Ok here's my tuppence worth. PS is a work of historical fiction. No one can refute that and if Mr. Prapancham has said something like that, it is either out of ignorance (which I don't think is the case) or out of arrogance (which might be the case). However, despite that, we have to realize that he is entitled to his views just the same as all of us. If we all love PS and Kalki's works, it doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with us or disparages his works is bad or wrong. That is just his opinion, just as the fact that we think PS is good is just our opinion. Also, one doesn't need to be a cricket player to critique cricket or bash Ganguly now, does one? Or be a politician to comment on politics. :-) Similarly, IMHO, one does not need to be a great writer to critique novels.
Prabanchan has every right to criticize PS.Without literary criticism no field will grow.I found fault with the logic of prabanchan.He says
"A historic novel should not focus on lives of kings and princes.It should focus on life of commoners.Historic novels which dont do so arent qualified to be called as historic novels.So far only my novel has focussed on commoners.Thus this is the first historic novel in Tamil"
I found fault with his criticisms on the following grounds.
1.Greatest historical epics like macbeth,julius ceaser,illiad,odyssey were written about the lives of kings and queens.Are they historical novels or not?
2.Writing about commoners is one method of writing historic novels."Pillars of earth" is one such great novel.But how can we say other forms of novels cannot qualify as hitoric novels?
First, please call me Arun :). I don't have any disagreement with what you said. As I said, if he said it out of arrogance, that is still his opinion. And just like we have ours, he has his. And we are also well within our rights to criticize his opinions :)
Like someone said: Opinions are like Ass*****. Everybody has one! :-p (*Tongue firmly in cheek*)
Kalki's PS is not complete fiction. He mixed fictious character along with historical facts made PS.
Prabanchan has the right to put his views but he shouldn't have saying "not considered PS is not historic novel" when PS is completely based on historic facts. He would have told about "Parthipan Kanavu". I think Prabanchan confused between "Ponniyin Selvan" and "Parthipan Kanavu".
Anyway if you tell about eveybody have the right to disagree means its bad that someone who professional writer disagreed on Tirukkural may not be correct.
Like Prabanchan somebody disagree with Tirukkural, it doesn't make any sense. He may tell that even if whole world accept Tirukkural he wouldn't definitely be an arrogant.
So Prabanchan must be arrogant that disagreeing the mass opinion.
"All individuals have their own freedom of thought and the freeness to express". It is his own way to view the novel but i'm definetely not for his side since i dont find even a single reason as of why he says so. I'm a very very ardent fan of Kalki and especially ponniyin selvan i have read around 25 times. Let us not go into his way of again criticizing him. We'll enjoy our own joys and let him not interfere in our debates.
i think we are becoming too obsessed with Prabanchan and deviating from the purpose.....
It is like Ravana being too obsessed with Rama , whereby he lost all his virtues and ultimately perished.......(pls do not start a thread as to whether is right to compare Rama with Prabanchan and us with Ravana)...
by concentrating too much on prabanchan, we are losing our focus.....
today, even a great Person like "Mahatma Gandhi" is not above Criticism.. so accept it as a way of life...
With Regards
B. Dhiwakar
Note: Think at last i have posted something which may look serious...
I agree with you that people should be able to express their opinions. In my view, his opinion was basically regarding what is a historic novel. What Prabhanjan did was to redefine in his own way a commonly understood term , "historic novel". The justification he provides (common man ...) is not convincing. He did not criticise PS, but the way people use the term "historic novel". In his world, all such novels are called by some other name. I guess he does have a contorted view of the world.
I just had a rapid glimpse of the discussion. Have couple of thoughts on it,
1) History is an ever growing field, with advances in anthropology/archaelogy and epigraphic evidences shed more light over it, we find lot of things we thought was history being proved wrong.
So if we are to judge PS by historical factuality, we have to take into consideration the availability of sources at the time kalki wrote it.
2) Another blame on historical fiction is that they focus too much on kings and less on cabbages. Love and war are the primary ingrediants.
Again PS is a groundbreaking work in that aspect too. In fact PS has some many enjoyable down to earth daily routine info/imaginations like Vandiyadevan's repast at Sendan Amuthan's place " Thengai paalum, idiyappamum vayir mutta undaan..". Though I do enjoy other authors are Candilyan, this is one of the hall marks of Kalki.
Points and Counter points apart.
PS has a hallowed place not just because it is a good literature, but because it inspired thousands to know thier history and inspired historical explorations and other literary works and what not.
So irrespective of factuality or belonging to any genre. PS is a phenomenon.
However Prabanchan's perspective may not be the same, being a creator in his own right, it is innate in him to challenge the existing order.
Dear Mr.Dhiwakar, A small correction....sir.....Ravana was not obsessed with Rama, but with Sita.....like Periya Pazhuvettayar being obsessed with Nandhini.....!!!!
Dear Mr.Dhiwakar, I would beg to differ there too....but then this ain't the place to do that.. So I will not...but one question....? Why no comment on "like Periya Pazhuvettayar being obsessed with Nandhini.....!!!!" Has not Nandhini taken Periya Pazhuvettayar for a ride.....like Milady did with so many in Three Musketeers?
ok accepted.. Nandhini took PP for a ride..... naan edhaavadhu comment adippen... adhu vinaiyaa poi mudiyum... podhum indha vaazhkai...
but i have read an abridged version of Three musketeers that too in my 9th std i suppose.... ellaam marandhuduchchu.... so milady and other things no idea.....
but one thing is for sure .. i Know about Mylady's garden in chennai, behind mooremarket... which was a prominent place ... you can see lot of mylady's garden in B/W tamil movies......
Attn Sridhar: Think Mylady's Garden can be added in the Historical places of Chennai which you listed sometime back
Dear Sriaman I beg to differ I wouldnt compare Ravanna and Periya Pazhuvettaayar... Periyavar married nandhini didnt steal her....and waited for her approval of married bliss Sri