From: vprasad@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: I HATE TAMILS (2)
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:09:33 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <41552@ogicse.ogi.edu>, partha@mse.cse.ogi.edu (R. Parthasarathy)
writes:
>
> is right or wrong is to be discussed later. No, Tamils are not the ones
> who campaigned for linguistic division of the whole nation. Ever heard
> of Potti Sriramulu? He was a Telugu speaking man. He fasted to death
> demanding a state based on Telugu language. Jawaharlal Nehru, who until
> then opposed such a division, decided to give in - AndhraPradesh was
> formed from the erstwhile "Madras state". That Tamil Nadu formed based
> on Tamil language was only a consequence. Not all Tamilians, but a group
> of men under EVR demanded a Dravida Nadu from the British even before
> our independence. Such a state was supposed to consist of the four southern
> states. [source: MJ Akbar's "India the Siege Within].

	I find it very irritating that people blame Andhra Pradesh for being
	the first linguistic state in the nation and thus "setting a chain
	of linguistic carvings of the country". And Potti Sriramulu is being
	very unfairly criticized. Ever think of the logic behind his demand? 
	Apparently not.

	Before the formation of the linguistic state of Andhra Pradesh, Madras
	was the main capital of a vast region of Madras Presidency, which 
	included the present four states of AP, TN, Karnataka and Kerala. All
	the administrative machinery was run in English, and *Tamil*. A common
	person from interior Andhra, who had to deal with the administration
	day in and day out, it was quite irritating to have everything done in
	a language which is *alien* to him. My own grandfather, was a victim of
	such a situation. He had a property dispute with his kinfolk, and the
	case after being decided in his favor in a local court, was appealed
	in a higher court - where else? Madras. So, now the venue shifted to 
	Madras - everything was done in Tamil; it so happened that he ended up 
	paying for translation services as much as he did to his lawyer, the 
	sum total of which has *exceeded* the value of the property in dispute.
	And my grandfather was *not* ordinary rural uneducated person. He was 
	a "sidhdhanthi" in Telugu, well versed with all the vedas and was a 
	pundit. He was *very* fluent in Hindi too. If such was the fate for an
	*educated* and *upper-caste* person, don't you see the grave
	administrative injustice that would have been meted out to common folk,
	*other* than Tamils in the erstwhile Madras presidency?? Needless to
	say, my grandfather was extremely supportive of linguistic division of
	the states. So were many common folk - Potti Sriramulu just made these
	mute voices public. This was quite akin to present day sentiment about
	Hindi in Tamilnadu, if you care to understand. I find it hypocritical
	for one to be against linguistic states and yet oppose Hindi.

	Secondly, I find it offensive to equate Potti Sriramulu to EVR. EVR
	demanded a **separate and independent** nation consisting of present
	4 south indian states, with his screwed-up idea of Dravidians and non
	Dravidians, quite conveniently ignoring the commonality of Indianness
	between us. Potti demanded a separate linguistic *state*, which is to
	be still a *part of the Indian union* and NOT independence. To say
	Potti's call for a separate identity of Telugus in the form of a 
	linguistic state and EVR's call for secession (not unlike present day
	Kashmiris) are one and the same, is an *insult* to all Telugus and
	Potti's patriotism.

> Looks like they haven't gone much into the south. Telugus have been ruled
> by the Congress for a majority of their time. Until Congress ruled Tamil
> Nadu, Hindi was being taught in schools. Also Hindi is spoken in Muslim
> dominated areas in Andhra Pradesh like Hyderabad, Machlipatnam other
> regions where Muslims ruled ages ago. Try talking in Hindi in rural
> AndhraPradesh. You'll get the same response as when talking in Tamil
> in Bihar.

	Mr. Parthasarathy, you will be quite surprised if I tell you that if
	you ask something in Hindi in interior Andhra, you *won't* be getting
	a blank stare. My experience is limited to some West Godavari's small
	towns, but people there are not so ignorant about Hindi. Any school
	kid can answer back in Hindi, albeit with a text-book language and
	very bad grammar, but successful in getting the idea across. If you
	think that this has somehow diluted our Telugu culture or infer that
	we do not appreciate our language that much, you must be mistaken.

	Learning Hindi language continues right upto 10th std. after which it
	is optional for you take *any* language, but must choose atleast one.
	You get to choose a *first* language, *second* language and a *third* 
	language (Telugu, Hindi and English in my case). The emphasis on the 
	first language is *quite* heavy compared to second and third languages.
	[Well, English was also my medium of instruction, so the std. of 
	English taught was comparable to Telugu. But if your medium of
	instruction is Telugu, this needn't be the case] Quite often, the 
	tenth std. book of the second language is the same as fifth std. book 
	of the first language. If you choose Telugu and Hindi in that order, 
	in your 10th std. you will be learning as much Hindi as a person 5 
	years jr. to you is learning in Hindi heartland, for a comparison. 
	Contrast this with the complete do away of Hindi if one chooses to, 
	as in TN. Placing emphasis on one's own language and learning of 
	another language (Hindi) need not be mutually exclusive as TN 
	administrators seem to think. I for one, am extremly happy with the
	present education policy in AP.
> 
> I am getting tired of these views. When will it all end?
> 
> Partha sarathy

	Tired of different opinions than yours eh?

	Siva Prasad.				vprasad@uoft02.utoledo.edu