An interview with writer Indira Parthasarathy

[Oldposts]

My hearty congrats to the learned Professor and eminent author I.P on his receiving the Saraswathi Samman.

[Oldposts]

<font face="VERDANA">
go to rediff's tamil pages at

http://www.rediff.com/tamil/2000/feb/16news8.htm

to find out more.
</font>

[Oldposts]

<font face="VERDANA">
go to rediff's tamil pages at

http://www.rediff.com/tamil/2000/feb/16news8.htm

to find out more.
</font>

[Oldposts]

While there can not be any second opinion about Prof.IP's unique contribution to modern Tamil literature, how far do we agree with Jayamohan's observation (as quoted by Venkat in his posting a few months back) that modern writing with focus on urban milieu starts with IP and ends with IP?

[Oldposts]

I join with everyone here in wishing Prof. IP on being honoured with the prestigious award.

era. murugan, thanks for bringing the issue to focus, I am anticipating others opinions.

[Oldposts]

Vassan,
Thanks for the Rediff link. I tried Inaimathi and Inaimathi TSC to read that page, but found that I couldn't read. Please advise. Thanks.

Murugan & Venkat,
Click on the old responses and see the full quote by Mr. Jayamohan. He talks about i.pA. and then states that Adhavan continued the Urban Literature tradition but wasn't as impactful as i.pA. I need to give this further thought, but let me just share this top-of-the-mind question:

By "Urban Literature", Mr. Jayamohan is describing fiction set in a middle to upper middle class background (a metro area is specified mostly but sometimes just implied by the lifestyle.) Populist Literature has been traditionally scorned by Elite Literature as being "Middle class". I wonder if Mr. Jayamohan's statement would hold if populist writers' works are included? Fundamentally, it seems to go back to the question of "What is Literature?" Look forward to your thoughts.

[Oldposts]

Kanchana,

I think JM is making such statements more for the shock value they have (like 'Jnanakoothan is this century's KALamegam' or 'Vishnupuram is an epic and it has redefined the concepts of novel' etc). Even if JM has a mind block in considering 'middle of the road' writers for their contribution to urban literature, how can he forget Asokamithran (ThaNNEr, 18-avathu atcha kOdu), Neela Padmanabhan (PaLLi Konda Puram), Aa.Madhavan (SAlai kadai theru kadhaigaL) or Prabanchan? (I will attempt to give a detailed list ASAP). IMHO, urban literature in Tamil commenced with 'Sababathi' of Pammal Sammandha Mudhaliar (with a true to life description of Mudaliars of Chennai towards the beginning of the last century). (Or, was it much before, with CilapathikAram?).

More than half of the authors of the current crop are city based - p'haps not by choice (including myself). Be it Dilip Kumar or VaNNA Dasan or Sankara Narayanan or Era.Murugan - we genuinely attempt to focus on the issues we experience as city dwellers and reflect those in our creations. (And literature is not observations and experience alone - it is a much interesting alchemy).

I do not think any writer would start his /her day with a pre determination - 'I am going to pen a rural story now; will have iddly and sambhar for breakfast and then start work on suburban literature before lunch - let me get a copy of the latest city/town/village wise census to make other such clear decisions.."

[Oldposts]

Murugan,
That is an interesting response. May I add I couldn't help a smile as I read the last part about idli-sambar breakfast and rural-urban writing?

Let's clarify Mr.Jayamohan's position. In that quote, he has said that "there isn't enough of Urban Literature in Tamil". When he talks about Asokamitran in the same book, he classifies his works as Urban Literature too; he seems to have a great regard for Asokamitran's writing. He refers to the aesthetics of Asokamitran's writing as "The Art of Ordinariness" and goes on to talk about how that kernel of profundity is hidden in Asokamitran's deceptively simple but elegant style. About Neela. Padmanabhan's "paLLikoNdapuram": he talks about how Thiruvanandhapuram provides a lively backdrop to the entire novel. A. Madhavan's works which are set in the Thiruvanandhapuram streets are also analyzed in detail. I think he has given credit to the established contributors to Urban Literature, but credits i.pA. as being an important player, and wishes there could be more. At least, that is my take.

Mr. Jayamohan's critique regarding younger generation writers is restricted to what he considers to be contemporary Tamil literature vehicles: the small circulation magazines. You, as a younger generation writer, will have your own opinions on the issue, I'm sure. I, as a reader-consumer of both mass magazines and small circulation magazines, definitely have an opinion on that subject.

Of course, Mr. Jayamohan's literary critique is also restricted to contemporary literature. Yes, cilappathikaaram is an intriguing Urban literary piece; I think the cangka ilakkiyam "paripaadal" may be one of the earliest Urban Literature pieces. Parts of it are poems of worship for Vishnu and your namesake god. The other parts paint a vivid picture of the ancient Madurai and its people. One poem which compares Madurai to an open lotus flower is so delicate and beautiful!

That is a much longer posting than I intended. Your comment about literature/writing being an alchemy is intriguing, and needs to be discussed in detail later.

[Oldposts]

Kanchana: try with Dinamalar's fonts on Rediff's site. ( http://www.dinamalar.com )

[Oldposts]

Prof.Indira Parthasarthi's interview with rediff

http://www.rediff.com/tamil/2000/feb/21news6b.htm