03-22-2008, 08:42 PM
Eighteenth IUCAA Foundation Day Lecture
Many Indias : Search for a Centre
by
U.R. Ananthamurthy
http://ojs.iucaa.ernet.in/index.php/annual...iewFile/252/413
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You know Ramanujan, once came to Karnataka and did
some research on the Ramayana in Kannada. Not the
written Ramayana but the oral Ramayana. He found
nearly a thousand oral versions. In one version, Sita is
not literate and is a village girl and Rama is also not a
literate. They argue and the question is whether she
should go to the forest with Rama. Rama argues that you
are a princess, your feet are very tender, you should not
be going to the forest with me and there are wild animals,
etc. etc. and Sita also argues that I am your Dharmapatni
and you canât leave me. But Rama is cleverer and he puts
another argument. You know in oral epics you can make
your own argument, they donât recite what is given to
them. Then Sita says: <b>"In every Ramayana, Sita goes to
the forest, so how can you deny it to me?"</b>
This is what I call inter-textuality. There are many Indias
but there is still one India because there is an intertextuality.
Every work in India - even the folklore - has
some insight into another text.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->That is why either
Salman Rushdie or anyone like him writes, their English
has a special quality; that special quality comes from the
ambience of an Indian language, because it resides in
the ambience of an Indian language.
But I think we are slowly losing this - which means that
we may have international writers or writers who write
for export. Now we have more and more writers who have
begun to write for export. We have lost the confidence of
Shrivijaya who thought that the language does not
travel but it can mirror the whole world. Rightly so because
when Shakespeare was writing in English, it was not a
language which traveled but Shakespeare came.
I have a feeling that what is happening in India is
something that is happening all over the world also. A
thousand years ago, when Latin dominated Europe, even
Newton wrote in Latin because that was the language
through which they could talk to one another. Later on,
the great book on evolution came in English language
and it created a big stir in Britain. Darwin wrote in English
and Newton wrote in Latin. But English was not a
language which traveled but it produced great writers.
Why? because when Latin, the language of Cosmopolis,
made way for the languages of Europe - the ordinary
languages, the Bhashas of Europe which were always
there.Then we have a Dante, Shakespaere, Tolstoy and a
number of great creative writers. Again when Sanskrit,
which was the language of Cosmopolis, made way for
the Indian languages, we had a Tulsidas, we had a Kabir
and a number of great Marathi writers like Gyandeo and
many others. Sanskrit, thus, made way for them. It was a
great period of decentralization of our kind of knowledge
- the literary, the poetics, and similar kind of knowledge.
But now it looks as if the whole world is centralizing
now. I met a great Physicist in Germany. He said that he
no longer publishes anything in German now, but in
English. It is not because you can express it better in
English but because it is commercially a more successful
language. It is not because the British speak English but
it is because Bush speaks English. So there too it is a
game of power. But I heard another woman who was
talking about this, one Dr. Radha. She said that when she
went to Sweden she found that Europe is also taking to
one language. The Swedish people, it appears, donât mix
the two languages but most of them know English and
they can happily use English and also Swedish and create
knowledge in Swedish. Not in English but in Swedish.
Create knowledge - that is more important for me.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->We have also now imbibed a lot of Europe in our
languages. I use a term for the Indian languages. I call
them âgenagniâ- that is digestive fire. The Indian
languages have a digestive fire. Marathi in its great
medieval period when Tukaram and Gyandeo were there,
they took whatever had to be taken - from the essence of
Indian knowledge and Indian spirituality. That was
translated by the Dasas and the Shivacharans in Kannada
and it happened everywhere - through Kabir, Tulsidas.
The medieval movements were not just religious. They
were movements which empowered our languages, men
and empowered women. In the 12th century if you became
a lingayat, if you took the Basava part, the women when
they menstruated did not have to go and sit outside. It
empowered women. So all our languages empowered
women. The first fight against caste system was by
Basava who got a Brahmin girl married to a Dalit boy in
the 12th century.
So it happenend through all these languages. These
languages, were also vehicles of revolutionary thought,
and change. There were also languages, which were like
receptacles. Through their Genagni, they digested
whatever had to be digested from the cosmopolis like all
the European languages did.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Many Indias : Search for a Centre
by
U.R. Ananthamurthy
http://ojs.iucaa.ernet.in/index.php/annual...iewFile/252/413
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You know Ramanujan, once came to Karnataka and did
some research on the Ramayana in Kannada. Not the
written Ramayana but the oral Ramayana. He found
nearly a thousand oral versions. In one version, Sita is
not literate and is a village girl and Rama is also not a
literate. They argue and the question is whether she
should go to the forest with Rama. Rama argues that you
are a princess, your feet are very tender, you should not
be going to the forest with me and there are wild animals,
etc. etc. and Sita also argues that I am your Dharmapatni
and you canât leave me. But Rama is cleverer and he puts
another argument. You know in oral epics you can make
your own argument, they donât recite what is given to
them. Then Sita says: <b>"In every Ramayana, Sita goes to
the forest, so how can you deny it to me?"</b>
This is what I call inter-textuality. There are many Indias
but there is still one India because there is an intertextuality.
Every work in India - even the folklore - has
some insight into another text.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->That is why either
Salman Rushdie or anyone like him writes, their English
has a special quality; that special quality comes from the
ambience of an Indian language, because it resides in
the ambience of an Indian language.
But I think we are slowly losing this - which means that
we may have international writers or writers who write
for export. Now we have more and more writers who have
begun to write for export. We have lost the confidence of
Shrivijaya who thought that the language does not
travel but it can mirror the whole world. Rightly so because
when Shakespeare was writing in English, it was not a
language which traveled but Shakespeare came.
I have a feeling that what is happening in India is
something that is happening all over the world also. A
thousand years ago, when Latin dominated Europe, even
Newton wrote in Latin because that was the language
through which they could talk to one another. Later on,
the great book on evolution came in English language
and it created a big stir in Britain. Darwin wrote in English
and Newton wrote in Latin. But English was not a
language which traveled but it produced great writers.
Why? because when Latin, the language of Cosmopolis,
made way for the languages of Europe - the ordinary
languages, the Bhashas of Europe which were always
there.Then we have a Dante, Shakespaere, Tolstoy and a
number of great creative writers. Again when Sanskrit,
which was the language of Cosmopolis, made way for
the Indian languages, we had a Tulsidas, we had a Kabir
and a number of great Marathi writers like Gyandeo and
many others. Sanskrit, thus, made way for them. It was a
great period of decentralization of our kind of knowledge
- the literary, the poetics, and similar kind of knowledge.
But now it looks as if the whole world is centralizing
now. I met a great Physicist in Germany. He said that he
no longer publishes anything in German now, but in
English. It is not because you can express it better in
English but because it is commercially a more successful
language. It is not because the British speak English but
it is because Bush speaks English. So there too it is a
game of power. But I heard another woman who was
talking about this, one Dr. Radha. She said that when she
went to Sweden she found that Europe is also taking to
one language. The Swedish people, it appears, donât mix
the two languages but most of them know English and
they can happily use English and also Swedish and create
knowledge in Swedish. Not in English but in Swedish.
Create knowledge - that is more important for me.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->We have also now imbibed a lot of Europe in our
languages. I use a term for the Indian languages. I call
them âgenagniâ- that is digestive fire. The Indian
languages have a digestive fire. Marathi in its great
medieval period when Tukaram and Gyandeo were there,
they took whatever had to be taken - from the essence of
Indian knowledge and Indian spirituality. That was
translated by the Dasas and the Shivacharans in Kannada
and it happened everywhere - through Kabir, Tulsidas.
The medieval movements were not just religious. They
were movements which empowered our languages, men
and empowered women. In the 12th century if you became
a lingayat, if you took the Basava part, the women when
they menstruated did not have to go and sit outside. It
empowered women. So all our languages empowered
women. The first fight against caste system was by
Basava who got a Brahmin girl married to a Dalit boy in
the 12th century.
So it happenend through all these languages. These
languages, were also vehicles of revolutionary thought,
and change. There were also languages, which were like
receptacles. Through their Genagni, they digested
whatever had to be digested from the cosmopolis like all
the European languages did.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->