Between Reviews: Why He Mattered…
WHY HE MATTERED…
MAR 9, 2008 - THE UNFORTUNATE DEMISE OF THE TAMIL WRITER SUJATHA – from the news-channel eulogies, though, you’d think the man was merely a screenwriter, giving shape to the visions of Shankar and Mani Ratnam – has occasioned a steady outpouring of how-I-learnt-to-read-Tamil-with-his-books memories, and while I know from experience that that’s true, I feel no one has zeroed in on why this is so. After all, there were so many other Tamil writers – the great modernist god that was the early Vairamuthu, say – who were Sujatha’s contemporaries and who were certainly no slouches when it came to a certain felicity of expression that could make any rank newbie fall in rapturous love with the language. But I think what made Sujatha stand apart and speak to so many of us who grew up in the seventies and the eighties was that his writings were instantly appealing to a generation that could understand Tamil and speak Tamil and read Tamil and perhaps even write Tamil – but thought in English. I’m not just talking about the sci-fi setting of En Iniya Iyandhira and its robo-dog named after the Roman goddess Juno – all far, far removed from the sociopolitical and moralistic scenarios that constituted a lot of the writing in the local magazines of the time – but Sujatha’s Western sensibilities would peek through even his pieces on ancient religious texts.
By “Western” sensibilities, I mean that he could demystify the most arcane of abstractions with the lightest of touches and with the gentlest sense of humour. In other words, he would take his subject seriously without taking himself seriously – and that was refreshing to a generation whose defining characteristic was (a borderline don’t-care-ish) casualness. As an aside, maybe that’s why Mani Ratnam felt the time was ripe for his kind of cinema – because he had in front of him a young audience that wasn’t especially “Indian” when it came to, say, respecting authority figures. Do you think a filmmaker from an earlier era would have given us the scene from Roja where Arvind Swamy’s mother speaks of his smoking habit as if it were a minor annoyance, perhaps ranking alongside a maidservant who doesn’t show up despite her previous-evening promises to be there first thing in the morning? And maybe that’s why Mani Ratnam worked so extensively with Sujatha, one Western sensibility in complete synchronicity with another. Anyway, coming back to Sujatha, here’s what I mean when I talk of his being with it, and with us: In a recent installment of his series in the magazine Kalki – the column was called Vaaram Oru Paasuram (loosely, ‘A Verse A Week’), where, each time, he’d pick a sacred hymn and lay it out in layman terms – he’d chosen a stanza from (the poet-saint) Nammazhvar’s Thiruvaimozhi, one that went Nalkuravum, selvum…
Now, this is what he does. Like that other Tamil instructor so beloved to those of a certain age – Maa. Nannan (from Doordarshan’s Vaazhkai Kalvi), who opened up to us a world of etymology and spelling and pronunciation, armed with nothing more than a piece of chalk, an easel-tilted blackboard and the patience of the ages – Sujatha first breaks down the verse word for word, stopping to intone, for instance, that “nalkuravu” is Old Tamil for “poverty.” Having approached the passage at a building-blocks level, Sujatha now stands back a little and talks about the most immediately apparent meaning, which is Nammazhvar’s contention that the image of the Lord he laid eyes on was an amalgamation of antonyms – poverty and wealth, poison and life-giving nectar, amity and enmity, hell and heaven – and therefore, He is (and is responsible for) everything. And after this is when Sujatha doffs his “Indian” hat – his truly reverential, emotional, subjective “Indian” hat; there’s not a note of condescension or scepticism in this robo-dog creator’s appraisal of the religious text at hand – and looks at things from a decidedly objective, “Western” perspective. He marvels that you could extrapolate this philosophy of God into the utmost extreme of antonyms: namely, if you think He exists, He exists; if you don’t, He doesn’t. But because of His all-encompassing nature, even His non-existence is proof of His existence. And after this dizzying demonstration of circular reasoning, Sujatha signs his piece off with the Tamil equivalent of “the mind boggles,” capping off what could have been a fuddy-duddy exercise in esoteric academia with a cheeky flourish of hipness. And that’s why he’ll be missed – because, like few before him, he got us in touch with the uncoolest of things in the coolest of ways.
Copyright ©2008 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
I was very surprised ( infact a bit angry) that there was no mention of Sujatha in your recent blogs .
Sujatha did what ARR did for music . He never wrote novels, only kuru- novels and i guess that explains everything. An incident of gay marriage was made as a story , without any judgements !
Surely, we will miss him !
Splendid tribute to a splendid person !
“…his writings were instantly appealing to a generation that could understand Tamil and speak Tamil and read Tamil and perhaps even write Tamil – but thought in English”
– You nailed it here, dude!
MumbaiRamki: “a bit angry”? But why pray? And thanks.
Karthik: Thanks man. At first I was afraid that line would come off as a bit of Peter-ism, but I guess not.
I cannot understand Tamil or speak Tamil (well, I know the script so I can read but can’t make out what it means!
), and my exposure to Sujatha is limited to Mani Ratnam’s films. But reading this piece makes me want to learn tamil in 30 days and explore his work. 
I can only read Tamil very slowly, so I’ve never read so much as a newspaper article, but I would love to try to read a Sujatha work.
Were there any film adaptations of his stories?
I disagree with the “thought in English” bit. Probably because I think it is possible to think in Tamil and still maintain a western sensibility. What did strike a chord with me about Sujatha was that the language was not ” look at me, look at me, I can play with words”. There was a simplicity about it that kept you more engrossed in the subject matter. It is the content that made you think of the writer and not the language. I was reading his collection of plays, specifically Dr. Narendranin vinodha vazhakku, when I heard the news. That made the loss somewhat more tangible for me I guess. He will be missed.
Ravi K - I would advise you stayed away from the commercial cinema adaptations of his stories. Most are woefully inadequate.
i deeply dislike your essentialist division of indian vs. western. was puthumaipithan western? and anyway, i think only a brahmin would find sujatha western — if only he werr western, rather than given to advertising his quite traditional prejudices.
mani rathnam and sujatha catered to the brahmin desire to feel modern without being modern.
MumbaiRamki,
Do you know what is the novel that had the gay marriage story ?
Thanks
baradwaj, wonderfully written
ravi, ‘gayatri’ and ‘priya’, both rajni starrers, were adapted from his stories. not sure about popular opinion on ‘gayatri’ but be warned that ‘priya’ was considered a blasphemy by people who read the story and sujatha himself, after watching the movies is said to have said “only the title is mine”
SKP<
It came in Kattradhum Pettradhum !
Aditya Pant: You can read the script? That’s interesting. Usually people can speak/understand a language but reading/writing is more difficult to find…
Ravi K: As Balaji says, nothing of note. Vikram, IMO, was the best of the lot, but it was more a novelisation of the screenplay than an actual novel.
Deepauk M: When I said “thought in English,” I meant the readers, not Sujatha. Or do you disagree with that as well?
thamizhan: oh well…
Balaji: Gayatri is easier to watch today than Priya. I find, in general, that the b/w films of the 70s have lasted better than the colour ones — whether story-wise or even eye-sore-wise
I do disagree with the fact that the readers thought in English. His patrons were probably more in the urban/suburban/bigtown demographic primarily because those were the kind of settings he wrote in. Not all people in this demographic qualify for the thought in English, in my opinion. Of course, I speak purely from personal insight and not any statistically based sampling techniques :).
It was a nice piece, better than anything I read about Sujatha elsewhere. My one suggestion to Rangan and also others is to refrain from using the phrase “Western sensibilities” when describing objectiveness. Subjective and emotional interpretations are seen everywhere both in the West as well as the East.
“Balaji: Gayatri is easier to watch today than Priya. I find, in general, that the b/w films of the 70s have lasted better than the colour ones — whether story-wise or even eye-sore-wise ”
Now, there’s an idea for a column but I guess the puppy media managers of today wouldnt allow you to harp on 70’s tamil movies. Ofcourse, there is a market for 70’s Hindi stuff - too bad there isnt any for the tamil stuff. Those were perhaps, more than anything else, innocent times as far as Cinema goes, though quality wise may not be that memorable.
Was 16 V in B&W?
srikantan: I guess I wasn’t just just talking about objectiveness, but (among other things) a sense of humour while dealing with sacred-cow topics, which was definitely not very big in Tamil writing then (perhaps even now).
raj: Even qualkity-ise, the b/w films aren’t bad. If you take the morality-play movies of the period — Sooryagandhi, Balapareetchai, Vaazhndhe Kaatugiren — there was a “cleanness of writing” that disappeared as the films became more of a director’s medium with the likes of BR and all. Even with KB, my favourite films of his are from this period, especially Nizhal Nijamaagiradhu and Avargal. And 16V was colour dude.
But that irreverence of his is quite common in TN, isn’t it, esp. milieu he came from, i mean there is one rebellious atheist uncle in household…. And Sujatha kept what you call ‘coolness’ as long as he lived.
*****
wasn’t ninaithale enikum, based on his novel as well?
baradwaj, tell me honestly - how old are you
I mean, Balapareetchai, Vaqazhndhu Kaattugiraen?SooryaGandhi? Closet JJ Fan?
Yes, I thought 16 V was in colour - know what, I thought that is a striking reparteee to your theory of B/W 70’s tamil films having aged gracefully. But watched it today - must admit it hasnt aged that well:-)
Dear BRangan:
wonderful to read your piece about our Dear Sujatha. He was ridiculed for “Boys” - talk about our western sensibilities!! You are so right about him (and about even our current writers) - your last line says it all.
I will really miss his writings -just like millions of his readers.
Thanks for the wonderful article.
Good piece!
As an aside, I register my protest against MumbaiRamki, for belittling Sujatha by comparing him with Rahman!
s: I think he just gave the “story knot” for Ninaithaale…
raj: Haven’t watched it in a long time, so can’t say about 16V in particular, but in general, I find that very few films are as good as you remember them to be.
APALA: Yeah, we’re really quite hypocritical in that respect. When it comes to movies like Boys or Shriya’s dresses, an out-of-nowhere repository of “Thamizh kalaachaaram” will be unearthed.
randramble: That was one hell of a sly needle in a banana
br, actually apparently Sujatha gave a whole done screenplay to KB for Ninaithale… but KB changed ot as per his sensibilities and ‘greater’ understanding of cine-fans’ requirements:- ).
“naan ezhudhiyadhai appadiye eduthirunda padam miga nandraga vandhirukkum” was Sujatha’s comment on NI
http://www.geocities.com/sujathapage/english/einterview1.html
Here’s the link to the interview wheere Sujatha mentions the snippet on Ninaithale Inikkum. The exact words are
“If KB hadd filmed it exactly as Ihad written it, it would have been a model screenplay”
http://www.lazygeek.net/archives/2008/03/duh.html
raj: Thanks. Interesting read, that.
Anon: Thanks for the link. It looks like he’s made all sorts of assumptions about what I’ve read of Sujatha, and misunderstood the Mani Ratnam bit — and that’s really his prerogative. But yeah, looking back, I guess I should have used another phrase for “no one has zeroed in on”. It does sound rather condescending. Oh, c’est la vie.
BR, you shouldnt worry about sounding condescending. You might well condescend on mere mortals :-).
The readers should make an effort to see the writer’s POV just as the writer( as in good writers like you) try to see all angles while analysing,well, anything.
Yes, i would disagree on the Vairamuthu bit, too. But if someone tossed your article away just because of that bit, that person is not worth a thought from you.
raj: But why would you disagree on that VM bit? I’m just saying that he was ONE of the “many other Tamil writers” capable of making “any rank newbie fall in rapturous love with the language.” You don’t agree with that? Or that his early work was modernist in the sense that it broke away from earlier styles of lyric writing in quite a startling manner? That’s “modernism” too, right? Just curious why you disagree so.
br, i dont think he made me fall in love with the language. Indiran thottathu mundiriye(just becaue it rhymes, I mean why not kandasamy chettiyar thottathu mundhiri?), acham-macham, viyarvai-meesai stuff really put me off. Its not just that. There is a bit of phoney-ness to his word play. I cant explain it. I thought even the much-maligned kalaignar has better prose that makes you rapture at the possibilities of twisting language to your whims. Not that I am a fan of Kalaignar - you must really read Bharathiyaar’s Essays to understand what it is to fall in love with the language thanks to one poet.
About modernist, I dont have much idea. I dont know what is modernism :-). But i dont think he broke any new ground on Film-Lyric writing. I personally dont think he achieved any new technique that Kannadasan hadnt patented but maybe I didnt analyse enough - we need to discuss specifics here to see where we meet/diverge on this one.
btw, here’s a sample of bharathiyaar:
http://nambharathi.blogspot.com/2005/11/60-1.html
This is picked from the site of the guy who ‘tossed your article after the mention of Vaira as Modernist god’. This should help you see where he comes from.
i am quite surprised u say what made him stand apart is his ability to appeal to those who thought in english. Because, people who grew up in towns, where lack of english - that essential lingua franca of greater cultural engagement - was a main disadvantage , were the main beneficiaries of his writings as he brought to them in Tamil all that he deemed good and loved enough to write about.
And vairamuthu, truly made a path breaking entry into the Tamil literary scene.
And it is a big comedy to mention bharathiyar against vairamuthu.
And bharathiyar’s essays? My god! those sanskritised tamil lines!!!
‘gyalam karuthinum kai koodum
adi naanum avanum oru katchi
antha kaalam oru naal sollatum
naan kadalai eritha thee kuchi”
Well, vairamuthu is unmatched in lyricism.