for a surgery ,as it was her firm conviction not to interfere with what

had been ordained by Nature. She requisitioned my services at this

stage and I was commissioned to read for her the serials written by

the celebrated writers, Kalki and Devan in those illustrious weeklies.

‘Thuppariyum Sambhu’ by Devan was her hot favourite. My

grandmother, like an American grandma, believed that everything

had a price. She paid me one anna and a quarter for every hour.

This compensation went a long way those days, as it could fetch two

idlis and a masala dosa

This what I meant when I said reading Devan was a rewarding

experience for me when I was young. This was doubly rewarding in

the sense, I got initiated into the world of  Tamil literary fiction.

‘Thuppuariyum Sambhu’ was, perhaps, the first Tamil novel, with a

bungling , clumsy, common man as the hero, who  gate crashes

by accident into the world of mystery ,thrill and adventure with all

those very blundering qualities standing him in good stand and

accounting for his incredible success in solving crimes. My parents

used to very often call me clumsy and at that age, finding a kindred

soul in Sambhu, I felt proud and optimistic.

‘Thuppuariyum Sambhu’ is one of the masterpieces in Tamil fiction.

Till then, the Tamil fiction was a portrait gallery of inimitable

handsome heroes of noble birth, high learning and chivalry. No one

could have imagined at that time a lowly bank clerk with a face

looking crowded  by  such a prominent nose would have kept the

readers  on their toes every week .Devan, perhaps, hit the jackpot

when in the very first episode Sambhu found the diamond necklace

in the cashew nut cake !

There was no stopping him after that!

I do not know whether those Hollywood guys who produced

Inspector Jaques Clouseau in 1963  could have been familiar with

Sambhu. When I saw Peter Sellers as Clouseau, he strongly reminded

me of our own Sambhu in his injured-innocent looks and other

mannerisms. I recollect in yet another movie, Peter Sellers

imitated the Indian accent while speaking English in the most

brilliant manner.

Later, when I got acquainted with Charles Dickens in the college, I

found  there was a good deal in common between Devan’s

characters set in the Tamil milieu and Dickensian portrayals of the

Victorian era.

Eccentric and at the same time pathetically comical and helpless,

many of them provoke our sympathy and laughter at one and the

same time. The common temptation of a Devan reader is to compare

him with P.G.Wodehouse, the British humourist of the 20^th century.

No doubt, both of them are great humourists. But the comparison

stops here. Wodehousian characters like Lord Elmsworth, Bertiee

Wooster, Psmith (with ‘P’silent) and the innumerable spinster aunts

are stylised,  one-dimensional and static  caricatures

indicating no evolving at all, with the progress of the story and they

are predictable. They look like frozen victims caught in a time warp

Devan’s  characters,on the other hand,  are not stagnated but evolve

gradually, drawing strength from their inner potential and

experiences, evidence for which we see in his ,what  I would consider

as his masterpiece ‘Mr.Vedantham’

Maybe, a hard-nosed literary critic would not agree with me in

calling a romantic and sentimental novel belonging to the popular

genre as a literary masterpiece. In fact, we learnt to throw such

literary jargons such as ‘popular writing’ and’ literary writing’ after

westernization. Even in the west, such literary classifications came

only afterthe Industrial Revolution, when the privileged classes kept

their identity alive by such critical branding. So Dickens, because he

was a great hit with the working classes, was called a ‘popular’ writer

and Virginia Woolf ,who had selected readership called ‘a serious

writer’. It may be pertinent to ask at this juncture, whether

Shakespeare was a popular writer or an ivory tower bard condemned

to be read only by a few? Even during the period he lived and wrote

he was extremely popular with the masses. ‘Sweetest Shakespeare,

Fancy’s child’ says John Milton, one of the most learned among the

English poets. So such categorizations as ‘popular writing’ as against

‘serious’ writing’ is of recent origin in the west and imported by the

self-styled intellectual elite to convince themselves of their  own

literary credibility.

In the thirties and forties of the last century, the Tamil critics, fed on

a  fat diet of western literary  criticism, and totally ignorant of our

own  Indian poetics, held the view that any  work with a

readership  of more than five hundred, could not be considered as

‘literary’.

Kalki and Devan, as popular editors of two very popular Tamil

Weeklies had a huge following, a fact that did not go well with the

estimate of these elitist eggheads. Their novels were dismissed by

them as ‘popular writing’ as if ‘popular’ is a dirty word synonymous

with pornography.

Devan wrote  “Mr.Vedantham’ as a serial to cater to the hungry

needs of thousands  of middle- brow readers belonging to the urban

middle- class. As a non-proprietry editor of a popular weekly Devan

had two commitments; one, to himself that he could feel proud of

what he had written and two, that he had to have an eye on the

circulation of the weekly, conforming to the laws of magazine

economics. Studying all the novels that Devan wrote in this context,

one could say he had done a remarkable job by arriving at the golden

formula  to provide good reading for his readers and with

commendable literary flair.

This novel describes the struggles, travails, disappointments and

ultimate  success of a rural middle class Brahmin youth Vedantham.

By narrating his story, the author provides subtle, insightful details

of the social, cultural and economic structure of the Tamil society

during the forties of the previous century.

The Brahmin community, caught between two stools of culture

that were at variance at each other during the colonial rule. opted

for their survival by adopting the benefits of a western education

by forsaking their own cultural mores that led to their social

degradation. This is beautifully illustrated by some of the Brahmin

characters portrayed in this novel.

But Vedantham has not set forhimself very big ambitions like

achieving wealth and power to reach the top of the social hierarchy

but, he just dreams of becoming a good journalist  and get married

to his aunt’s daughter, whom he loves. The story centres around this

simple theme and within this frame, Devan introduces a panoramic

picture  of various characters representing  different cross-sections

of the Tamil society, each one distinctive in his/her own way.

Two brothers, Swamy and Singham play a very significant role

in Vedantham’s life. Both are aggressive, egoistic, unbending and

at the same with hearts of gold. They feel too proud even to accept

expressions of gratitude from their beneficiaries. Such characters

may belong to the category of vanishing species in the present

context of values, the bottom line of which assures that there cannot

be  free lunches.

Devan was at his creative best in some of his later works like

‘Rajathin Manoradham’, in which the mundane experiences of

constructing a middle class family dwelling brings into focus all

the cultural aspects of such a venture and narrated with such a

delightful humour that only Devan could.

A comprehensive study of all Devan’s works should be undertaken.

 

Reading Devan’s short stories was a rewarding experience for me,

when  I was a student in the school in the forties of the last century.

Yes, a rewarding experience, literally.

I need explaining this.

My paternal grandmother was fond of reading books. Her reading

habit was not confined to reading the prayer chants dedicated to the

various gods and goddesses, as what her contemporaries were

doing at that time, but to  include  in her reading schedule

modern Tamil fiction. She gradually got graduated from reading

the shilling shockers and penny thrillers to reading Ananda Vikatan,

and Kalki, the most popular weeklies of that era.

Soon, cataract interfered with her reading habit. She refused to go

for a surgery ,as it was her firm conviction not to interfere with what

had been ordained by Nature. She requisitioned my services at this

stage and I was commissioned to read for her the serials written by

the celebrated writers, Kalki and Devan in those illustrious weeklies.

‘Thuppariyum Sambhu’ by Devan was her hot favourite. My

grandmother, like an American grandma, believed that everything

had a price. She paid me one anna and a quarter for every hour.

This compensation went a long way those days, as it could fetch two

idlis and a masala dosa

This what I meant when I said reading Devan was a rewarding

experience for me when I was young. This was doubly rewarding in

the sense, I got initiated into the world of  Tamil literary fiction.

‘Thuppuariyum Sambhu’ was, perhaps, the first Tamil novel, with a

bungling , clumsy, common man as the hero, who  gate crashes

by accident into the world of mystery ,thrill and adventure with all

those very blundering qualities standing him in good stand and

accounting for his incredible success in solving crimes. My parents

used to very often call me clumsy and at that age, finding a kindred

soul in Sambhu, I felt proud and optimistic.

‘Thuppuariyum Sambhu’ is one of the masterpieces in Tamil fiction.

Till then, the Tamil fiction was a portrait gallery of inimitable

handsome heroes of noble birth, high learning and chivalry. No one

could have imagined at that time a lowly bank clerk with a face

looking crowded  by  such a prominent nose would have kept the

readers  on their toes every week .Devan, perhaps, hit the jackpot

when in the very first episode Sambhu found the diamond necklace

in the cashew nut cake !

There was no stopping him after that!

I do not know whether those Hollywood guys who produced

Inspector Jaques Clouseau in 1963  could have been familiar with

Sambhu. When I saw Peter Sellers as Clouseau, he strongly reminded

me of our own Sambhu in his injured-innocent looks and other

mannerisms. I recollect in yet another movie, Peter Sellers

imitated the Indian accent while speaking English in the most

brilliant manner.

Later, when I got acquainted with Charles Dickens in the college, I

found  there was a good deal in common between Devan’s

characters set in the Tamil milieu and Dickensian portrayals of the

Victorian era.

Eccentric and at the same time pathetically comical and helpless,

many of them provoke our sympathy and laughter at one and the

same time. The common temptation of a Devan reader is to compare

him with P.G.Wodehouse, the British humourist of the 20^th century.

No doubt, both of them are great humourists. But the comparison

stops here. Wodehousian characters like Lord Elmsworth, Bertiee

Wooster, Psmith (with ‘P’silent) and the innumerable spinster aunts

are stylised,  one-dimensional and static  caricatures

indicating no evolving at all, with the progress of the story and they

are predictable. They look like frozen victims caught in a time warp

Devan’s  characters,on the other hand,  are not stagnated but evolve

gradually, drawing strength from their inner potential and

experiences, evidence for which we see in his ,what  I would consider

as his masterpiece ‘Mr.Vedantham’

Maybe, a hard-nosed literary critic would not agree with me in

calling a romantic and sentimental novel belonging to the popular

genre as a literary masterpiece. In fact, we learnt to throw such

literary jargons such as ‘popular writing’ and’ literary writing’ after

westernization. Even in the west, such literary classifications came

only afterthe Industrial Revolution, when the privileged classes kept

their identity alive by such critical branding. So Dickens, because he

was a great hit with the working classes, was called a ‘popular’ writer

and Virginia Woolf ,who had selected readership called ‘a serious

writer’. It may be pertinent to ask at this juncture, whether

Shakespeare was a popular writer or an ivory tower bard condemned

to be read only by a few? Even during the period he lived and wrote

he was extremely popular with the masses. ‘Sweetest Shakespeare,

Fancy’s child’ says John Milton, one of the most learned among the

English poets. So such categorizations as ‘popular writing’ as against

‘serious’ writing’ is of recent origin in the west and imported by the

self-styled intellectual elite to convince themselves of their  own

literary credibility.

In the thirties and forties of the last century, the Tamil critics, fed on

a  fat diet of western literary  criticism, and totally ignorant of our

own  Indian poetics, held the view that any  work with a

readership  of more than five hundred, could not be considered as

‘literary’.

Kalki and Devan, as popular editors of two very popular Tamil

Weeklies had a huge following, a fact that did not go well with the

estimate of these elitist eggheads. Their novels were dismissed by

them as ‘popular writing’ as if ‘popular’ is a dirty word synonymous

with pornography.

Devan wrote  “Mr.Vedantham’ as a serial to cater to the hungry

needs of thousands  of middle- brow readers belonging to the urban

middle- class. As a non-proprietry editor of a popular weekly Devan

had two commitments; one, to himself that he could feel proud of

what he had written and two, that he had to have an eye on the

circulation of the weekly, conforming to the laws of magazine

economics. Studying all the novels that Devan wrote in this context,

one could say he had done a remarkable job by arriving at the golden

formula  to provide good reading for his readers and with

commendable literary flair.

This novel describes the struggles, travails, disappointments and

ultimate  success of a rural middle class Brahmin youth Vedantham.

By narrating his story, the author provides subtle, insightful details

of the social, cultural and economic structure of the Tamil society

during the forties of the previous century.

The Brahmin community, caught between two stools of culture

that were at variance at each other during the colonial rule. opted

for their survival by adopting the benefits of a western education

by forsaking their own cultural mores that led to their social

degradation. This is beautifully illustrated by some of the Brahmin

characters portrayed in this novel.

But Vedantham has not set forhimself very big ambitions like

achieving wealth and power to reach the top of the social hierarchy

but, he just dreams of becoming a good journalist  and get married

to his aunt’s daughter, whom he loves. The story centres around this

simple theme and within this frame, Devan introduces a panoramic

picture  of various characters representing  different cross-sections

of the Tamil society, each one distinctive in his/her own way.

Two brothers, Swamy and Singham play a very significant role

in Vedantham’s life. Both are aggressive, egoistic, unbending and

at the same with hearts of gold. They feel too proud even to accept

expressions of gratitude from their beneficiaries. Such characters

may belong to the category of vanishing species in the present

context of values, the bottom line of which assures that there cannot

be  free lunches.

Devan was at his creative best in some of his later works like

‘Rajathin Manoradham’, in which the mundane experiences of

constructing a middle class family dwelling brings into focus all

the cultural aspects of such a venture and narrated with such a

delightful humour that only Devan could.

A comprehensive study of all Devan’s works should be undertaken.