Is literature just something to munch on?
The core of literature is protesting the power politics. This has been its lifeblood since long. The literature that seeks to stand on the side of power does not have a long shelf life.
Hence, the ‘court poets’ could not sustain for long and were never able to reach the people. The literature that chose to document history, standing in the open, amidst people facing sun and rain, could write with honesty and integrity. Staring from the pride of Kannada, Pampa to the recent contemporary writer Champa (Chandrashekhar Patil), state has always tried to keep them under ‘control’.
This is not limited to Karnataka or India alone. Mega awards have been set up to buy out the writers. For the same reason, many esteemed writers lost out on Nobel prize despite deserving it richly. Today, more than the writers that have won the honour of awards such as Nobel or Jnanpith, the ones that have rejected those or were kept out of the race are being seen as good and engaging writers.
This friction between the state and literature is not a new phenomenon. The state tries to bind the literature through Brahminical hegemony. This is an easy deal in a country like India. The recently concluded Kannada Sahitya Sammelana was testimony to an uncivil practice of pronouncing women as symbols of auspiciousness or the lack of it, from its stages where such differences had to be protested and mitigated.
The lit fests in India are an excellent example of how the privileged priestly class is hijacking the core agenda of literature itself. At one level, efforts are on to ‘take control’ of the said category and on the other, all attempts are being made to keep dissenting voices out of the fests. This is not limited to Karnataka alone, but in the entire country. In the neighbouring Maharashtra, writer Nayantara Sehgal was invited to inaugurate the 92nd Akhil Bharatiya Marathi Sahitya Sammelan to be held in Yavatmal on January 11. The organisers then withdrew the invitation rather abruptly.
This has not only invited criticism but also widespread condemnation of the act by the organisers. This has given rise to many questions in the minds of writers, believers in democracy and readers alike. Withdrawal of an invitation never reflects well on any organization or event. This causes loss of face to the organisers more than the invitees. How can such decisions even dent the battle that has been waged to protect the values of democracy.
The Akhil Bharatiya Marathi Sahitya Mahamandal has a dignity and image to itself. This has been dealt a serious blow with the withdrawal of invitation. Secretary has resigned from his post protesting this uncivil move. Which means, even within the board, this was not a decision that was supported unilaterally. Sehgal has been kept out owing to the pressure exerted by the external forces.
The government has developed some sort of discontentment towards writers who have been part of the strong dissenting forces who spoke against growing intolerance. Some writers even made hay when this sun was shining, to push their own agenda and impress the government.
On one hand, writers are putting everything they have earned on line, including their own lives sometimes, and on the other, there is a set of writers that is standing on their toes to impress upon the government. Writers like S L Bhyrappa became national professor. Some writers who started out as socialists have now silently changed their ideological camps to stay on the right side of the government.
All those writers who ridiculed the right ideology are now feigning ignorance about it. At the same time there is a set of writers who have visibly protested and stood against the intolerance exhibited by the Modi government. Some writers who were soft rightists have vocally opposed the failures and discrepancies of BJP led government, to earn the wrath of right wingers.
Some writers who would pride themselves to be left and socialists, have turned into full time trumpets of BJP led government. This is the same gang of writers who have ensured Sehgal was humiliated. A writer who would be a silent witness to wrongs prevailing in the society at the order of state, is worse than a colour changing politician.
Because those who read the writer, may never be able to see his personal agenda shifting and can be misled into following him. This is the reason why the politicians want writers to write favourably for them. An age old threat practice of lodging sedition cases against writers whom they dislike. Sometime ago, writers who spoke against state, were only denied the awards.
But today the situation is different. Those writers who speak against the state and government can be branded as terrorists or cases be lodged against them with imminent arrests.
Hence, some writers who fear this action by the state, have resorted to silence. A very small section of the writers is speaking in rather certain loud voice against what they deem as injustice and intolerance at the risk of their own lives.
Now everyone knows why Sehgal was denied the opportunity to participate in Marathi Sammelan. The government feared she may use the stage to convey some uncomfortable truths that are unknown to people and uncomplimenting to the government. The state may not have had a direct role in withdrawing invitation to Sehgal, but it has surely used the organisers who are on its side.
Yet, Sehgal has been successful in conveying her words, even without having to stand on that dais. Through her, the country now knows how the literature is being stifled at the hands of powerful dictators. Slaves sing paeans to the king when they stand in his court. A real poet, writer speaks standing on the street and much against the king. He owes it to his times and his people. People like Kalburgi and Gauri lost their lives doing exactly this.
But today, they are well etched into the public memory. They are the inspiration to those who want to fight the state. Today we shouldn’t look for literature in lit fests but on the streets, in jails and the witness boxes of courts. This is where the literature is taking shape. For someone like Kambar, literature may be some munchies post a hearty meal.
But for a genuine writer, it is the test of fire and one needs courage to pass through that. The country is looking forward to seeing more such talents emerge from country’s alleys.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Speaker rules out discussion on Guv''s conduct amid K''taka Assembly standoff
Bengaluru (PTI): In an effort to end the logjam over the Governor's address that has stalled proceedings for the past week, Karnataka Assembly Speaker U T Khader on Wednesday ruled that legislators should not discuss Thaawarchand Gehlot or his conduct in the house, saying such debates send the wrong message to the public.
The House has witnessed repeated disruptions and adjournments since the session began on January 22 over the issue of the governor's conduct.
During his address to the joint sitting of the Karnataka legislature on January 22, Gehlot read out only three sentences from the 122-paragraph speech prepared by the state government.
The speech included criticism of the Centre for replacing the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) with the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajivika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G), portions of which the governor declined to read.
Concluding his address in about two minutes, the governor left the house, triggering a commotion as Congress legislators attempted to gherao him and raised slogans.
While the opposition BJP accused the ruling Congress and its ministers of "insulting" the governor and demanded action, the treasury benches countered by claiming the governor had "insulted the National Anthem by leaving before it was played."
The house again witnessed heated arguments on the issue earlier in the day, leading to adjournment.
During the interruption, Khader held a meeting with ministers and opposition members to resolve the impasse.
When proceedings resumed, the speaker delivered his ruling.
Referring to the events of January 22 and the subsequent debate, Khader said the conduct and discussions had conveyed the wrong message to the public.
"Our conduct as members of this House and the opinions expressed must be in good taste and in accordance with constitutional provisions. They must uphold the dignity of the House and its members. We must introspect in this direction," he said.
He stressed the need for caution to ensure that such incidents are not repeated in the future.
"Let us end this matter here, continue the discussion on the motion of thanks to the governor, and refrain from discussing the governor or his conduct in this house," the speaker said.
Leader of the Opposition R Ashoka said the house should express regret over what he termed an "insult" to the governor.
Responding, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said the situation would not have arisen had the governor read out the entire address.
"Asking the house to express regret is not appropriate. Why did the governor leave even before the National Anthem was played," Siddaramaiah asked.
BJP MLA S Suresh Kumar reminded Siddaramaiah that as Leader of the Opposition in 2011, he had asked then Governor Hansraj Bhardwaj to curtail his address.
Bhardwaj had subsequently placed the address on the table of the house, requesting members to treat it as read.
Siddaramaiah said the situation in January 2011 was different from the present one.
The debate grew intense, leading to another adjournment of the house.
