... to the Tamil of today

The only problem that I have with David Shulman's biography of Tamil is that for a book authored by a person of his caliber, and for a book published by Harvard University Press, there are quite a few inconsistent spellings throughout.  Even Tenkasi is spelled as Tenkaci in one context.  In the opening pages, the pallavi of the Carnatic music is written as pallava.

But, otherwise, what an awesome learning experience it has been for me!

Shulman writes that the Tamil world had changed almost beyond recognition by the middle of the nineteenth century.  Manonmaniyam Sundaram Pillai played an integral role in the revival and revitalization of Tamil.  I recall his Tamil Thai Vazhthu from the school days.  Shulman lists many more who worked on recovering the old Sangam texts and providing commentaries about them.

In the early 20th century, the struggle to get rid of the bastard raj also became a struggle to re-establish Tamil.  Unfortunately, this became entangled with anti-Brahmin and anti-caste issues, which were also extremely important, and are important even today.  But, the co-mingling of these issues led to a political movement to also get rid of the Sanskrit--associated with Brahmins--words from the Tamil language.

Shulman writes that "the very intensity of anti-Sanskrit feeling that we see in the Pure Tamil fanatics is itself a sure sign of the deep interdependence of the two languages."  But, politics does not care for such nuances.  And despite the maniacal efforts of the fanatics, "Tamil today, like the Tamil of yesterday, indeed like nearly all major living languages, remains saturated with borrowed vocabulary."  The language lives on.

Shulman ends the book with a contemporary Tamil poem, by Manushya Puthiran.

Elections 2010: Lose the battle, but win the war

I grew up with crazy politics and politicians in Tamil Nadu. There was very little difference between the two main parties--DMK and ADMK. Almost always, whenever one got elected into power, very few of the populist programs put into place by the "other" would be dismantled. Further, it was not uncommon to even enhance the other's programs and even claim credit for it.

Politics here in the US is becoming, unfortunately, as clownish as the Indian politics. The Tamil Nadu electorate voting out one party in favor of another wasn't any decisive swing because of love for the other either. It was merely to throw one set of bums out with another set of bums, and repeat.

Which is why I like this analysis by William Saletan on why the Democrats and Pelosi did not lose the battle of 2010:

Politicians have tried and failed for decades to enact universal health care. This time, they succeeded. In 2008, Democrats won the presidency and both houses of Congress, and by the thinnest of margins, they rammed a bill through. They weren't going to get another opportunity for a very long time. It cost them their majority, and it was worth it.

And that's not counting financial regulation, economic stimulus, college lending reform, and all the other bills that became law under Pelosi. So spare me the tears and gloating about her so-called failure. If John Boehner is speaker of the House for the next 20 years, he'll be lucky to match her achievements.

I would think that this is the kind of ramming through that Bush had in mind when he talked about spending his political capital on reforming Social Security. Imagine if he and the GOP had carried that through! The same way they had rammed the wars through ...

There is a probability that the economy wouldn't improve a whole lot before the 2012 elections. And we will still have "non combat" troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? American voters will become like those in Tamil Nadu and replace their reps. If the GOP has learnt the lessons, then they too will try to tam through their favorite programs. Crazy, eh?

This is actually better politics in a way: the parties clearly stating what they are for and implementing it. I much prefer a principled government (not the irresponsible populism though) than one in which everybody hails bipartisanship.

Remembering Melina Mercouri

One of the characteristics of getting old is, I suppose, we think about the lives we had.  And, all of a sudden pop up in our minds events we didn't even know had registered in our memories.  

I had one of those this evening.  I have no idea what led to me thinking about Melina Mercouri's visit to India--this was when I was back in India, working on my undergrad degree.  I wonder if her trip registered in my memory because it was at then that I had read "Zorba the Greek". Anyway, I recall thinking that Mercouri as a minister was so much like the politicians in Tamil Nadu, who had extensive movie connections.  The chief minister at that time, MGR, was a big time movie star before he became a full-time politician.  For that matter, the party to which he belonged for the longest time before breaking away, the DMK, was founded and led by Annadurai and Karunanidhi--both screenplay writers .... 

Ok, back to Melina Mercouri.  So, thanks to YouTube I pulled up the famous song from Never on Sunday, which, of course, I heard for the first time during her visit to India.  Here is the clip:

After that, I thought I should revisit Zorba the Greek; here is that famous dance scene that is also the movie ending

The unbearable whiteness/blackness of being

Growing up in Tamil Nadu, a southern state in India, I had a total immersion in the socio-political dynamics that were based on groups that had always had the upper hand versus those that were always pushed down. It was only a matter of time before those who were pushed down exercised their democractic power and, when they did, the old rules were swiftly broken. It is no wonder then that Tamil Nadu today is phenomenally way more progressive than many other states in the union.

Of course, the big difference between the situation here and that in Tamil Nadu is one of numbers: in Tamil Nadu, the oppressed were/are a majority of the population.

Looking at the presidential elections from that perspective, I have a strong feeling that the "blackness" and "whiteness" will play a significant role in this election. Which is why I liked this essay in the New York Review of Books. I think I like the concluding argument too:

What seems more needed, in my view, are two parallel campaigns: a quiet one to assure a maximum black turnout, and a more public one to make the most of the white backing the Obama-Biden ticket already has. His rallies, appearances, and advertisements would benefit from featuring white faces, and they should be accompanied by endorsements from white military veterans, union leaders, police chiefs, and firemen. His black supporters will know what is going on, and not take this as a rebuff.