Home   Forum   Wiki   Notes   Register   FAQ   Sitemap   About Us   Contact Us  

Poetry vs Lyrics

Topic started by Bhoori (@ synvpn.synplicity.com) on Tue Feb 23 21:55:02 EST 1999.
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

Is Kannadasan a poet or a lyricist ? Indha Katru Veliyidai Kannamma - is this a poem because the author intended it to be poetry and not a lyric ? How different is it in quality from, say, Singarak Kanne Un Thenoorum Sevvayal ?

---

Responses:

• Old responses
  
• From: rameshb (@ spider-te012.proxy.aol.com) on: Thu Feb 25 12:08:33 EST 1999
  
  Hello there,
  isn't the word 'paththini' means 'one who wouldn't have any illicit relationship with another man other than her husband? Would you call a woman who has spend a day with another guy in loneliness (kAni nilam) and indulged in koottu kaLi as a 'paththini'? If bharati was asking for his kannamma , who was he not explicit in saying so?. He might have meant it indirectly, but use of that word by a renowned poet in such a context is a big mistake!
  
  
• From: pg (@ gate02.merck-medco.com) on: Thu Feb 25 12:08:51 EST 1999
  
  Sex is one of the driving forces of life and bhAradhi expresses it in a most beautiful manner.
  
  One should not reduce the passion which bhAradhi expresses to a "supplied with a 'paththini' to fulfill his sexual desires".
  
  Anyway look at bhAradhi expressing himself :
  
  kalaviyinAl mAnidarkku kavalai theerum -AdhalinAl
  kAdhal seyveer ulagatheerE
  
  Sex and love and very closely entangled much more than puritannic Indians would like to admit. Sex is nothing to be ashamed of.
  
  rameshb,
  Anyway kaNNadhAsan has written much worse lyrics and poetry than what is mentioned. Not that I am criticising him but just pointing out facts. Have you read KK's treatise on kooLappa nAyakkan kAdhal ?
  
  kaNNadhAsan was the greatest TFM lyricist. That's it. His novels, poetry (?), arthamuLLa indhu madham (in spite of their enormous popularity) are all eminently forgettable works. Moreover kaNNadhAsan was not a original thinker. Almost all of his works were derivative works being derived from old classical Tamil literature. The magazine uNmai (dravidar kazhagam) used to publish a series called 'kaNNadhAsanin kavidhai thiruttakkaL' and it used to document where many of kaNNadhAsan's cine songs were derived from.
  
  
• From: chandy (@ 209.125.83.228) on: Thu Feb 25 13:20:20 EST 1999
  
  Rameshb,
  
  Lets analyse the words closely
  
  pAttu kalanthidavE angEyoru
  paththiNi pEN vEnum engaL
  koottu kaLiyinilE kavithaigal
  koNduthara vEnum...
  
  In this song, Bharathi is aspiring for many things - there are three interpretations possible - one, Bharathi is unmarried and hes aspiring for a wife/lover (along with kaani nilam etc) who would be a "pathini" to him..
  - two, Bharathi is married and his wife/beloved is away.. and hes longing for his "pathini", among other things
  - two, Bharathi is asking for someone's "pathini"
  
  Which of these alternative interpretations is best? Given Bharathi's stature.. do you frankly think the 3rd alternative is best??
  
  The word pathini is used in the poetic sense, as pointd out by PG.
  
  I'd subscribe to alternative.1, or 2.
  
  This reminds me of an interesting short story - the context of which i dont recollect.. During some dispute in some village.. when all the villagers were asked a question "Who is the most pathini-pen you know of?", everyone came up with answers like "Kannagi", "Sita', "savithri" etc... Then they were asked back, "Why is that none of you could think of your mom, sister or your wives as pathinis????"
  
  Cant someone call his wife/lover as pathini? Cant Bharathi have that freedom ?
  
  Rameshb, enna sir solreenga?
  
  
• From: rameshb (@ spider-wa024.proxy.aol.com) on: Thu Feb 25 13:50:55 EST 1999
  
  Chandy,
  good logic! you are on the right track. Bharati has every right to quote his wife as 'paththini' in his poem. If you observe the poem closely, he says 'oru paththini vEnum'. Why he could not say 'en paththini vEnum or en kannamma vEnum?'. For every man his paththini (wife) is 'the paththini' more than 'a paththini'. This is exactly the place where bharati flawed. isn't it?
  
  
• From: Bhoori (@ synvpn.synplicity.com) on: Thu Feb 25 14:50:40 EST 1999
  
  rameshb,
  
  Looks like you are arguing for the sake of argument. ;-) Consider Bharathi unmarried, which is option 1.
  
  The interpretation that the poet wants the pathini of another man for koottuk kali is really ridiculous.
  
  
• From: chandy (@ 209.125.83.228) on: Thu Feb 25 15:00:37 EST 1999
  
  Rameshb,
  
  I agree with Bhoori. You are reading too much on the word "oru" before pathini. Lets be reasoable before we implicate Bharathiyaar in some sex-scam :-)
  
  
  
  
  
• From: rameshb (@ spider-wk014.proxy.aol.com) on: Thu Feb 25 16:47:09 EST 1999
  
  Bhoori,
  i think you are totally wrong in interpreting my arguments! i never said bharathi wants another man's wife. You are extremely casual in making that observation. A paththini doesn't necessarily have to be a married woman. She could be a woman with virgin intact. When i asked 'why he could not say en paththini or en kannamma' , it clearly meant that adj 'oru' sends a wrong message to the readers. And if i consider bharathi unmarried, same error applies. Did you say ' i am just arguing for the sake of argument?' . It is indeed an argument and i just want to put forth my observation. Nothing more, nothing less. If you don't have points to substantiate your views , you just throw this blanket accusation saying 'you are just arguing'.
  
  Chandy,
  I am not trying to implicate bharathi in a sex-scam. Indeed this is not a scam. This is just a floor to debate the works of our elders. If there are rooms for any ambiguity, it should be debated and conclusions be drawn.
  
  Since it is considered by others that this is not a healthy topic to discuss but a mud-slinging attempt by me, I don't want to pull this any further. I am NOT an Iconoclast.
  
  
• From: Bhoori (@ synvpn.synplicity.com) on: Thu Feb 25 20:23:46 EST 1999
  
  rameshb:
  
  I hv no problem about the health of the issue; the problem is that this is a non-issue!
  
  1. If you think that pathini is not necessarily someone else's wife, whats your point ? The poet shouldnt aspire for a pathinip pen ?
  
  2. Do you need explicit stmts which say that "I want to marry a patthinip pen" ? Are you bothered by mention of koottuk kali with a pathinip penn ? Whats the problem ? Would yo u rather prefer the poet to say that he wants koottuk kali with a dhasi or something ?
  
  3. Is that your ideal of pathinip penn shouldnt be demeaned by references to sex ?
  
  The only way your objection made any kind of sense to me is that you interpret patthini as in Hindi - meaning wife. Since oru wife is not correct in the context of self, the only way it made sense is that you interpret this as the wife of somebody else. Thats why I called this arguing for the sake of arguing. You say that this is not what you meant, and now I dont understand this at all - arguing for what ?
  
  
• From: rameshb (@ spider-wm044.proxy.aol.com) on: Thu Feb 25 21:33:21 EST 1999
  
  "When the goings get tougher, the tough gets going"
  It is even getting rougher here with kinda unrelenting , aggravated ,prolonging arguments over the conceptualization of the term 'paththini'. I just don't want to create a picture here that i am in a pugnacious mood on some petty issue. I have expressed all my comprehensions , feeligs, micro-analysis, systhesis, in my above postings only to be viewed as a mulish , obstinate dude showing my pertinacious attitude!
  So, bhoori would you care to read my postings once again and help me spare this floor for the rest of them who want to continue their mud-slinging on kannadasan? Please email me if you still want me to explain the theory of paththini and its practical implications vis-a-vis bharathi's 'kaani nilam' verse.
  
  
• From: chandy (@ 209.125.83.170) on: Thu Feb 25 22:50:31 EST 1999
  
  Rameshb:
  
  The idea is not to misinterpret certain conceptaulizations of Bharathi. You took objection to the words "pathini pen" and "kootukali" used by bharathi. Your earlier definition of pathini as "one who wouldn't have any illicit relationship with another man other than her husband" and your pondering about calling someone who "indulged in koottu kaLi as a 'paththini'?" lead to the whole debate. You implicated Bharathi by saying he "FLAWED" and he made a "BIG MISTAKE".
  
  Even by your own definition, a pathini can have kootukali with her own husband/lover, and where is the evidence in this song that Bharathi is seeking some other pathini and hence he must be "flawed".. Even if he seeks another woman, thats purely his business... how can it be called a "flaw", and "a big mistake"? Its purely his perogative to wish for all that he wants.
  
  I'm trying to take a different angle to the entire argument just to tell you that its no fair to implicate a poet like Bharathi!
  
  
  
• From: Raj (@ master.hyd.deshaw.com) on: Thu Feb 25 23:22:52 EST 1999
  
  Chandy: Ata boy!
  
  Ramesh: That precisely was , I think, what Bharathiyar meant. Anyway, I dont wear a white glass either... ofcourse, youhave a right to sport your green glass:)
  (I havent seen netrikann BTW)
  
  
• From: rameshb (@ spider-tm062.proxy.aol.com) on: Fri Feb 26 00:07:56 EST 1999
  
  "angEyoru paththiNi pEN vEnum engaL
  koottu kaLiyinilE "
  
  
• From: rameshb (@ spider-tm062.proxy.aol.com) on: Fri Feb 26 00:17:47 EST 1999
  
  Once again i reinstate , i never said he was mentioning (or asking for) another man's wife. If you say oru paththiNi , it widens the scope for interpretation. If you say en paththini , it becomes more precise, he should have done this . If you say it was purely his business , i don't want to come between you and your arguments.
  
  
• From: rameshb (@ spider-tm062.proxy.aol.com) on: Fri Feb 26 00:36:24 EST 1999
  
  Let me eloberate a little more,
  Since i think he did not probably ask for a married-pathni, an unmarried pathni (virgin intact) is what i understand being asked for and which is objectionable, for a man who belived in moral principles. But , is true that it was purely his personal wish. I have nothing to say beyond this point. Well if nobody wants to wear my glasses , i have to quit. I certainly made crass comments like 'supplied with' ,'for fulfulling sexual desire' which are definitely mud-slinging from my part. I should have made it in a polite manner.
  
  
• From: chandy (@ 209.125.83.228) on: Fri Feb 26 10:11:07 EST 1999
  
  Rameshb,
  
  Cool it boy...
  
  I think you are reading too much into that "oru" word. And I also wonder if we are reading too much into the word kootukali also.. i'd possibly classify kabadi also as kootukali :-)
  
  
  

---

List all pages of this thread

Post comments