From: sp2@cec1.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
Subject: Re: Tamil Literary Society
Date: 27 Sep 1992 19:43:51 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

   On Sundaramoorthy's proposal to set-up a literary society
  -----------------------------------------------------------

                                             - Sundara Pandian


    The response to our friend  Sundaramoorthy's  proposal  to
set-up a literary society is very disappointing. So far, there
are only two  posters  discussing  Sundaramoorthy's  proposal.
That  too  came  as a result of a confusion with the motive of
Sundaramoorthy in making this proposal. M.P.Premkumar  mistook
Sundaramoorthy  as  proposing a dissident newsgroup to discuss
Tamil literature who was corrected in the net by  Vignewswaran
alias Vicky. Vicky also welcomed Sundaramoorthy's proposal and
M.P.Premkumar's stand in this matter is a conditional support-
the  condition  being   that  this  society  should fall under
soc.culture.tamil and not as  a  seperate  group.  Apparently,
M.P.Premkumar  is  still  not convinced that Sundaramoorthy is
not heading a dissident literary  newsgroup.  Since  there  is
hardly  any  talk on this topic, this letter is written to re-
gister my views in this net.
    First  I  like  to  give  a  simple  suggestion  to   Sun-
daramoorthy. Call it off.  I don't see any interest in the net
for modern Tamil literature. If one doesn't have the  time  to
read  your proposal fully before posting his reply, what makes
you think that he will take an active part in  the  activities
of your society.  Only a handful of people like Vicky, Nagara-
jan, Ravi Sinnarajah, Sankarapandi,  you  and  occasionally  I
post  some  poems,  notes and excerpts on modern Tamil litera-
ture. There is hardly any response in the net.  I  am  however
glad  that  they have taken my suggestion to skip the articles
that don't pertain to their interests in this matter  atleast.
I   also  like to make a note  that there is no opposition ei-
ther. There was no Selvakumar-Viswanath type discussion on the
proposal.  I didn't see any politics in the part of netters on
the proposal.  M.P.Premkumar's criticism is merely  due  to  a
misunderstanding of Sundaramoorthy's proposal. As the proposal
is very well written, I suspect that this might be  due  to  a
hasty  reading  in  the part of M.P.Premkumar. Or perhaps that
the proposal was too good that it sounded as a  charter  of  a
newsgroup  sci.lit.tamil.  Or  perhaps  that  the  name  Tamil
literary society sounded too pretentious to some  readers.  If
one  ponders  to  look  at  the pages of the world history, he
would notice that the philosophies like Buddhism, Leninism and
Gandhi's `truth and non-violence' doctrine all sounded preten-
tious when they first proposed it in their days. But they suc-
ceeded  in  convincing their respective doctrine to  people of
their days by adherence to the principles  outlined  in  their
respective philosophies. Saying like ` I will form a Silk Smi-
tha fan club in the net if there is enough interest'  may  not
be pretentious to readers of this net. But the way things are,
proposing ` I will form a literary society in the net to  pro-
mote  modern Tamil literature if there is enough interest' may
sound very pretentious  to  many  netters.  When  we  proposed
`soc.culture.tamil'  in  the  Indian  net,  many readers there
thought that we were just making a pretentious claim and  that
we  were  not  really  into  it.  We  created an alt newsgroup
alt.culture.tamil  first  even  before  posting  a   RFD   for
soc.culture.tamil     to     disprove    the    claims    that
soc.culture.tamil  was  just  a  pretentious  proposal.   Sun-
daramoorthy was not pretentious at all in proposing a literary
society for modern Tamil literature. In view of  some  e-mails
that we shared lately, I am sure that Sundaramoorthy means it.
But the response in the net is very discouraging. Since  there
are  only  a few readers who are into it,  rather than forming
an editorial committee to edit  the  articles  in  a  magazine
form,  I think it is much better to bring forth a mailing list
comprising people interested in modern  Tamil  literature  and
call  it  a  Tamil  literary club to have a discussiopn on the
current literature in  Tamil  or  to  promote  works  of  club
members  in  the  modern  Tamil  literature.  A small audience
comprising interested people is much preferrable than  a  huge
audience who would either take a nap or clap to finish off the
speaker to get `fire-brand' Arumugam to take the mike.  It  is
true  that the audience affects the speeches of a professional
speaker. He prepares his speeches acccording to his  audience.
He  dilutes his speech accordingly if the audience are not ex-
posed to the topic or the field he is giving a talk on. On the
other  hand,  if  there are only a few people who have come to
attend his talk but are genuinely interested in his  talk  who
would  like to exchange their views with him, then the picture
changes considerably. The speaker feels that his talk won't be
lost  in the air but would atleast reach one or two people and
that in the mean process he might  himself  be  benefitted  by
their comments and criticisms. The same with the writers. They
welcome sincere replies or comments from any quarter on  their
works  and  not questions like " Who the hell is this J.J. ? I
couldn't get anything in your story. We won't buy  your  books
in  future  if  you  write crap like this." Such writers don't
write to sell their books in the market  but rather to  set-up
some  new  patterns  in  the  Tamil  literature suffering from
stereotype novels by writers like  Laxmi, Balakumaran and oth-
ers.  That  the works of Laxmi and the like is not accepted as
literary material is a different matter which  is  beyond  the
scope  of this letter. Selvakumar's note in his recent article
that he could reply only serious questions on his articles  is
welcomed  as it shows his seriousness in his articles which is
missing in a few writers of this net. So setting up a  mailing
list `Tamil literary club' for netters seriously interested in
modern Tamil literature is better than setting up a society in
the  net  which  many  readers  don't care at all. So a simple
suggestion to Sundaramoorthy in his proposal  is  to  call  it
off.  Hard luck. It did not come to me as a surprise. I feared
that it would fail so did the efforts of some good writers  in
Tamilnadu   itself   to   promote   good   Tamil   literature.
Tho.Mu.Chi.'s literary magazine "Santhi" which he started with
putting  all  his  money  was disastrous. It died two and half
years afterits birth. So a simple suggestion would be that  of
taking back the proposal.
     This is not all. What I  gave  is  a  simple  suggestion.
There  is also a more complex one. This needs more effort from
Sundaramoorthy and people interested in serious literature  in
Tamil.  This  suggestion  is to go ahead with the proposal and
try a sample issue first . This needs an  editorial  committee
to  go  through  the  articles  if anyone submits his or other
writers'  good  works  on  serious  Tamil  literature  (   not
S.V.Sekhar's  jokes  or Kaathaadi's jokes ) and send forth the
comments. I am sure that interested people  in  serious  Tamil
may  volunteer to help the proposer in his first edition. I am
one to volunteer. I am sure that there are some others also to
volunteer.  (  Vicky?  Are  you reading this letter ?) I could
send one short story and counting Vicky to send some poems and
Sundaramoorthy's  editorial  letter,  we  could  have a decent
first issue if we could get other readers like Nagarajan, Ravi
Sinnarajah and others to write for the first issue. Of course,
in view of the `good' response, we could have only  one  issue
per  month  for  the time-being and we could start it from No-
vember first week or second week with the last day for submis-
sion  as  the  last  day  of the next month October 31st ( one
month time ). Good literary magazines like  `Subamangalaa'  or
`Kanaiyaazhi'  are  available  in India and one can try to get
them if he is interested in them. I have translated and posted
one interview from Subamangalaa which might have given an idea
to some readers what is Subamangala like or what  is  Subaman-
galaa unlike. It is unlike commercial magazines like Kumudam ,
Vikatan or Kalki. Unfortunately, this magazine doesn't have an
overseas  subscription but if there is a good deal of interest
in the net , we can talk to the  magazine  office  to  get  an
overseas  subscription.  It  will  be  a  good start, in fact.
Kanaiyaazhi is there for so long as compared to Subamangalaa a
recent  one  and details pertaining subscription to the former
are welcomed. With a few short-stories, some  poems,  transla-
tions,  critical  essays  and possibly interviews (in Tamil or
translations), we could have a decent  first  issue  of  Tamil
literary society in November but this, as I have said earlier,
is a more complex one. I welcome readers' views on this letter
or  Sundaramoorthy's  proposal  on opinions and suggestions on
his charter and his proposal.
     Thanks for reading.
                                          [  Sundara Pandian ]
                                 
 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic