State of Tamil Literary Reviews – Kutti Revathi

kutti revathi 2
[Pics – Theeranadhi]

How much ever I dislike to talk about the petty issues surrounding the Tamil literature circles, Kutti Revathi’s interview to Kumudam’s Theeranadhi was more meaningful than just throwing duppatas. This interview is a must read if you understand what the paragraph below is trying to convey.

kutti revathi

I completely agree with these statements made on the state of tamil literary reviews. Especially the last 4 lines draws a vivid picture. And before you start reading the complete interview, I have to say this, What’s said here is also applicable to Indian Blogosphere.

P.S – Just in case you login to Theeranadhi to read the interview don’t miss, Kamala Pudumaipithan’s re-collection of pudumaipithan days.

13 thoughts on “State of Tamil Literary Reviews – Kutti Revathi

  1. //was more meaningful than just ‘throwing duppatas’.//


    //What’s said here is also applicable to Indian Blogosphere.//

    It is applicable to the entire world. Borges called Nabokov and Samuel Beckett as schoolboys. He called Tagore a well-meaning trickster. Nabokov thought Dostoevsky was just another cheap second-rate writer, and all that was said about him was sheer hype. When Lolita was refused by American publishers, Nabokov bit back, saying ‘This is taboo number one in America. The second one is a successful black-white marriage that is happy till the end. The third is an atheist who lives all his life happily as an atheist and doesn’t find God when he is about to be dead’. Rushdie calls Italo Calvino as ‘Borges on a bad day’. Coetzee thinks Rushdie can be parochial to the point of being incomprehensible to a westerner. He said this, she said that, on and on and on and on, blah blah blah…



  2. as graham greene said it’s not good practice (for reviewers) to comment saying the author cudve done this or done that in the story when he/she (author) intended heart and soul to drive home HIS/HER point…its like insulting his/her intelligence..
    and true what kutti revathi said..reviewers r rarely unbiased…


  3. If you are accusing someone of being subjectively biased, is that not the definition of subjectivity? In short, if I were to be charged of this, I would gladly plead guilty.


  4. my 2 cents : brmil was an excellent poet but as a critic he too had many shortcomings.i read a collection of essays by him on poetry recently.
    His biases are too obvious in that volume.


  5. http://www.nymag.com/news/media/15967/

    Check out that article on blogging haves and have-nots. As someone noted it is common to all fields – scientific research, even open source software development etc. Not trying to justify what’s happening, btw. Just wondering if the Net could be creatively used to beat the system – don’t have any solid ideas yet.



  6. Sannasi, I’ve updated the post with a link for the duppata throwing issue/comedy.

    Adn yeah, I agree it fits the entire world. It rather fits Indian Blogsphere so well that makes me doubt if it was tailor made for that !!


  7. Nilu,
    All I am just agreeing to with Revathi is that reviewers should try and be objective. Ofcourse its a tougher virtue to attain but then its quintessential.


  8. Ravi Srinivas, May be you are right. I haven’t read the book that Revathi had quoted but if he has done it fairly well for most part, I would say its a great effort.


  9. //Sannasi, I’ve updated the post with a link for the duppata throwing issue/comedy.//

    I’m aware of the incident, and my point is – it was not a comedy. Thanks, though.


Comments are closed.