A Letter to the Editors

To

THE EDITORS,

TRIVENI.

Dear Sirs,

Mr. Srirangam Srinivasa Rao’s article on "The Short Story in Telugu," which appeared in a recent number of Triveni is somewhat hasty. In the first place it did not mention story-writers in Telugu whose contribution to the development of the short story in Telugu is not at all negligible. They are, chief among others, ‘Karunakumara,’ Mr. Munimanikyam Narasimha Rao and Prof. V. N. Bhushan.

‘Karunakumara’ is a writer in whose stories we find village life so vividly, sympathetically and artistically depicted. In fact, there is no other short-story-writer in Telugu who can stand comparison with ‘Karunakumara’ in depicting village life, if we except Mr. Sripada Subrahmanya Sastry.

Mr. Munimanikyam Narasimha Rao is a story-writer whose stories are full of amusing incidents. If a film-goer, when he wants to forget himself in enjoyment, ought to take four-anna worth of Charlie Chaplin, a reader of Telugu short stories, if he wants to have the same effect, ought to buy a copy of two-anna ‘Vinodini’ to read Mr. Narasimha Rao’s incomparable accounts of incidents in ‘his’ family life. His ‘Kantam’ is as admirable a creation in Telugu short stories as ‘Yenki’ of Mr. Nanduri Subba Rao is in Telugu lyrics.

Prof. V. N. Bhushan’s short stories teem with clever incidents written in chiselled language. When we read Mr. Gudipati Venkatachalam’s short stories we cannot escape the fact that the writer is importing incidents from Western society and giving the characters Telugu names. But not so with Prof. Bhushan. Prof. Bhushan’s characters are cultured. They are Telugu in spirit, though they give an impression that they are hugely interested in Western culture.

It is regrettable that Mr. Srirangam Srinivasa Rao forgot to mention these excellent writers when he was writing on Telugu short stories which form the most important branch of Telugu literature today. And his criticism of the literary talents of Mr. Gudipati Venkatachalam and of Mr. K. Kutumba Rao is poor. Wise critics in the Telugu country say that Mr. Venkatachalam’s stories teem with incidents which seem utterly ridiculous. They are imported from Western society and, it is said, not without truth, that these incidents of his stories could not have happened even in Western society until very recently. Even then, for argument’s sake, let us agree with Mr. Srinivasa Rao that Mr. Venkatachalam is an excellent writer who depicts the evils in our society in all their horror and without any fear. Then, is this quality in a writer not worthy of imitation? But Mr. Srinivasa Rao does not think it is. When he writes of Mr. Kutumba Rao, he says, "At present the influence of Sri Gudipati Venkatachalam is too greatly on him. Once he shakes it off he can be expected to scale the higher reaches of artistic endeavour." (Italics mine.) When Mr. Srinivasa Rao thinks that Mr. Venkatachalam is an admirable writer, why should he forbid Mr. Kutumba Rao to imitate him? The truth is that Mr. Kutumba Rao does not imitate Mr. Venkatachalam, as Mr. Srinivasa Rao thinks he does. Even though Mr. Kutumba Rao does, at times, import incidents from Western social life and invest the characters with Telugu names, yet he has written stories which show that he is an excellent observer of men and manners in Telugu society. He certainly does not imitate Mr. Venkatachalam so obviously.

Yours truly,

M. SATCHIDANANDA SARMA.

THE REPLY

BY SRIRANGAM SRINIVASA RAO

I do not remember to have met Mr. Satchidananda Sarma before, either in print or in person. But a perusal of his letter leaves me with the conviction that we can never agree in our judgments. When he speaks of Charlie Chaplin, ‘Vinodini’ and "Kantam" in the same breath, I find it beyond my capacity to adjust my sense of values to his viewpoint. He praises very highly Messrs. Karunakumara, Munimanikyam, and V. N. Bhushan. He is entitled to his own judgment, and I readily concede that they have their points, but I cannot regard them as front-rank writers. Among very good second-rate writers I had named a few in my essay. I did not intend my essay to be comprehensive, or else I could have mentioned, besides the above writers, fine raconteurs such as Messrs. Sivasankara Sastri, Muddukrishna and Bhamidipati Kameswara Rao, any of whom is any day a greater writer than the three Mr. Sarma mentions. The title of my essay is a misnomer, I admit; but the fault is not really mine, for I wanted to write only about "Some Short-story-writers in Telugu."

Then there is the controversy about Mr. Gudipati Venkatachalam, My criticism of his literary talents Mr. Sarma considers as "poor." Staking what little reputation I possess, I assert that ‘Chalam’ is the greatest living short-story-writer in Telugu. I know that people raise a hue and cry when ‘Chalam’ is praised. With many his name is taboo. The high-class monthly, "Bharati," has not published even a single story of his, during its existence of over twelve years. Others remember only his shock tactics and fail to perceive that our bullock-cart society cannot keep pace with his sky-rocketing speed. His honest realism has torn the middle-class masks. It is easy to understand the rage of Caliban looking at his own image in the mirror.

"When Mr. Srinivasa Rao thinks that Mr. Venkatachalam is an admirable writer, why should he forbid Mr. Kutumba Rao to imitate him?" asks Mr. Sarma. It is for the simple reason that no writer has become great by imitating another. Individuality is everything and imitation is its death-knell. I thought that Mr. Kutumba Rao possessed fine qualities as a short-story-writer, and so I wished to warn him against this bane.

And then, what is this talk about East and West, as if human nature were different in different places? It is really amusing to read that certain incidents in Mr. Chalam’s stories "could not have occurred even in Western society until very recently." The fact is, they occur always, here, there, everywhere. The Western writers were bold enough to present them in literature. Chalam’s incidents are not ridiculous. It is the society in which such incidents occur on the sly that is ridiculous.