In the original story of Sakuntala, as told in the Mahabhratha, there is no ring. Sakuntala appears in Dushmanta's court with their son and requests Dushmanta to declare him the heir to his throne, as he had promised her, before their gandharva vivāham. Though Dushmanta very much remembers their encounter (and thus recognises legitimacy of the claim), he still pretends not to remember and asks her provocative, insulting questions in his court. But he is ' being cruel only to be kind '. For, this sets the dramatic stage for a fine articulation of her case by Sakuntala, which ends in the divine voice from the sky, declaring her to be true and for Dushmanta to accept her and their son. And then, Dushmanta tells his courtiers that he always knew but his word would have been insufficient proof to the court. We are of course, more aware of the storyline of KāLidāsa's play abhijñānasākuntalam, where the poet made significant departures. The elevation of the 'word/memory
But then "beauty is a cruel mistress".
ReplyDeleteAh it is. Who was that, btw ?
ReplyDeleteMy publicist urges me to exploit the proximity of your comment to excavate a comment I once posted in a now defunct blog ambitiously attempting Bharathi translations. This was about the line:
கச்சணிந்த கொங்கை மாதர் கண்கள் வீசு போதினும்
in his famous அச்சமில்லை.
I do not see this line here as reflecting the sentiment that woman is a nuisance in man's way. I say this because the overall feel of the poem is not one of renunciation. After all the fearlessness of someone who has renounced all is not so heroic. The sting of
'இச்சை கொண்ட பொருளெலாம் இழந்து விட்ட போதினும் //
அச்சமில்லை அச்சமில்லை அச்ச மென்ப தில்லையே//
is precisely to show that the poet is deeply rooted in the practical world with its desires and atendant miseries. (think 'பொன்னை உயர்வை புகழை விரும்பிடும்'). But even amid all this exposure and threats he shows a steely (insane) and even frightening resolve to be undettered by the worst.
So it is not a question of rising above things like the beauty of the feminine form. It is about saying he is strong enough to be unyielding to attractions.
I read it as a line that relaxes the tension amid all the fuming anger in the poem. It is the aesthete acknowledging the large looming threat of Beauty.
Vaguely remember something in Kamban when describing the beauty of womenfolk of Mithila. From nowhere he springs a didactic observation that highlights those being described marvellously.
பெண்கள் பால் கொண்ட சிநேகம்
பிழைப்பரோ சிறியர் பெற்றால்
One can even forget the didacticism here. That the women were so beautiful that they set alarm bells off in the poet is the take-away here.
I read Bharathi's lines in the same spirit. Poet first, angry man later :-)
That, believe it or not, is from a Guy Ritchie movie - RocknRolla. I thought it was extremely relevant in terms the GuNa post I am writing.
ReplyDeleteThe Bharathi lines bring to mind ManikkavAsagar immediately.
"kiLiyanAr kiLavi anjEn, avar kiRi muruval anjEn"
Oh yeah Manickavasagar is strikingly similar.
ReplyDeleteA graphic line from the same song which now leads me to think may even be Bharathi's inspiration:
வன்புலால் வேலும் அஞ்சேன்
வளைக்கையார் கடைக்கண் அஞ்சேன்
Summava sollirukaanga...
ReplyDeleteperarasin padaigaL thirandu por mooLum peN oruthiyin azhagin poruttu.
//perarasin padaigaL thirandu por mooLum peN oruthiyin azhagin poruttu//
ReplyDeleteஆஹா.... சொன்னது யார் ?