This morning (22-03-2014), I watched a rhetorical talk by Suki Sivam on Sun TV. I was surprised by his unnecessary critique of Owvaiyar and other poets who used illustrations to clarify their points to their audience.
Owvaiyar, in critiquing poets who lack a proper grasp of grammar and poetic techniques, compared them to a turkey trying to stretch its feathers and dance like a peacock. Suki Sivam argued that this comparison was an unfair attack on the turkey and that Owvaiyar, despite her greatness, had no right to make such a comparison.
What puzzled me about Sivam’s talk was the extent of his digressions, which had little to do with the topic at hand. For example, he sympathetically discussed the turkey’s short feathers while criticizing women who use artificial hair extensions (known as ‘savuri’ in Tamil) to enhance their appearance. He veered off-topic, condemning various practices that were unrelated to his main argument.
Sivam stated that while one should not criticize others by comparing them to others, this does not mean he should avoid criticizing Owvaiyar. He also claimed that Indians often use comparisons to praise someone by belittling others. I am unsure where he derived this idea.
Sivam mentioned that he revisited the Tamil poems from his school days and felt that Owvaiyar was wrong to compare untrained poets to a turkey, which gets its beautiful feathers from either nature or a divine source. Sivam emphasized that he does not want to impose his views on religion on others, asserting that he is neither an atheist nor a theist.
In my view, Sivam seems to be imposing his own perspective that most Indians tend to condemn others to elevate someone. He extended this idea to Owvaiyar’s illustration, which he believed was misplaced. If Sivam believes Owvaiyar is wrong, then many Tamil poets who have used similar comparisons must also be wrong. Owvaiyar did not criticize the turkey nor praise the peacock; rather, she used an illustration to communicate her thoughts effectively.
Every illustration carries a central message. Stretching it beyond its intended purpose and reading our own interpretations into it (such as comparing the feathers of a turkey and a peacock) can lead to misunderstandings, as Sivam’s talk demonstrated.
Sivam is a gifted speaker, but as the Tamil proverb says, “Even an elephant may slip” (yanaikkum adisarukkum). Another point he raised was that no one should hesitate to criticize great poets like Owvaiyar. He claimed that the turkey, brought to India by the Portuguese, was not present in earlier times, making Owvaiyar’s comparison historically inaccurate. In India, as in many other places, it is not uncommon for later poets to attribute their new ideas to renowned poets in order to gain popularity. This practice often reflects a desire by the original author to spread their thoughts among the people rather than seek personal recognition. This phenomenon isn’t limited to poetry but extends to various fields. For instance, as Grimes aptly observes:
‘Traditionally, the reason philosophers do not discuss themselves in their works seems to stem from a desire to let the truths they present speak for themselves. As individual thinkers, they consider themselves insignificant compared to their ideas, and even the most original among them often disclaims any originality for the doctrines they teach. They all declare themselves mere transmitters of an ancient tradition, one that requires continuous refinement and exposition. Furthermore, it is said that in the Hindu tradition, no individual can claim to have discovered the truth for the first time; all they can do is articulate, explain, and defend some eternal truth.’ [John A. Grimes, ‘Darsana,’ pp. 531-552, in Sushil Mittal & Gene Thursby, The Hindu World, New York, [2004] Reprint 2018, p. 534].
Moreover, it is possible that someone who compiled several popular songs of his time may have attributed them to a famous poet and presented them under one title. So, The issue here is not about the timing of Owvaiyar’s comparisons but rather the use of illustrations and exaggeration in poetry. For example, contemporary poet Sri Vairamuttu, in one of his film songs, says, “Collyrium beautifies the eyes and lies in the poem”—a statement Sivam might criticize for using film songs as a reference, though that is not the main point here.
Returning to my main argument, the same Owvaiyar in another verse said: “Great people act without announcement; mediocre people announce their actions; mean-minded people announce but do nothing. O woman with a swinging garland and sharp eyes, observe the jackfruit, mango, and padiri as illustrations for these types of people” (K. Subramania Pillai, Tannipada Thirattu, Chennai, Nallarappadippagam, 2007, vol. I, song 30, pp. 21-22).1
Sivam should not fault Owvaiyar for using illustrations to convey her message. She used the word ‘uvamai’ (illustration) to compare these trees with different types of people. Criticizing the illustrations without considering their intended message detracts from the core idea.
Every illustration aims to communicate a thought using familiar examples. If we focus only on the examples and not on the message they convey, we risk missing the point. Sivam himself uses numerous examples to convey his ideas. We are more interested in the ‘message’ rather than the ‘medium.’
For instance, I could discuss his use of terms like ‘atheist’ and ‘theist’ and delve into their philological, etymological, and theological meanings. However, such a discussion would detract from the main point. Sivam’s own logic will falter if he stretches the medium beyond its purpose of conveying the message.
Dayanand Bharati, Gurukulam, [22-03-2014], Revised 31-8-2024
22-03-2014
1 சொல்லாம லேபெரியர் சொல்லில் சிறியர்செய்வர்
சொல்லியுஞ் செய்யார் கயவரே–நல்ல
குலாமாலை வேற்கண்ணாய் கூறுவமை நாடிற்
பலாமாவைப் பாதிரியைப் பார்.—30, p. 21
நல்ல குலாமாலை வேற்கண்ணாய்–அழகிய அசைகின்ற மாலையைச் சூடிய வேல் போன்ற கூரிய கண்ணையுடையவளே
இவர்களுக்கு ஒபபாகச் சொல்லக் கூடிய் பொருள்களை ஆராய்ந்தால், பலாமாவைப் பாதிரியைப் பார்–பூக்காது பழுக்கும் பலா மரத்தையும், பூத்துக் கனி தரும் மாமரத்தையும், பூத்தும் பழம் உதவாத பாதிரி மரத்தையும் பார்த்துக் கொள்.–தனிப்பாடல் திரட்டு, உரை கா. சுப்பிரமணிய பிள்ளை, சென்னை, நல்லறப் பதிப்பகம், 2207, முதல் தொகுதி, p. 22
Dayanand Bharati.
22-03-2014
Leave a Reply