LITERARY
RAPPORT:
DR.
VISWANATHA SATYANARAYANA
Formerly
Editor, “Illustrated Weekly of
Whenever
I think of the deepening crisis, where aesthetic values are concerned, I’m
reminded of Dr. Ananda Coomaraswamy’s
advice to the traditionalist which cannot be bettered. He says: “Each race
contributes something essential to the world’s civilisation in the course of
its own self-realization. The character built up in solving its own problems,
in the experience of its own misfortunes, is itself a gift which each offers to
the world. The essential contribution of
Few
writers in Andhra Pradesh have greater authority to demonstrate through their
own writings the compulsive relevance Dr. Coomaraswamy’s
argument than Viswanatha Satyanarayana, the latest Jnanpith-Award
winner. His appeal is wholly through his writings which are as acceptable to
modern sensibility as they are to traditional scholarship. By temperament and by orientation, as a person, he is reputed
to be very rigid, reticent and rough-hewn, and naturally, does not care to
cultivate people at the cost of his convictons. But
his works are universally lovable because of their range, depth and brilliance.
I
have been Viswanatha’s admirer since the 30s and
during my long distance “affair” with him all these years I have had many
doubts, fears and misconceptions about his literary ideals, methods and
attitudes for want of first-hand information about him. It is therefore with
pride that I offer his views below on literary matters expressed in reply to
the specific questions asked by me.
Question:
May I, Sir, request you to give me a brief resume of your life with the
emphasis on literary influences, crises, challenges, etc., with a direct
bearing on the evolution of your vision and technique? I mean the influences,
such as your own forbears (parents, grandparents and other ancestors), gurus,
the impact of literary classics on your young, impressional
mind, pulls and pressures from economic, environmental, ideological and other
factors.
Since
the early life of Viswanatha must be I am sure by now familiar to every reader
of Triveni, there is no point in my reproducing his elaborate answer in
detail. I wish to, therefore, if I may, stress only a few little known aspects.
Here are the excerpts:
“My
early literary be considered in three phases: (1) Up to 1917 (I was born in
1895) (2) From 1922 to 1927 and (3) From 1927 to 1933. The first was a period
of boyhood, of study and discipline, of failures and frustrations. The second
period was more productive. I came into close contact with literary virtuosos
with a mastery over techniques perfected by Sanskrit and English classicists.
The foundations of my own literary idiom became firmer and more meaningful. The
third period saw the culmination of my dedicated study of English and Sanskrit
literary traditions and techniques. At the same time, for a living, I found
myself teaching Telugu at two colleges:
Question:
What are the various innovations you have tried during your long and
distinguished literary career and with what results, Sir? What was the
motivation behind these, was it technical, or
intellectual or emotional? Or, Sir, did you just want to pursue novelty for its
own sake? Is it possible for one to be modernistic and traditional at the same
time? What precisely is the scope for experimentation within the framework of
tradition?
Answer:
Almost all the books which appear to be in orthodox
traditional style reveal innovations at every turn of the phrase, provided the
reader is alive to the cadences of the language employed. In my opinion, an
author can be modernistic and traditional. Creativity and conformity I feel are
not things divorced from each other. Life is a perennial stream and it goes on
renewing itself on the strength of its own secret, invisible reserves. An
author who addresses himself to his contemporaries is bound to speak in clear,
firm accents which are not only intelligible but acceptable to them.
Question:
Sir, what is your conception of an individualist, committed
to a social purpose? Is it possible? Is it desirable at all? For a creative
writer to be involved in extra-literary problems on which depends the very
future of the community to which he belongs? For example, Sir, are you aware of
the criticism that your novels such as Veyipadagalu
and Cheliyalikatta are full of
extra-literary irrelevances resulting in clumsy formlessness? This is what your
critics say. What is your reply to them? Which of your novels would you regard
as artistically impeccable and socially significant? What was the main
inspiration behind this particular work?
Answer:
An author who assimilates the
temper of the age he lives in without uprooting himself from the values and
ideals he has inherited from the masters of the past, is a true individualist.
My Veyipadagalu and Cheliyalikatta
have the tone and texture of life itself. Would you say that the works of
Dumas, Hugo, Balzac and Tolstoy are full of extra-literary irrelevances? When
diversity is accompanied by depth and when it constitutes the very core of a
master-design, the result is a literary tour de force. I think my Ekavera and Veyipadagalu
are artistically complete. In the Veyipadagalu
I have projected the evocative image of a society that is today on the
verge of extinction in an age dominated by values that have only a passing
relevance. As for my Ekaveera, I have
tried to depict in vivid detail the war that goes on all the time inside the
human heart under the stress of circumstances beyond control. This I
consider my artistically perfect novel.
Question:
Another criticism against you, Sir, is that you are an
obscurantist without any sympathy for or understanding of anything that is
modern. In other words, you are the champion of lost causes, the upholder of
values that are no longer valid today. What is your defence?
Is it not futile to resist what is inevitable, irrepressible and irreversible?
I mean the avant garde
trend. Have you read any modern European or American
authors? Who are your favourites among them? Have you
read any modern Indian writers? Perhaps in passing you will care to say a few words
about the quality of modern Telugu writing, particularly where poetry and
fiction are concerned.
Answer:
If people say that I have no sympathy for modernism I can
only pity them. I am not an enemy of science and technology: the train,
the phone, the plane, the TV, the spacecraft, these are all irreplaceable. If
you go through my writings carefully and dispassionately, you are sure to
attribute to me unqualified admiration for the sort of
government that the Russians have in their country. My ideal briefly stated is
socialism plus God plus religion. I may be a defender of
lost causes. But I think it is better to cling firmly to something that is
within our reach than chase desperately something that shall never be ours. I
have read hundreds of books by the English and American authors. I’m interested
in any type of good writing, popular or classical. James Bond, Perry Mason, Sherlock Holmes: I get on very well with these “super-men”.
I’m also interested in science and science fiction. Philosophy, history,
classical art–everything good you can think of. I’m particularly fond of our
own ancient classics: the puranas, the Itihasas, the Brahmanas, the
Upanishads, the Bhashyas, and so on. But what does
all this study prove? I don’t know what you expect me to say. I believe that
scholarship is an excellent aid to creativity. Without the support of the depth
and range of one’s own reading, one soon exhausts oneself if one begins to
write seriously. I don’t want to say anything about my own contemporaries.
Question:
What is your position vis-a-vis
the controversy re: vyaavahaarika bhaasha vs. graandhika
bhaasha? Don’t you think that the spoken word has
serious limitations, where its adaptability to the finer literary nuances is
concerned? In my view, which is of course contestable, the spoken word is best
spoken and the written word, best written.
Answer:
About graandhika and
vyaavahaarika bhaashaas
you hold a view identical to mine. I can write a book elucidating my ideas
on the subject, but I had better not, lest I expend my knowledge on a fruitless
controversy.
Question:
Coming to your Raamaayana Kalpavrikshamu: How is it different from other versions
of the Ramayana? Kamban, Tulsidas,
Valmiki and many others have written the Ramayana.
How do you claim special literary merit for your own version?
Answer:
My
Ramayana is my own. It is totally different from the other versions. What does Molla know about Ramakatha? Hers
is a small book in Prabandha style with the theme of
Rama sketchily etched. She is just a child: she does not understand the scale
and significance of the literary feat she has failed to perform. Bhaaskara Raamaayana has
no unity or consistency being the work of about half a dozen writers. I have
read Tulsidas’s version. I cannot claim to be familiar
with Kamban's Ramayana. In all humility I submit that
my own version seeks to re-establish advaita
mata and to disprove that Valmiki’s
Ramayana defends visishia advaita. The darshana
existing at the time of Ramakatha was Saamkhya. In addition to my advaita bias, I have given full-blooded
expression to the importance of Sita. The Ramayana is primarily the story of
Sita. Valmiki himself stresses this significant fact lost
sight of by lesser poets. I have written Ramayana with a view to emphasising the rasa content
inherent in the theme. I have also tried to portray the life of the Andhras in all its richness. I have created Rakshasas who are ‘gentlemen’. I have introduced some new metres in a manner consistent with the mood to be evoked.
My Ravana is not a conventional type. He is a great
devotee of Durga. He is a mantraadhidevata,
because there is a mantra called Khadga
Raavana Mantra. It is a secret known to very few
people: it remains hidden in the exacting Srividya.
One must thoroughly assimilate Kama Kala Vilasa, the Bible of the
Srividya, in order to understand this.
Question:
What
are your views on the principles that best govern the conferment of literary
awards? What are the guidelines you wish to lay down for the future trusts and
foundations? What is your assessment of the principles and procedures on which
the Noble Awards are based? Do you think there is any Indian writer to whom the
Nobel Award is long overdue?
Answer:
Modern
literary standards have deteriorated. Old values are thrown to the winds. So
how can we expect good writing to emerge? And when it does, who is there to
assess its quality? Politicians and millionaires are the literary arbiters in our
country. I don’t know anything about the Nobel Awards.
Question:
Do you have serious interest in the arts? I mean, any
creative hobbies?
Answer: Did
I not tell you that I was once trained to be a painter in the best traditions
of the now moribund
Question:
What are your writing schedules and methods? Of course, I
don’t expect you to disclose your trade secrets. But do you dictate or write in
long-hand? How many words per day? Do you have to revise your drafts
drastically? What type of readership do you have in mind when you begin to
write? Highbrow, middlebrow or lowbrow? Do you enjoy
writing commissioned poetry or fiction? Do you consider it creative enough to
write for the radio or the cinema?
Answer:
I have no writing schedules or methods. I am by nature a
lazy man. Left to myself, I would rather go to a movie or participate in a game
of cards without stakes. But who will fight my battles? When I write, I never
have a reader in mind and I write furiously. Rather dictate furiously. I do
write commissioned poetry and fiction. What is wrong with that? I never
sacrifice quality. You may say my commissioned work also is my committed work.
To me writing is a very serious and responsible occupation.
Question:
There used to be a modern movement in Telugu poetry in the
20s and 30s under the impact of Tagore, called: Bhaavakavitvam.
Did you participate in it with a sense of involvement Is it still a live
force? Or has it exhausted itself? In retrospect, what is your assessment of
its literary significance? I mean, in the context of the rich classical heritage
of Telugu literature?
Answer:
This question is a little bit difficult to answer. I was for
a little while under the influence of Tagore. His influence did me no good. In
my opinion, whatever Telugu literature has its root in the ancient classical traditions
and indestructible values is bound to acquire an enduring quality, whatever
forms it may assume. It cannot be surpassed by any literary activity, however
intense or sophisticated based merely on trends and techniques.
Question:
What is your message to the younger generation of writers? What sort of
discipline do you recommend to them?
Answer:
Don’t you think the younger generation needs no advice? What
discipline is possible in a mad world where chaos reigns supreme? I can say
nothing to a generation that has neither a past nor a future.