Monday, October 19, 2015

WRITERS FOR REWARDS- CAN WE TOLERATE THE NOISE BY THEM

WRITERS FOR REWARDS-

CAN WE TOLERATE THE NOISE BY 

THEM

       ############

We don't require
Writers for rewards
Seculars for sermons
Paupers in fortresses
Beggars in riches
The World requires
Leaders in true service!


Are we so short of acclaimed writers beyond those who won awards or reportedly manipulated to win awards that we have to bear the unhindered coverage on a few of these disgruntled (for no obvious reason but that Modi is the Prime Minister) on 24X7 Media and Press? What did they do? They announced return of awards. Many did not return them. May of them did not return the cash prize that accompanied the awards. And many us may not know that these writers must still be receiving royalty on the books  due to undue publicity given to them by the Sahitya Academy! 

1.What does the Sahitya Academy awards mean in terms of gains to writers? 


2. Is it appropriate to target the academy for an incident that happened in a State ruled not by the BJP or its ally but a local Regional Party, that is known for all that is not good in polity? 


3.Is Sahitya Academy bereft of controversies that these very civil writers thought not to return awards during those controversies? 


4.How many of those who returned awards won them post 1975 when so many incidents happened where complicity of the then rulers was established by Commissions of inquiry? 


5.How many of these writers that returned awards were close to the then ruling elite, how many were having Leftist and Ultra Leftist Ideology, what was the duplicity of the Left Parties in the whole issue? 


We shall consider the issues in the same order. But before going into that, let me tell two tales one from literature of yore in Hindu Philosophy that our Left friends and returned awardees will brush aside as fiction and to counter them the greatest Left Literary giant that died in 2008 after fighting Soviet Hegemony. He outlived the Soviet Russia, that suppressed freedom of speech, by seventeen years.


These writers were never in the news for any good reason like service to the society. They were living in cocoons built around them until their patrons-in-chief, the pseudo secular parties, were in power. They never reacted through their writings to the emergency era. They never wrote anything on the Bhagaplpur blinding incident and the orchestrated riots that followed. Who were behind these riots where around 1000 people (mostly Muslims) were killed?? Recent Commission report finds unflinching evidence of collusion the party that Ms.Nayantara Shehgal's uncle's family owned and ruled the state for thirty five years and the nation for sixty years. She never preferred to react to the incident. Or to the Tsundur incident in AP where Dalits were allegedly hounded out of the village and lynched like they were sheep in paddy fields. All the accused were released recently. Which was the party ruling AP, then? Or did any writer travel down south and wrote about the Karamchedu incident? Or the Kanchikacherla incident? Did anyone revolt on government after the Operation Blue Star? Or to the Sikh genocide? Did anyone ever care to castigate the Mughal invaders or the Britishers for their atrocities?


When they got the SA Award, they were cater pillars. They never turned butterflies. They maintained status quo. Now, they got wings and want the world to fly with them. What a hypocrisy, dear writers? They did not carry conviction. Nor did they have courage to face the state. Even now, they can write books quoting incidents of intolerance under Modi. They won't, as all they want is cheap publicity and gimmicks to see the nation does not progress under a right wing government. They do not bother about the poor as they are filthy rich. They will not do that as they fear incarceration. Compare this to the singular fight of Narendra Modi or Dr. Swamy against the Indira regime during emergency, in the midst of threats to their survival. And these writers should learn a lesson from these fighters against ruling establishments for common good instead of returning awards or painting their faces black for publicity. And these writers never bothered to say a single word against rulers when the coffers were being looted without qualms. They did not have qualms to have received awards from the same corrupt people who kept the minorities under impoverished, illiterate state in the name of secularism. 


They are (many of them) are too old to react too. They sit glued to the TV in their AC rooms. They see only Barkha Dutt and NDTV. They hear only Barkha Dutt and NDTV. They feel only sensation of NDTV and Barkha Dutt. They taste hatred spread by the channel and its inimitable guest editor. They smell conspiracy as the channel and its guest editor force through their noses. All the five senses of these writers (or were they and are they no more writers?) are mortgaged to a single news channel whose singular purpose seems to be that Modi is defeated in as many states as possible and does not get majority in RS. Is it for general good? No! It is to escape the noose tightening around them and their past masters against whom silent investigations are proceeding at a faster pace. Devoid of sources paid by their cunning past political masters, they have no way to know the progress. So, attack at the roots, seems to be their strategy. There are thousand ways of dealing with snake poison. What can Media and a Media house against whom a notice under FEMA has allegedly been served and a guest editor whose voice was reportedly caught on tape lobbying for a Minister on whom charges of serious corruption are progressing in courts, do to a mighty government? They must be living in an illusory world..Connect the dots. You will get the full circle. 


And a well researched column by one staff reporter of Op.India.com exposes the real faces behind the masks of liberal award winners and how they changed their facades over the decades, 


Ref: http://www.opindia.com/2015/10/meet-your-sahitya-akademi-award-returnees/


In a nutshell, I will explain the crux of the research article on various authors.



1. Uaday Prakash: The author who started the ill-conceived rebellion of sorts. He was an active member of CPI (M), a Marxist by ideology. When Ms. Arundharti Roy rejected SA award, he stated in 2006 that the Academy was full of brokers, compromizers, people fleecing the system for personal gains, awards, recognition, fellowship holders, those holding plum posts. He accepted it in 2011. 2.Ms.Nayantara: accepted the award in 1986, 2 yrs. after the Sikh genocide. Did not return it in 1990 when KP were thrown out or after Mumbai attacks by the full team of terrorists from Pakistan. 

3.Kasinath Singh. He received an awards from UP Government where the lynching happened. He did not consider it fit to return  the same.4. Syed Munawar Ali Rana: Just days before announcing return of award he derided others who already returned them. None know whether he has returned or just announced it for publicity.5. Ashok Vajpayee: A classic case of what Uday Prakash said. He worked for Arjun Singh.6. K.Sachindanandan: A classic case of pot calling kettle black. When Islamic Fundamentalists chopped the hand of a Professor in Kerala, he said the publicity was aimed at demonizing Islam!!!!8. Vikram Seth: yet to return the award. Received an award from Jagdish Tytler who was involved in court cases for the 1984 Delhi riots that saw 3000 killed,,A notable point is many of these and many other writers who were returning awards were in the forefront of anti-Modi campaign in 2014 run-up for elections. That speaks volumes.

While I was going through the process of churning the full vicious circle surrounding the unfortunate incident and the unsavory controversy to see nation's progress is halted at the instance of alien powers and their cahoots here, I recalled the life and times of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the revolutionary writer who defied the State authority in Soviet Union (the erstwhile state that most of the writers take as example of freedom of speech). When I was a youth he was a real sensation.  


Mr. Solzhenitsyn had been an obscure, middle-aged, unpublished high school science teacher in a provincial Russian town when he burst onto the literary stage in 1962 with “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.” The book, a mold-breaking novel about a prison camp inmate, was a sensation. Suddenly he was being compared to giants of Russian literature like Tolstoy, Dostoyevski and Chekhov. Over the next five decades, Mr. Solzhenitsyn’s fame spread throughout the world as he drew upon his experiences of totalitarian duress to write evocative novels like “The First Circle” and “The Cancer Ward” and historical works like “The Gulag Archipelago.”

“Gulag” was a monumental account of the Soviet labor camp system, a chain of prisons that by Mr. Solzhenitsyn’s calculation some 60 million people had entered during the 20th century. The book led to his expulsion from his native land. George F. Kennan, the American diplomat, described it as “the greatest and most powerful single indictment of a political regime ever to be leveled in modern times.”

In almost half a century, more than 30 million of his books have been sold worldwide and translated into some 40 languages. In 1970 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature.

Mr. Solzhenitsyn owed his initial success to Khrushchev’s decision to allow “Ivan Denisovich” to be published in a popular journal. Khrushchev believed its publication would advance the liberal line he had promoted since his secret speech in 1956 on the crimes of Stalin.

But soon after the story appeared, Khrushchev was replaced by hard-liners, and they campaigned to silence its author. They stopped publication of his new works, denounced him as a traitor and confiscated his manuscripts.

Their iron grip could not contain Mr. Solzhenitsyn’s reach. By then his works were appearing outside the Soviet Union, in many languages, and he was being compared not only to Russia’s literary giants but also to Stalin’s literary victims, writers like Anna Akhmatova, Osip Mandelstam and Boris Pasternak.

At home, the Kremlin stepped up its campaign by expelling Mr. Solzhenitsyn from the Writer’s Union.
Hundreds of well-known intellectuals signed petitions against his silencing; the names of left-leaning figures like Jean-Paul Sartre carried particular weight with Moscow. Other supporters included Graham GreeneMuriel SparkW. H. Auden, Gunther Grass, Heinrich Boll, Yukio Mishima, Carlos Fuentes and, from the United States, Arthur Miller,John UpdikeTruman Capote and Kurt Vonnegut. All joined a call for an international cultural boycott of the Soviet Union.

He wrote that while an ordinary man was obliged “not to participate in lies,” artists had greater responsibilities. “It is within the power of writers and artists to do much more: to defeat the lie!”

He had learned that the Soviet spy agency, the KGB, had unearthed a buried copy of the book after interrogating his typist, Elizaveta Voronyanskaya, and that she had hung herself soon afterward.

He went on the offensive. With his approval, the book was speedily published in Paris, in Russian, just after Christmas. The Soviet government counterattacked with a spate of articles, including one in Pravda, the state-run newspaper, headlined “The Path of a Traitor.” He and his family were followed, and he received death threats.

On Feb. 12, 1974, he was arrested. The next day, he was told that he was being deprived of his citizenship and deported. On his arrest, he had been careful to take with him a threadbare cap and a shabby sheepskin coat that he had saved from his years in exile. He wore them both as he was marched onto an Aeroflot flight to Frankfurt.

Mr. Solzhenitsyn was welcomed by the German novelist Heinrich Böll. Six weeks after his expulsion, Mr. Solzhenitsyn was joined by his wife, Natalia Svetlova, and their three sons. She had played a critical role in organizing his notes and transmitting his manuscripts. After a short stay in Switzerland, the family moved to the United States, settling in the hamlet of Cavendish, Vt.

There he kept mostly to himself for some 18 years, protected from sightseers by neighbors, who posted a sign saying, “No Directions to the Solzhenitsyns.” He kept writing and thinking a great deal about Russia and hardly at all about his new environment, so certain was he that he would return to his homeland one day.

How many of the writers were as courageous as the Nobel Prize winner? How many fight lie or tell blatant lies for publicity?  How many of them wrote essays, poems and gazals on the corrupt regimes. how many of them wrote on the pseudo secular path the earlier governments followed to keep minorities in a sense of fear and false hope? None. It was because they never carried any conviction nor cared about the poor of the nation. What they wanted was an hour, a day, a month of fame that the pliant Press and Media are providing.

Compare this great writer's life to that of the street writers that were rewarded by the one of the most corrupt regimes in the world. It is not unknown that no literary genius scrutinizes the books but most of the awards are reportedly given on recommendations of the bureaucracy-political nexus. The authorities that head the institution have the dubious record of not possessing the required qualifications to give away awards on a platter. It is said one LDC who worked with the SA was made Secretary and called the shots. When the awards have no sanctity, what sanctity their return has on the literary word in general? 

Some of the quotes of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, are interesting and must be followed by our falsely acclaimed writers.

“The belly is an ungrateful wretch, it never remembers past favors, it always wants more tomorrow.”

(The belly that yearns for an hour fame is more so, our writers proved)

“Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. And even in the best of all hearts, there remains ... an un-uprooted small corner of evil.

(Is it not the un-uprooted evil in the hearts of our ill-reputed writers that is coming to the fore now, that they have no more state patronage?)

Since then I have come to understand the truth of all the religions of the world: They struggle with the evil inside a human being (inside every human being). It is impossible to expel evil from the world in its entirety, but it is possible to constrict it within each person.”




                                                                   ############################

Bameera Pothana- Sree Maha Bhagavatam

Bammera-village potana-2007dec3.JPG

Pothana (1450–1510) was an Indian Telugu poet best known for his translation of the Bhagavata Purana from Sanskrit to Telugu. He was a Telugu and Sanskrit Scholar.[1] His work, Andhra Maha Bhagavatamu, is popularly called as Pothana Bhagavatam in Telugu.[2]
Pothana was born at Bammera Village, Palakurthy Mandal, Warangal District in Telangana State. His father was Kesanna and his mother Lakshmamma. He was considered to be a natural Poet (Sahaja Kavi), needing no teacher. He was known to be very polite and was an agriculturist by occupation. Though he was a great scholar, he never hesitated to work in the agricultural fields.
పలికెడిది భాగవతమట
పలికించెడి వాడు రామభధృండట 
పలికిన భవహర మగునట
పలికెద వేరొండు గాథ పలుకగనేల
Translated it means : "That which is spoken is the Bhagavatam and the one who made me speak/chant this is Lord Rama. The result of chanting this (Bhagavatamata) is ultimate freedom, the Liberation of soul. So, let me sing it, since there is no other story better than this (Bhagavatam).
మందార మకరంద మాధుర్యమునఁ దేలు మధుపంబు వోవునే మదనములకు
నిర్మల మందాకినీ వీచికలఁ దూఁగు రాయంచ సనునె తరంగిణులకు
లలిత రసాలపల్లవ ఖాది యై చొక్కు కోయిల సేరునే కుటజములకు
బూర్ణేందు చంద్రికా స్ఫురిత చకోరక మరుగునే సాంద్ర నీహారములకు
అంబుజోదర దివ్య పాదారవింద
చింతనామృత పానవిశేష మత్త
చిత్త మేరీతి నితరంబు జేరనేర్చు
వినుతగుణశీల! మాటలు వేయునేల?
Approximate translation:
A honeybee reveling in the honey-sweetness of Hibiscus, would he seek grass flowers?
A royal swan swaying in the pure breezes of the Ganges, would he go to the oceans?
A nightingale relishing the juices of smooth young leaflets, will he approach rough leaves?
A chakora bird blossoming in the moonlight of a full moon, would he go to dark places with thick fog?
Minds attention on the lotus-wearer's (God's) divine lotus-feet, a heightened headiness brought on by that nectar-like contemplation
In what way will it learn to seek another? Listen good one, what is the point of discussing (it's obvious)?

These two poems state the character of the writer. First he says he is only an instrument in the hands of Lord Rama, the same truth the Soviet Nobel winner has said. Then he says that all sweet things go towards the sweetness of  Lord Rama. That is the essence of Hinduism.  If writers do not believe in God, let it is be so. They can not impose their disturbing noises on the Believers. After Bihar polls Barkha will stop caring about these writers, as NDA and Modi are slated to win it big. They have to wait for the next polls for the hour, day, month of publicity. That is the reality of Indian Media today, who sell news and thrust on us their views.  

The same writer, when asked to dedicate his book to the Kings says this, in a simple poem.

బాలరసాలసాలనవపల్లవ కోమల కావ్యకన్యకం
గూళలకిచ్చి యప్పడుఁపు గూడు భుజించుటకంటె సత్కవుల్
హాలికులైననేమి గహనాంతరసీమలఁ గందమూల కౌ
ద్దాలికులైననేమి నిజ దార సుతోదర పోషనార్థమై.

Meaning:
“It is better for a Satkavi (good poet), to be a farmer or even to dig roots and beets in the forest to support his wife and children than to give(dedicate) his literary work – which is like his own daughter – to undeserving persons and eat the food got from that.”

Pothana was harassed by the Kings in many ways. And folklore has it that Lord Rama ultimately provides him riches and Mukthi (Salvation).

And compare the writers, most of whom reportedly manipulated winning the awards by remaining trumpets of the powers that ruled, with these two great writers.  


####################


Now let us  answer the questions that I raised in the beginning of the blog.  What does winning a Sahitya Academy Award mean to the authors. Is it only a citation and a cash award that started with Rs.5000/- and now reached Rs. 1,00,000/-? Annual literary meets are held by the academy every year, in February every year spanning three days. It publishes lots of books on Indian Literature every year. Annual Samvatsar lectures are organized. a Kavi Anuvadak program is held every year, in which translations of original poetry in any Indian language to another language can be rendered. In addition, winning the award gives the writer good publicity which helps in furthering his/her literary activity.

Second question.  The very modus of returning the SA Awards smacks of ill-conceived protest on the Government. When it was first mooted to open the Academy, Nehru said clearly that he did not want to interfere in its working. The Ministry of Culture has no role in the functioning of the Academy. All officers are selected from the Academy itself and it is autonomous. It is a joke that an autonomous literary body is being targeted by the learned men and women for something they blame the government of the day.  It is not only laughable joke but a crooked one too, as the larger idea behind this are political parties and their crony Media houses that want instability in the country. And to say that an International Organization supported their cause is more mockery as these writers try to hide the human rights violations in their own nations by targeting strong and resilient democracies like India. 99 per cent Indians never heard the names of these writers and we speak about PEN and say our nation's prestige is down. If it did not move in 1975, 1984, 1986 and on various other occasions, it did not move a fraction of milli meter now. Doomsayers may say many things.  

Third, the very Academy from which these writers received awards is mired in many controversies. Noted writer Kushwant Singh was highly critical of the Academy. I do not go into controversies as it is not apt. But corruption is said to be rampant. Award selection has been reportedly dubious. Appointments were mired in controversies. 

Since 1975, lots of incidents involving civil society happened.  Human Right Activists were killed even before. Opponents were branded Naxalites and were eliminated in fake encounters. If you visit Telangana, you will hear horrendous stories of poets being picked up and dragged out of houses during midnight. But never did a writer think it right to protest. Reason was they were pampered by the Centrist governments. Mass murders took place in 1975, 1984, 1986, 1993, 2008. None cared. Now they pick up one odd incident and try to play crooked politics. Being an award winner does not confer on him/her a right to act as per whims. If reflects on their culture only.

It is an open secret that the first two  returnees were close to the ruling elite. Many more are pliant to the ruling class or the employees of the Academy.  And speaking about the Left, a Parliamentary Standing Committee headed by Sitaram Yechury, in its 171st report in 2011 on the working of the three academies said thus.

 "It was felt that most of these institutions were not able to live up to the original mandates set out by their founding fathers. Controversies of different kind involving these institutions that keep cropping up from time to time, had caught this Committee’s attention. Questions were also raised about the indifference and helplessness shown by the Ministry of Culture to do anything in the face of autonomy enjoyed by these institutions." The Committee also urged Sahitya Akademi to adopt the recommendation of Haksar Committee (1988) of having its head appointed by the President of India, a practice followed by Sangeet Natak and Lalit Kala Akademies, to avoid "the inevitable complications of the existing system of elections

It is anybody's guess why Sahitya Academy alone did not follow the Haksar Committee Report and continued appointing its own officers.  and, it is anybody's guess why the same Left parties are supporting the writers. All in the political game.

Truth triumphs ultimately. Moths get killed in the heat and light of mock publicity by Media and Press. Hinduism believes in tolerance up to a level. When the level is crossed, "Paritranaya Sadhunam, Vinasayaca diskritam, Dharma Samstapanaradhaya Sambhavami Yuge Yuge" 

    

VANDE MATARAM - SATYAMEVA JAYATHE