When a writer passes away, the essays written immediately after that should be of explaining his contributions to the language and society. But the essays written by Shankaranarayanan and Malarmannan are of very poor in taste. It critises the La.Sa.Ra and talks more about Shankaranayanan and Malarmannan. It is really boring to read such stuff. I request thinnai to obtain good articles from really good tamil writers in memory of La.Sa.Ra and readers like me would be grateful to you for that.
I am not against criticising La.Sa.Ra.. but this is not the time..
I don’t know how long you are going to publish these type of articles ( http://www.thinnai.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=20705172&format=html ) which doesn’t have anything other than just creating waves. If you are not able make any criticism on the political parties which run only for the sake of some families, cricket players who are all active only in advertisements, caste parties which threatens the common people, dailies playing politics by giving wrong messages, magazine which discusses unnecessary things, private groups which challegnes the law and order problem, industrialist who earns lot of money without getting the attention of public,obviously you do not have the rights to make any critics on actors and their fans? hope it makes sound!
This is in reference to the letter ‘Bharathi Darsanam ‘by Mr. KV.
I feel sorry for Mr. Karpaga Vinayagam ?s (KV) single track minded approach. I hope he will remove his blinders and take a wholistic approach to historical facts. Bharathi was one of the greatest poets of India. Mr. KV raise some major complaints about Bharathi. First he complains about the reasons for Bharathi ?s mustache!. Secondly, he complains about Bharathi saying that how being a Brahmin was difficult for him in the prison. Thirdly, he even complains about Bharathi ?s integrity of disappearing from sight when required for the great V.O.C ?s trial. There are also other complaints where Mr. KV was so upset about Bharathi was promoting Hindu feelings. I do not want to answer each
It is high time that Mr. KV must learn to look at history from a socio psychological perspective too. Mainly, he need to understand the social structure at that time when Bharathi lived. If he truly understands that with objective reasoning, he will not write calumny about a great soul who rendered wonderful poems and vision.
In the 1800 ?s and early 1900 ?s, a person born in a Brahmin family was expected to follow certain social norms and Bharathi was courageous to break the superstition and many of the religious or s ocial constraints. He raised the bar that helped the later social reformers to follow and move forward. His social consciousness was far supreme and his kind heart sang ? Karumbu thottathile ? for the ill treated laborers.
Regarding the great V.O.C ?s trial, Mr. KV need to understand that Bharathi was always on the British rulers wanted list and when there was no evidence and the person was not here to defend do not give assumptions. Also, Mr. KV need to read carefully about Bharathi ?s quote in Karma Yogi about Sathi. Bharathi, mentions that in future a women who righteously live will be considered great. He was not promoting Sathi. His reference to a past practice should not be manipulated and misinterprested. Mr. KV must read the poem ‘Madhar thammai izhivu seyyum madamaiyi koluthuvom ‘. Again, Mr. KV must understand the historical context and under which social conditions people live in each era. The pioneers and leaders who act as catalysts or trigger for a change process cannot deviate too much from the structure. They have to work within it to create a new social order.
Hence, Mr. KV need to to three things. 1. Learn to write objectively and do not be one sided 2. Do a thorough research on the subject including the socio economic and political structure under which that era ?s norms and social constraints affect a leader or the people. 3. Understand that social change is taking place every minute. The cumulative effect can be seen only after some time.
Mr. KV, to vent your anger or hurt feelings you may have for the Hindus, please do not denigrate whomever you can think of.
After reading Karpaga Vinayagam ‘s ‘Bharathi Dharisanam ‘ featuring excerpts from Madhimaran ‘s book, I literally gasped for breath. So Bharathiar was a fraud, casteist, traitor, coward etc. etc. How easy it is to slander a poet revered by the whole Tamil Nadu , for these people. Any one can smear such kind of mud, with their own kind of interpretation, on anyone, take Gandhi, EVR.
Thanks to reader Dr. Sivan for enlightening me on the venue of the meeting of Anna with Medical College students. My presence at the meeting was NOT to cover the occasion. I went to meet Anna in the morning on that day and he told me to get into the car. We went to several places with great difficulty because of the hurdles created by transport workers in all major locations. Initially, we went to the hostel only and probably we might have gone to the college premises later. However, Anna ‘s helplessness and students ‘ agitated mood were NOT questioned by Dr Sivan. As for his remarks about the dean,I have no comments because I have no knowledge about it.
I am NOT the advocate of Anna to argue for his achievements or failures as the CM and my intention of wrting the article is to show the difference between today ‘s leaders occupying the seat of power and a person like Anna holding such post. Anna was very soft in nature and was keen on bringing peace and cordial relationship between transport workers and students. When the representatives of workers met Anna, he asked whehter they were having sons and were NOT they students. Would they attack their sons, as they were attacking students ruthlessly. Yes, he sholud have taken severe action on both the workers and students alike because students were also behaving violently. For workers, it is only the idnetity of teenagers as students, irrespective of whether they were medical college students or from law college or just young boys. As the clash occurred shortly after his party came to power, Anna did NOT want his party to become unpopular so soon. While returning, Anna kept his cool and said since students were young, it was natural for them to behave violently with him. Afterall they were our children only, he said. To be very frank, he was NOT capable of taking severe action on anybody and many took advantage of it. Personally speaking, he should have been very strict toward his followers, as well as the erring staff. And I should also point out that it was the students who made the situation worse by their collective misbehaviour.