LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT 78. LITERATURE,LANGUAGE AND VIOLENCE.

LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT

78. LITERATURE, LANGUAGE AND VIOLENCE

War without violence or violence without war?

We like to think that we know what violence is- after all we have read about the two world wars, the Korean War, Vietnam war, numerous other conflicts in all parts of the globe. We know something about the cold war- though the violence there was not so open, physical . It was more about contentious political and economic philosophies, competing for supremacy. But it was a war for people's minds, and control over their lives. The world is witnessing violence by Jihadis- of the most brutal kind. Nearer home, we saw violence in Sri Lanka. At home, though Mahatma Gandhi is credited with having got our Independence without violence, we have witnessed violence of every kind, on every possible ground since then- language, state border, water-sharing,reservation in jobs, etc.

Violence  has become such a part of our consciousness that we speak of "war" routinely- war against poverty, illiteracy, corruption, war even for peace! In the 60s, one scholar- Krishnalal Shridharani-  even wrote a book on Gandhiji's philosophy calling it "War Without Violence". But thoughtful people used to point out the hidden violence involved in Gandhiji's methods: when he undertook a fast for some cause, did it not amount to forcing people opposed to his way of thinking to embrace his position? It should really be called "violence without war"!

Unseen violence to mind and spirit

We associate violence with some physical assault, and bloodshed. But what about the damage to mind, heart, self-esteem? To personality? To self-expression?

Years ago, I copied down the following in my notebook:

"Who is to say that robbing a people of its language is less violent than war?"

    

 -  Ray Gwyn Smith.

Sadly, I did not note the source.

Subsequently, we read many reports from international agencies that many ancient languages and dialects are facing extinction. 

But we have experienced other kinds of violence relating to language. Some are happening right now.

In our generation, we completed our secondary education through our mother tongue, with English being taught as second language from the 6th standard. The syllabus was simple, small and uncomplicated and we had so much time to learn, think, dream, and absorb- not just cram. Most of us could read  a novel or newspaper, and write at least a page without glaring grammatical errors. The stress was on the basics- just learning to read and write.

When we entered the University, the medium switched to English, mother tongue becoming the second language, even optional in the big cities! This led to rote learning in the science subjects, but the humanities and social sciences called for some linguistic ability and originality. When a hundred fellows wrote about what Newton's laws were, they wrote the same thing, in the same words. But when ten people wrote about Ashoka's change of heart or Akbar's Din Elahi, you got as many versions! This was the pain, and also the fun, of mastering the humanities- you had to master the subject and English both! I would go a step further and say, such people mastered the art of life too! Economics, Political science, History, Philosophy, Literature- they do give a perspective on life. One can bet their theories are mostly speculative and wrong, but they make men! Science makes technicians, automatons, morons!


From English to English medium!

But soon, the craze for English medium started, even from the lower standards. In the convents ,and the schools run by their local imitators, speaking in mother tongue was prohibited during school hours and some schools even imposed fine on children speaking in their language! Today, there is something called pre-school, pre-nursery even before the Kindergarten. And everywhere, they teach in English! Is this not a form of violence we are practising on children- our own children, as we are preventing them from expressing themselves in the natural manner and forcing an alien language on them?

The scene is so confused. The state govts want to impose their language on everyone in the state, when parents do not want it. Central govt.imposes Hindi on everyone, and fools everyone with a three-language formula, when the Hindiwallahs just have to learn their mother tongue and English, while non-Hindi speakers have to learn three by the sheer force of circumstances and the Constitution. January 26 is Republic Day, but it is the day of Hindi Imposition on the South and other non-Hindi areas! This is constitutional violence!

This process involves another violence- the murder of Sanskrit- which it the mother of Indian languages and the source of all Indian thought in all languages of India in all subjects! If the three language formula simply means Mother tongue plus English plus Sanskrit, all Indians will be constitutionally equal- as English and Sanskrit are nobody's mother tongue- and do not confer any unearned advantage on any one! For all practical purposes, two language formula would do: mother tongue and English!

There is a type of violence even in learning English.Which is correct English- English English or American English? In writing, the computer has solved the problem: it will choose the form given the command! Most people are indifferent; even our newspapers are increasingly adopting American. We are so slavishly American, that we do not even use the Indian words for large numbers- it is all million, billion, trillion dollars now- not lakhs, crores of Indian rupees. Even our economists talk of our national income in terms of dollars. Is this not a violence to our national spirit ?

But speaking English creates its own problems- problems of diction, accent, etc.

I was fortunate to listen to the  speeches of Nehru and Rajaji and the lectures of Dr.Radhakrishnan- he did not give speeches, he only lectured! Even a simple inauguration would be scholarly,studded with quotations. Nehru was educated in England and spoke like an Englishman. Dr. Radhakrishnan and Rajaji were more Indian, but each had his distinctive style. Rajaji spoke in measured words, would build up the argument and he spoke from a moral and ethical framework. He spoke English naturally, like an Indian. It was idiomatic, correct and telling in its effect.His speech was like finely-chiseled sculpture. But he was not an orator. That Dr.Radhakrishnan was! He combined such erudition from the lore and literature of East and West, and his language flow was a pravaham- unstoppable flow of such force and majesty. One always felt sorry that he had to stop!

Dr.S.Radhakrishnan


 But the point is, each one had his own style, each one spoke English like an Indian and there was no conscious attempt to imitate any one! They were natural, and naturally Indian. But today, which top-ranking leader can talk like that? And we have got schools to teach us to talk like Americans or the English.

I often wonder if these people have listened to native speakers ever! There is no one standard way of speaking any language anywhere in the world! I was taught English in college by 3 Englishmen- two of them from Oxford. But each had a distinct style and even pronunciation. I asked one of them about Fowler's 'King's English'. He asked me how many people got to talk to the king! Rules about writing were rather strict, as there should be no ambiguity in the expression of fine thoughts, but cultured speech permitted more variations, without degenerating into slang. When we force one standard way of speech or even writing, we are indulging in another kind of violence! But this is practised now in the school system in Tamil Nad! And the odd thing is that they say the pronunciation of Sri Lankan Tamils is best!

When children were sent to the convents or Christian schools, a funny thing happened. Most of the nuns were Keralites- and they had their distinct pronunciation, in Malayalee accent! So the children naturally imbibed this! I am not saying it is wrong. I am just saying it happened this way! After all, do we not feel this when  Jesudas, the Master that he is, sings Hindi songs? It is quite natural. We are told that even Lata Mangeshkar could not pronounce Urdu words properly, and Naushad and others had to train her. And see how differently Rafi and Talat Mahmood pronounce Urdu words- both natural speakers of the language! Don't we enjoy both!

Language is such a lively thing! The variations in writing styles and pronunciation add richness, depth and variety. It sure can lead to some odd situations, but we can learn to enjoy. We called ground nut as 'Kadalakkai' in Tamil in Salem. My wife came from a different part, and she called it 'mallakottai'; the more popular version would be 'mallatai'. And a standard newspaper like Dinamani would give the market rates for 'manila kottai'. Now which one is the right one? 'Olakkai' in our part meant the long  thick wooden pole with iron-clad ends used to dehusk paddy or make beaten rice at home; but this word meant the small iron tool, about  18" long, used for digging earth in the part my wife came from! This we used to call 'Kadappaarai'!  In high school, our Tamil teacher, who came from Tanjore dist and  was a Saiva scholar would confer the title 'Olakkai' on any boy who could not answer a question but would stand erect and still! ( But in writing, it is always spelt "Ulakkai"! This is a peculiarity in Tamil in respect of many words!)
  "Panam" generally meant money in Tamil, but 'a panam' would mean 2 annas in Trichy, and 2.5 annas in Tanjore! Incidentally, this was the salary Vidura was supposed to have recieved in Mahabharata times! And his house was reported to be in a dilapidated condition! (Poor soul! No Vastu consultants were probably available to tell him how a minister 's  house should be!)

Vidura (left) with Dhritarashtra
Gita Press, Gorakhpur


Language is naturally plastic. Let us not do it violence by straight-jacketing it and preventing its naturally   growing  expression and variety!