U R Ananthamurthy--A Tribute
END
(Caricature courtesy Panju Ganguli)
U R Ananthamurthy passed away on August 22, 2014 evening in
Bangalore. I cannot add much more to the prolific literature produced by many
admirers and critics of his writings and hence have reproduced below an article
I had written in The Sunday Observer 21 years ago in 1993 when UR was elected
as President of Sahitya Akademi.
I had met him as a boy at our home in Dharwad, just as I had met
scores of other Kannada writers since I grew up in a family of amiable and
hospitable writers. But my first direct encounter with him as an adult was when
I had done a mid- career switch from Theoretical Physics and political activism
to journalism.
He was refreshingly friendly and evolving and had clearly
shaken off the rebellious and at the same time bewildering Eurocentrism of
Modernism and was discovering India in his own way.
He had also come out of the
narcissism of Modernism and Existentialism of the 60’s and 70’s and had also become
a socially active person. He was taken aback by the communal frenzy whipped up along with the Ayodhya agitation, like most other intellectuals and was keenly learning
about Human Rights issues and taking forthright stands on them.
Despite not
knowing him too well I could engage with him very quickly
whenever and wherever we met. When I complained about the rootless Eurocentrism in Indian Modernism he quickly pulled out a copy of his "Sooryana Kudure" and gave an
autographed copy for me to read, where he had substantially evolved in his own approach
to modernity.
He was one among the most creative triumvirate of Modernist
Kannada literature of the late sixties and seventies (the other two being the
Late P Lankesh and K Poornachandra Tejaswi). Besides his literary admirers, he will also be missed by all who care
to step out and fight for justice and human rights of ordinary people in India despite
being surrounded by consumerist fog.
Even in his failing health in the last decade UR found new founts of energy and used to regularly surprise people by his appearance and serious participation in literary meetings and activist agitations, at times straight out of hospitals.
Even in his failing health in the last decade UR found new founts of energy and used to regularly surprise people by his appearance and serious participation in literary meetings and activist agitations, at times straight out of hospitals.
May he rest in peace.
---------------------------------------------
New Leftist with Vedic moorings to the
rescue
(The Sunday Observer 1993)
By SHIVANAND KANAVI
If the human resources
development minister had his way - in this case, government nomination as
opposed to election to the presidency of the Sahitya Akademi - the literary
body would have remained firmly under the control of the politicos.
The election -- by a thumping
52-15 majority of the members of the general council - of Kannada litterateur
U R Ananthamurthy was as defiant, as
emphatic a riposte as they come.
Before the poll, the Akademi's General
Council rejected a letter the ministry sent the literary body that quoted the
Haksar committee recommendations and called for government nomination to the
president's post.
While accepting those recommendations
that dealt with the better functioning of the Akademi, the council stuck to its
guns regarding elections and, what is more, underlined their point that the
Akademi is about writers, not politicos, by picking Ananthamurthy - a stormy
petrel if ever there was one. For it was the president-elect who, way back in
the 70s, boycotted the annual Kannada Sahitya Sammelan on the ground that the
official gathering was pro-establishment and not prone to innovation. Ananthamurthy
went on to hold his own rebel convention on that occasion.
Interestingly, critical opinion of
the Akademi's functioning today mirrors Ananthamurthy's own grouse against the
Kannada Sahitya Sammelan way back then. What remains for time to tell, of course,
being the question of whether the fiery novelist and critic can bring his
organisational acumen, diplomatic skills and iconoclastic frame of mind to
sorting out the problems besetting the Akademi.
The beginning of his tenure, however,
certainly augurs well for the immediate future. One of his first acts on
assuming presidency of the Akademi has been to institute a committee to examine
the Haksar recommendations. Ananthamurthy has, besides, invited suggestions on
ways of improving the organisation's functioning.
Applying his new broom to yet
another contentious area, the president-elect has decided that the Akademi's
executive committee should be just that - a body charged with the sole task of
executing policy. In the past, it may be recalled, the executive had also
functioned as a selection board for the
Akademi's prestigious literary awards,
inviting in the process not a little criticism and allegations of bias. That
will now stop.
On a related track, the president-elect
has also decided to make the selection process governing the awards more open, more
transparent and therefore less likely to attract criticism.
A la the prestigious Booker awards,
Ananthamurthy has decided to employ the twin steps of announcing both the jury and
the short list of works under consideration, well before the actual awards are
named.
The new broom, on the face of it,
would seem to be sweeping clean with a vengeance.
Ananthamurthy first made his mark
as a critic in the early 60s with his award-winning col-
lection, Prajne mattu Parisara (Consciousness
and the environment), which was a conscious attempt to apply the theories of people
like George Lukacs, Herbert Marcuse, Milovan Djilas and Erich Fromm to
contemporary Kannada literature.
Ananthamurthy consolidated a
burgeoning reputation by becoming the interpreter for Gopalakrishna Adiga's
Navya poetry and as the theoretician for the modernist movement in Kannada
literature. Navya, at the time, came as a rebellion against the metaphysical
and aesthetic excesses of the romantic Navodaya literature that had dominated
the scene in the first half of the century. His own creative contributions - short
stories and novels, not to mention the occasional dalliance with verse - became
landmark works of the Navya genre.
Controversy swirled around the
man right through his career. When the film version of his novel Samskara hit
the screens to critical acclaim, Brahmins viewed it as an attack on their
orthodoxy. And even before the furor died down, Ananthamurthy kicked off
another one when he presented a paper at a seminar, in which he classified
Kannada literature on the lines of the Brahmana Sahitya and Shudra Sahitya.
Ananthamurthy's attempt was to
distinguish between the cerebral appeal of what he termed
brahmana sahitya and the visceral,
sensual appeal of the shudra variety. Critics however saw in his theories an
attempt to communalise contemporary Kannada literature.
Along the way, however, the movement
degenerated into formalism and complex mystery.
Resulting in the inevitable alienation
from the growing literate masses who were then left to the mercies of pulp
writers, while the writers themselves were polarised into Indocentric and Eurocentric
camps. And as social and political tensions built up in the mid-70s culminating
in the Emergency, Navya literature died a natural death even as more socially
conscious literature, removed from the earlier obsession with self, became the
emerging trend.
Ananthamurthy's response came via
a number of short stories in the collection Bekku mattu Akasha (The Cat and the
Sky) and a couple of novels. Even as changing literary styles saw Ananthamurthy
metamorphosing, moving and, often times, helping shape the trend, the mind of
the man shifted stance and outlook. Often, it may be added, in unpredictable
directions. From the policies of Ram Manohar Lohia (an early hero) to an
admirer of the Pejawar Swami of Udupi Mutt and a leading light of the Vishwa
Hindu Parishad was a quantum leap from Leftism to Vedicism that left admirers aghast
- but the man held firm to his right to change, to develop.
"I quarelled with
Marxism," says Ananthamurthy in response to a question on his changing
ideological stance, "because they only looked at the change in the
capitalist relations of production, not a change in the mode of production itself
to a more decentralised system. I stayed away from
Gandhism when it became sarkari.
I moved away from Lohiaite ideals when people like Raj Narain made a mockery of
it. Anyway," argues Ananthamurthy, "I am a writer, not a politician.
Don't look for ideological consistency in me."
Even in his writings, Ananthamurthy
has tended to attract criticism. For instance, it is held that while exploring different
sides to a phenomenon, the novelist in his writings never succeeds in making his
own statements. "One has to learn," he says, "to write about the
other point of view. In that sense, writing cannot be clear. But action has to
be simple, easy. In fact, this is exactly what I have attempted to convey in my
last short story, Sooryana Kudure (Solar Horse)."
On his own election, he says, "It
is a testimony to Indian literature's plurality, that I as a Kannada writer
have been elected to the Akademi's presidency. Plurality is a fact of existence
and a condition with which the Indian writer has to cope, it is a condition
that has to be preserved. For it is only from this plurality that an all-India
writer will emerge."
The writer feels strongly that there
is a serious threat to the Gandhian ethos. "We were all inspired by the
three great debates: between Tagore and Gandhi on swadeshi; between Ambedkar
and Gandhi on the emancipation of the Harijans; Gandhi's debate on the path of decentralised
economic development in India. Tagore, Aurobindo, Ramana Maharshi and even
Paramahansa belonged to that ethos. That is the tradition of our rishis and
bhaktas like Basava, Tukaram and Guru Nanak. The current communalisation, hatred, ghettoisation and fundamentalism
should be fought."
A point of view that hardly reconciles
with his stated admiration for Pejawar Swami of the Udupi Mutt. But Anathamurthy, again, disagrees. "He
(Swami) is the guru of my caste, he opened the doors for harijans. Even my
mother was much influenced by him. But then he became political and went
against the tenets of his own religion. Now I oppose him - not only on political, but also on religious, grounds."
P. Lankesh, the controversial Kannada
novelist arid editor of the weekly Lankesh Patrika, has some advice for Ananthamurthy.
"Except for Dr (V.K.) Gokak, we have had politicians and middlemen presiding
over the Akademi. I hope he reshapes the Akademi and infuses into it a bit of creative
spirit."
1 comment:
Good blog is this.
Post a Comment