Telugu is one of the Four important Languages that is spoken in south India, the other three being Tamil, Malayalam and Kannada. Telugu has its origin in Dravidian Languages it is spoken by all over the India epically Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Karnataka, and Madhyapradesh. Perhaps Telugu is the largest language is widely spoken by Majority of the people. It has a long history tradition as well as literary tradition. According to Historians Telugu have been its inscriptions from sixth century and first literary work from the eleventh centenary. In this paper I Would like to examine, Literary Modernity, particularly Indian Literary Modernity in general and Telugu Literary Modernity in particular. Telugu people does not have the Modernity, this is western discourse. Colonialism spread Modernity all over the third world countries, and the West has invaded the colonial countries and occupied them and wipe out their Native Discourse through their Imperial domination if at all we have the Literary Modernity we need to critically re- examine the structure of Telugu Literary Modernity.
Modernity as a concept and the basic characteristic is opposition to the ancient. According to Jurgen Habermas” The term “modern” has long history investigated by Hans Robert Jauss. The word “modern” in its Latin form “modernus” was used for the first time in the late 5th century in order to distinguish the present, which had become officially Christian from Roman and pagan past.”
“ Modernism as an artistic or literary movement was associated with the intellectual and artistic relation to the last of the developments noted above; it was influential at the turn of the Twentieth century” (John Hartley Key concepts).We can find Modernity in different Spears, we have Economic modernity, Technological modernity, Philosophical modernity, scientific modernity, political modernity. In religion it has its own idea, it opposed to liberal Protestantism. Modern art wipe out all existed cannons of beauty, it reflects a new attempts and schools. Artists created a new kind of modern art. In the same way a modern painter will cover his canvas with zigzag or portraits a woman with different hair colors. At the same time a modern sculptor will carves figures in different way, he may be an architect, an engineer, a composer they will have their unique qualities which are not existing elsewhere.
But what is modernism in literature? Do we have literary modernity In Telugu literature? Is it a western debate or Indian? If at all we have modernism what is pre modern literature? Before going to examine Telugu literary modernity I would like to analyze Western Literary modernity.
Hegel was the first philosopher to develop a clear concept of modernity; we need go back to him if we want to understand the internal relationship between modernity and rationality. It was introduced as a technical term only in the 1950s by Max Weber. His concept of modernity from its modern European origins and stylizes it in to a spatio temporally neutral model for process of social development.
There are several definitions for modernism. The famous Marxist critic George Lucas said that “ Modernism despairs of human history abandons the idea of a linear historical development, falls back upon notions of a universal condition humane or a rhythm of eternal recurrence, yet within its own realm is committed to ceaseless change turmoil and recreation”
Jurgen Habermas is a German Philosopher a sociologist in the tradition of critical theory and American pragmatism. He is the most influential German philosopher and a leading theoretician of the Frank fort Institute of social Research. His philosophical hermeneutics opened a new way of re thinking the critical theory tradition of Frankfort school social philosophy. He is perhaps best known for his work on the concept of the public sphere. His theoretical system is devoted to revealing the possibility of reason, emancipation and rational critical connection. He gave two level of modern world. One is cultural modernity another one is Aesthetic modernity.
Habermas says his ‘In the philosophical Discourse of Modernity’ “ We are still contemporaries of the young Hegelians .He is concerned here to respond to the challenges posed by the radical critique of reason in contemporary French thought by re examining the philosophical discourse of modernity. He gave two kinds of interpretation of the modern world. Before Habermas they deal with modernity as a theme of Philosophical not Aesthetic discourse. David M. Rasmyssen writing about him “ Habermas double attempt to address the problem of modernity, first by re constructing his own position to meet the demands of modernity and second by dealing with the question of modernity in the context of the development of philosophy” .
Earlier we discussed various kinds of Modernity as pre modern and modern at the same time what is pre modern philosophy? Modern philosophy is generally said to have began with Descartes (1596-1650) or with Francis Becan (1561-1626), in England and with Descartes in France. One can find a break between medieval and post medieval philosophy and each phase poses an important characteristics. Most of the seventeenth century philosophers were convinced that there was a sharp division between the old philosophical traditions as well as modern philosophical traditions. I assume that Literature and Philosophy are bound together and have organic relationship; we cannot separate Literary Discourse with Philosophical Discourse. They are interdependent.
“We can see philosophy in the middle ages gradually winning recognition as a separate branch of study. And we can see lines of thought emerging which anticipate later philosophical developments, for example, the characteristic philosophical movement of the fourteenth century generally known as the nominalist movement”.
One can find the emergence of the pre modern philosophy is not the same. “The medieval philosophers were the most part University professors, engaged in teaching. They wrote commentaries on the standard texts in use at the universities, and they wrote in the language of the learned world”. The modern philosophy in the pre Kantian period, on the contrary were in the majority of cases unconnected with the work of academic teaching. On more un believable thing is that the original and creative philosophy of the early modern period developed outside of the Universities”. There were original minds and fresh voices not as traditionalists. Most of the thinkers use vernacular languages instead of using Greek and Latin. It was not only in Philosophical discourse they use in other literary fields also. The most important point one can find that modern philosophy is autonomous and product of reason alone, where as Medieval Philosophy was dominated with Christian Theology. And also pre modern philosophical discourse has been in the clutches of the Catholic Dogma.
“In the Middle Ages theology was esteemed as the supreme science and we find theologians who were also Philosophers. In the seventeenth and eighteenth century we find philosophers, some of whom believed Christians while others were not. And though their religious beliefs doubtless exercised some influence on the philosophical systems of men such as Descartes and Locke.” (A History of Philosophy-Copestone)
They were fundamentally in the same positions as any philosopher today who happens to be a Christian but who is not, in the professional sense a theologian. That is one reason why philosophers like Descartes and Locke appear to us ‘modern’ if we compare them with St Thomas or St Bonaventure. It clearly indicates that one would say that philosophy was separated from its close connection with theology and freed from any eternal control.
It becomes purely autonomous branch of study. I think modern philosophy has long journey which came out from the traditional languages to vernacular languages and theological influence to autonomous way of thinking.
Subjectivity becomes the typical condition of the modernist outlook. German novelist Herman Hesse speaks about “ A whole generation caught…between two ages, two modes of life with the consequence that it loses all power to understand itself and has no standards no security, no simple quiescence” . “On or about December 1910 human nature change” said by Mrs. Woolf she meant to suggest that there is a frightening discontinuity between the traditional past and the shaken present; that the line of history has been bent, perhaps broken. Modernist literature goes on the tacit assumption that human nature has indeed changed (the circumstances we live has been transformed by nature these are not delit) some assumptions have been radically altered.
Jurgen Habermas, defined modernity his famous speech “modernity- an Unfinished Project” he gave it in September 1980 on the occasion of accepting Adorno Prize. After returning from University of Frankfurt he gave series of lectures and offers courses on this subject.
“He described modernity as process of disenchantment which led in Europe to disintegration of religious world views that issued in a secular culture.” He says that the concept of modernisation refers to a bundle of process that are cumulative and mutually reinforcing: to the formation of capital and the mobilisation of recourses.
“The theory of modernisation performs two abstractions on Weber’s concept of “modernity”. It dissociates “modernity “from its modern European origins and stylizes in into a sptio- temporally neutral model for process of social development in general. Furthermore, it breaks the internal connections between modernity and historical context of western rationalism, so that process of modernisation can no longer be conceived of as rationalisation, as the historical objectification of rational structure. Modern thought did not remain a fixed ideal. The ideals of French Enlightenment they looked back to the ancients and changed the beliefs. The Romantic modernists oppose the antique idea of classists. They looked for a new historical epoch. During the 19th century they were emerged out of romantic sprit and radicalized consciousness of modernity and freed it from all historical ties, and one more thing the most recent modernism simply an abstract opposition between tradition and the present.” our sense of modernity crates its own self enclosed cannons of being classic. Modernity unfolded in various avant-garde movements and reached its climax like Dadaism and Surrealism. Habermas says Modernity revolt against the normalizing functions of the tradition; it lives on the experience of rebelling against all that is normative. These revolts neutralize the standards of both morality and utility. Octavio Paz a fellow traveller of modernity noted already in the middle of the 1960s that “the avant- grade of 1967 repeats the deeds and gestures of those of the 1917. We are experiencing the end of the idea of modern art “post avant-grade art it indicate the failure of the surrealist rebellion. He is asking what is the meaning of the failure? Does it signal to fare well to modernity?
American neoconservative Daniel Bell argues in his Famous book “The cultural contradiction of capitalism” argues that the crises of the developed societies of the West are to be traced back to a split between culture and society. Modernist culture has come to penetrate the values of the everyday’s life” Habermas concluded his argument “The impulse of modernity, we are told on the other hand, is exhausted; anyone who consider himself avant-grade can read his own death warrant.
I assume that Western Philosophical and literary discourse and critical theory have gone a different stages and different experiments. They have literary evaluation as well as organic growth. They have done other modes of enquiry free from Theological religious Mythical authority.
European modernity what we are thinking is Colonial modernity, because Indians are largely trained by colonial understanding of modernity. The debate of Modernity is Western Thought. They propagate this idea all over the colonial countries.
New Trends in modern Telugu Literature:
The origin of the modern thought came in to existence in the Telugu literature with the influence of English education as well as English literature. Telugu poets and writers followed the models of the old themes, new patterns of literary expression. G V Sitapathi in his book “History of Telugu literature” says “Veeresalingam may be regarded as the founders of this new school, though he did not give up the accepted style of prose writing in his novels and other works. He wrote books which represented almost all the new patterns of this age Novel story, Drama, farce essay, short poems, biography auto biography literary criticism and lives of Telugu poets. He used the “Kavya” dialect for poetry and prose, but in the case of prose the language used by him is very simple and free from obsolete or obsolescent forms and words, and in the case of farces he used the spoken tongue of the characters in the story.” Not only Veeresalingam but also anotherSchool called Bhavakavita originated with the influence of Western Romantic poetry, Rayaprolu Subba Rao and Devulapalli Krishna Shastry were the leaders of this movement, these two were the earliest to start the new trends in modern Telugu poetry. The influence of western culture on Telugu language and literature during the Mohamadean period, many foreign words crept in to the Indian languages epically North Indian languages and next to Telugu and other south Indian languages. After the Mohamadean period the colonial ruling started all over the Nation.
G V Seethapathi says “In the course of the time The Telugus like other peoples of India came in to contact with the Portuguese, The Dutch , the French and the English, and learnt to use the words of these Foreigners as occasion arose. It is interesting to note how the names of these Western people came in to use in Telugu (p.85)
K V Ramana Reddy in his book “Modern Trends in Telugu Literature” says,” Gopichand, was a philosophical dissident who ultimately found refuge in Arobindo. But his” Asamarduni Jeevita Yaatra” is a minor prose classic, with the little man for its hero. Buchibabu was a prolific writer who always went in for the latest in Western thought and writing, in the process landing him self in complications of form and content. “Chivaraku Migiledi” is an epitome of his out look on life” (page22) we can find the most of the early writers and poets of the Twentieth century have taken a fancy to write poems or Novels are simply imitation of English Genres and themes. Kndukuri Verresalingam ‘Rajashekara charitra’ was imitation of “The Vicar of the Wake field” Krishna Shastry, Rayaprolu Subba Rao imitated s Romantic Poets.Gurazada Apparo himself acknowledged In Kanyaasulkam scene in King Henry part one Falstaff is inspiration for his character Gireesam.
I feel that Indian intellectuals are captivated by Western culture. Instead of crating new modes of enquiry they began to imitate Western mode of thinking. As earlier I said before, we have been under the clutches of Colonial ruling for more than Three hundred years and we largely trained by colonial understanding of literary modernity. The Indian literary modernity roots are connected with Western literary modernity. When we are thinking about our past we need to explore fundamental enquiry. And need to ask how Indian modernity emerges. If at all we have literary modernity we need to re examine the structure of Telugu literary modernity.
I this connection Adonis a highly influential figure in Arabic poetry and literature, he combines in his work a deep knowledge classical Arabic poetry and revolutionary, modernist expression. He critically examined problems of the Middle East, as a poet he has been more interested in experimentation, Language, and freeing poetry from traditionalist formalism, than to comment contemporary socio political issues. His famous work” An Introduction to Arab Poetics”
He says that “In the light of these considerations it would appear that modernity is the problem of Arab thought in it dialogue with itself and with the history of knowledge in the Arab tradition. If we are to treat the problem of modernity, we must first re examine the structure of Arab thought. To question modernity Arab thought must question itself. Arab modernity can be studied only within the perspective of Arab thought to study it from a Western perspective would be to distort it and distance oneself from the real issues.”
I assume that Adonis rightly asses the problem of the literary modernity. The point here I am trying to make out is West has gone enormous kind of research about critical theory and critical enquiry as well as literary modernity. They have experienced different modes of understanding about literary modernity. And one more thing they have nurtured intellectual or poetic nature but it is political and ideological it in values all over the Colonial countries through their Imperial domination. It does not mean everybody should reject technology or intellectuality, but we should careful about the western domination. West has penetrated in to our daily life, and impose their hegemony upon us it lead to we become consumers and our countries are turn in to Market places for their Experiments in Technology as well as Cultural domination.
Ngugi Wa Thiong’o A prolific Literary and social activist Said That “The real aim of colonialism was to control the peoples wealth as well as culture. It involved two aspects of the same process: the destruction or the deliberate undervaluing of peoples’ culture, their art, dances, religion, history, geography, education, orature, and literature; and the conscious elevation of the language by the languages of the colonising nations was crucial to the domination of the mental Universe of the Colonised” (De colonising the mind” page 16) .
I assume that West has annihilated the literary growth and captured the people’s culture. Imperialist nations introduced the printing press and they published the Bible and control the content by the colonisers. And the coloniser’s publications were censored by the Imperialists.
There is no single scholar from Telugu Literature evaluate the crisis of literary modernity because they are the products of Colonial ruling. As Rallapalli Ananta Krishna Sharma in his Famous Book “Vemana” rightly said that “we are still depending on C P Brown contribution to Telugu Literature”. I feel that one must open up new kind of enquiry of Native literary thinking as well as Modernity.
Colonialism spread the modernity all over the third world countries. In this way we don’t have critically examined this discourse. We don’t have developed the native philosophical outlook yet to. What we have is simply taken from west only; one must need a way from western centre of learning. There is an age gap between earlier generation and modern generation to defend Modernity. Reformers like Unnava Laxminaryana a Dublin Trained barrister, Veeresalingam and Gurazada sold out by the colonialism. The point here I am trying to make out is West has gone different stages, phases and organic growth in spending time in all previous state and also they have intellectual or political nurture but it is political and ideological it in invaded (The spectre) all over the colonial countries, and occupied through their imperial domination. It does not mean everybody should reject technology or intellectuality, but we should careful, that the West has penetrated in to our daily life, and has been imposing their cultural Hegemony upon us, it leads to we become consumers and our societies are turn in to their market places.
K V Raman Reddy says in his famous book Aaadhunikaandhra charitra “Abhydaya Rachayatala Sangam” followed the best traditions of the new epoch makers, Kndukuri, Gurazada, Gidugu, among others in Andhra history who recognised that the betterment of the society is the main aim of literature; and contributed to a lively literary scene. Drawing on the best qualities of ancient and modern literature, it creates a new literary tradition in Andhra literature. In order to revive indigenous literary forms, it portrayed contemporary life in these forms, propagated those forms and attained Andhra people’s appreciation. It gave up the literary forms alienated from the social life. Those peoples life and problems as their subject matters, supported progressive forces and showed a bright path to the Telugu Nation”
I think Abhydaya Rachyatal Sangam (ARASAM) may be progressive in their thought but it is completely colonial thought as Adonis says “to be modern it is necessary to identify with western poetry. From this there arises an illusion about the norms where standards of modernity in the west, springing from a specific language and experience of a different nature. This amounts to looting at a personal, linguistic and poetic level, and is the way to complete alienation. “
It indicates any colonial country can study the tradition with in the nativity only, I think Indian modernity can be studied with in the perspective of Indian modernity. If we cannot does it our issue may be distort or distance from the crux of the issue. This is unfortunate that those who are called themselves Modern thinkers they have adopted to the shock of the modernisation from the west simply Indians are treating modernity as a primarily as a technological achievement. Poets like Rayaprolu , Gurazada, and Kandukuri Veeresalingam Pantulu, Gidugu, who opposed the ancient dogmatic social evils claiming to be modernisers’ think they are the products of Chennapatnam, who were captivated by the Western culture, their literary plots, characters, ideas and their techniques borrowed mainly from the West. Three hundred years colonial ruling made our education system, ruling, are completely dependency on the West. There is no single scholar from Telugu literary circle to evaluate the crux of the discourse literary Modernity, and the ugly face of the colonial and post colonial domination. Our Telugu Literary figures and Reformers are the products of the colonial mode of training. They largely trained in Christian Educational Institutions.
Gurazada (1861-1915) the first great poet of Modernity started writing around 1900, with grate vigour, control, and complete honesty. His poetry stemmed and involved in the social life around the beginnings of the 20th century. Some critics consider him grater dramatist than poet. His poetry is unobtrusive and has the significance of the ordinariness and validity of the normal. In language ideas and expression he is the futurist” (This Tense Time by Vegunta Mohanaprasad). But poetry, Novel, any Literary domain does not acquire Modernity merely from being current. It is beyond that it requires the Philosophical base that we are lacking. Not only in India around any non Western countries did not develop the native Philosophical Discourse.
European colonial modernity dominated I feel west has done enormous research in critical theory, critical enquiry as well as literary modernity; they have experienced different modes of understanding about literary theory. We need to explore alternative Modernity; every place has distinctive modernity in terms of cultural, Political Aesthetic Domains. But Indian Literary modernity is different; the modernity we are discussing is the capitalist phenomenon which is alien to us.
Adonis says “The technical, mechanical aspect of modernity is turning our lives in to a desert of imported goods and consumptions eating away at us from within and distracting us from thinking about our own distinctive power of invention. In literature and in poetry in particular, it generate superficial, naïve conceptualisation that interpret modernity simply as a way of arranging and combining words; a mirror held up to everyday life or an attempt to catch the spray as it flies off rolling waves of time” This superficial modernity which is predominant in our societies engendered partly by a fear of confronting the true state of Arab culture and partly by an understanding which stops at appearances gives rise to many illusions.
Adonis discussed some illusions about Literary modernity may apply any colonial post- colonial countries, those who see modernity as a quality of being directly connected to with and a live to the present moment. “Poetry does not acquire its modernity from being current. Modernity is a characteristic latent in the actual structure of the poetic Language” I feel this is a mistake most modern poetry goes beyond the present moment.
The west is supposedly the source of modernity there is no modernity outside western poetry and its standards; to be modern it is necessarily to identify with western poetry from this there arises an illusion about norms where standards of modernity in the west, springing from a specific language and experience of a different nature. This amounts to looting at a personal, linguistic and poetic level and is the way to complete alienation.”
Partha Chactterjee says that “Indian Modernity is distinct from western Modernity” Our modernity is distinct in character and its agents are the Nationalist leaders and the intellectuals. He said that “The real agents of the project of our modernity are “The Western middle class” D R Nagaraj says “Modernity as western and therefore Foreign” He makes a distinction between “The western middle class and authentic Indians”
In Telugu Literature there is a misconception about a technical one concerning prose as a poetic form. Poets like Sri sri believe that old metric writing to prose is considered to be moderns. Of course the poetry was seen an attack on the values of the ancient and authentic we can see this force in Sri sri poetry. I feel during this time Sri sri ,Narayana Babu, Arudra, inspired from poets like Poe, Hopkins, Mayakovski, Pasternak Kazi Nazrul Islam and Harin Chattopadhya ,they produced power packed poetry. Poets like Narayana Babu does experiments in poetry in the name of the Surrealism with Freudian influence, Arudra “Twamevaaham” with Dylan Thomas to Ogden Nash, They enriched the Telugu poetry with the latest trends in Western writings. Shafting from old metric to prose is not at all modernity It is possible in an old metric writing may have modernist tendencies, present prose may consist pre modern thoughts. All pre verse is not innovatory and modernist .D Rami Reddy, Gurram Joshua do not wholly fit in to Bhavakavita, their diction is simple their themes are intimately human and progressive though they are the pre modern poets. Even among the Traditionalists, there are some Poets who show a Modern out look, for instance Gurram Joshua (1895-1972) “Gabbilam” (Bat Messenger to Lord Shiva) is a memorable poem which is a power full critique of a caste dominated society. He also wrote many poems with minor characters from the epics as the subject. I would like to conclude this essay with Adonis saying “European- American West is not of an intellectual or poetic nature, but it is political and ideological, originally a result of Western imperialism. We should not reject it a whole, but only this ideological aspect of it. Modernity requires not only freedom of thought, but physical freedom as well. It is an explosion, liberation of what has been suppressed… The essence of this modernity should be a creative vision, or it will be no more than a fashion. Fashion grows old from the moment it is born, while creativity is ageless. Therefore not all modernity is creativity but creativity is eternally modern”. I believe that no culture exists isolation from other culture, they give and taker from each other. They influence and are influenced. Each society has to re examine their Texts and find out their own creativity explore and open up new kind of Research.
Bibliography:
Adonis: an Introduction to Arab Poetics, Sind bad, Paris 1985.
Jurgen Habermass the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, MIT Press, Messachusetts, 1990.
Copelstone, Frederic A History of Philosophy, vol 1 Search press, London, 1946.
Thomas McCarthy, the Critical Theory of Jurge Haber mass, Polity press, New York, 1978.
Chatterjee Prtha: Talking about our Modernity in Two languages, OUP New Delhi, 1997.
John Hartley: Key concepts in communication Rutledge New York 2004.
Ngugi Wa Thiyang’o De colonising The Mind Zimbabwe Publishing House, Zimbabwe, 1986.
Narayan Rao Velcheru: Telugu Kavitvamlo viplavaswaroopam Hyderabad Book trust: Hyderabad, 1987.
Ramana Reddy K V, Mahodayam Hyderabad Book Trust, Hyderabad, 1995.
Aarudra , Samagrandra Saahityam Prajashakti, Hyderabad, 1985.
K.V.RamanaReddy. Modern Trends in Telugu Literature and other essays, AILRC, Hyderabad, 1999.
‘
GURRAM SEETARAMULU
