Periyar has been described as an atheist, anti-Hindu, rationalist, and of course a social reformer too. After doing extensive research on him and making a film on him, what do you say is Periyar's relevance today? The main reason why I decided to make a film on Periyar is because I feel he was and is misunderstood . . . . AND YOU DON%u2019T KNOW THAT MORE AND MORE YOU TALK, MORE AND MORE YOU CONFUSE OTHERS . . MORE YOU READ MORE YOU GET CONFUSED . .. I am not saying he was not an atheist; he was. He was also against religious superstitions, caste, etc. One of the objectives of my films is to show the other facets of Periyar; in fact, he was a multi-faceted personality . . . . . WHICH PART OF PERSONALITY? He lived till he was 95, and the history of Tamil Nadu moves with him. I feel his philosophy and social reforms are more relevant today than earlier. DO U KNOW THAT AT LEAST IN TAMILNADU ITS BEING REVERSED BY PEOPLE LIKE KARUNANIDHI? ON THE SAME NAME- CALLED PERIYAAR! His number one enemy was caste and today, we see only caste politics in Tamil Nadu. The greatness of Periyar was in his humanism . .. . WELL I ACCEPT You said he was an original thinker. Can you elaborate on his original ideas? His ideas about women (WHAT? ANYTHING NEW- PLEASE TELL ME FRIENDS AFTER SEEING THE MOVIE), caste and communism were very original . His ideas on women were far ahead of today's feminists. He said the subordination of women was because they gave birth to babies. He said unlike the man, from the moment the baby started growing inside a woman, her thought process changed. According to him, man and woman become unequal from that point onwards. He spoke about equality even in those days but in a different way. . . .DO YOU REMEMBER PAMELA BORDES? SHE SAID- MEN REMAIN IN SIDE WOMEN FOR 9 MONTHS AND KEEP TRYING TO ENTER AGAIN FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE! He also had a strong opinion on thali (mangalsutra). He said thali should not be worn by a woman at all . . . .BETTER NOW A DAYS- WE CAN HAVE LESSER HEART BRAEKS AT LEAST ON THE ROADS! It is said he was not exposed to Western writings. What could have triggered off such opinion on everything when he had everything going right for him in life? My film tries to find answers to questions like that. My reverence for him is because of that. He never suffered in life. Still he became a reformer, an original one at that. That is why we call him Periyar. . . .WAS IT BECAUSE THE GREATNESS OF HIS IDEA? WAS IT BECAUSE OF ORIGINALITY OF HIS IDEA? WAS IT BECAUSE OF POLITICAL SUCCESS OF HIS IDEAS? He was a Naikar, a royal caste and came from a very rich family in Erode. His father was a merchant. They owned around two-thirds or three-fourths of the area. But he studied only up to the 4th standard. When he was young, he was a debonair person. He had a happy married life too. So, he had no compulsion to be a reformer. But if you look at history, you will see that most of the reformers suffered . . . . DO YOU RESPECT HIS CASTE AT LEAST? IS NOT HIS CASTE IN THE LIST OF BACKWARD CASTE? I have read that when he was in Kashi, he was not given food because he was not a Brahmin, and that was the reason why he turned against the caste system. Is it true? Yes, this incident happened in his life but I will not say that was the only reason why he turned against the caste system . DO YOU KNOW THAT SUBHASH CHANDRA BOSE AND VIVEKANANDA WERE ALSO NOT GIVEN WATER AT KASHI? WHY DOES U ASK THE BRAHMINS TO SERVE WATER I SAY SPECIALY WHEN GANGA IS OVERFLOWING? TODAY YOU WILL NOT FIND SOMEONE TO GIVE YOU WATER IN DELHI. WHY? BECAUSE 50% OF POPULATION THERE FEEL THAT THEY R FROM THE WOMB OF THE QUEENS OF INDIA. KASHI HAS BEEN CULTURAL CAPITAL- PEOPLE DESERVED THE PRIDE. AND WE NEED TO BRING THE PRIDE BACK. IT WAS NOT BRAHMIN- IT WAS THE PLACE! His life itself is quite interesting. He was a jolly good fellow who used to visit dance bars. Then he became a successful businessman. That way, he understood the government and how it functioned. At one time, he was holding 29 decorative posts in the government. So, his personal experiences, the decorative posts and his closeness to the bureaucracy helped him understand the system completely. Later on, he declared that he would not accept any government posts. That was why when he was offered the chief minister's post, he declined . . . .AND AS HE GAVE THE POST TO ANNA DURAI HE BECAME %u201CPERIYAAR%u201D- TAKE IT FROM ME- THERE WAS NO THER REASON FOR HIM TO BECOME PERIYAAR THAN GIVING CHIEFMINISTERSHIP . . . He himself said he had three lives; first, it was that of a happy go lucky young man, then as a businessman and finally as a public person . . . AND THE 4TH ONE GIVEN BY WOMENISERS LIKE TODAYS TAMILNADU POLITICIANS- OF A PERIYAAR! Can we call it renunciation of power and money? No, he did not renounce anything. He was a practical man. He told people all the time that they should save money. You will also see that all his followers are successful businessmen. I don't think you will see a person like Periyar in India. He was not only different, he was mystical also . GOOD TO KNOW THAT Was it because he was so intelligent that he could have original ideas about so many issues? It was not because of intelligence but because of humanism that he became Periyar. The dominant factor in his life was human values. But somehow, he was misunderstood. There is a proverb in Tamil, if you want to kill a dog, you give it a bad name and then kill it. Names like atheist, anti-Hindu, anti-God, etc are used against him to ignore him. But you should know why he is anti-God . WHO HAS UNDERSTOOD HIM? YOU? GO AND WASH YOUR FACE. Why is he anti-God? He said, 'There is no God. He who created God is a fool and he who spreads his message is a scoundrel'. On the other hand his family, especially his mother, was very religious. Periyar became anti-God because he felt God was against man. He felt the single factor that was against man in India was caste, and caste came as a part of the religious system. So, he denounced religion. He said I am against caste, and whoever proposes caste. God comes with religion, so, he was against God also . . . MY BOTTOM BRINGS DIRT- I WANT TO CHOP IT OFF So, it was basically the human element that made him an atheist and anti-God. But he was as well read on religious texts as any other religious head. In his case, he picked up the loopholes in the texts . CAN WE LIVE WITHOUT GOING AGAINST ANY ONE? So many big leaders were atheists and agnostic. Nehru was an atheist. He was not bothered about God. Kamaraj also was agnostic. He felt Hindu religion was against equality . . . AND IN THE SERIES I AM ALOS AN ATHEIST So, he was basically against Hinduism? I would say he was against any religion that is anti-human . HINDUISM AND ANTIHUMAN! THEN HOW DID HE LIVE? But was he not anti-Brahmin? He was against Brahminism . . . KARUNANIDHI PATRONISES RAVANA WHO I KNOW WAS A BRAHMIN . . SO PROVED . . . Was he against Brahminism because of their supremacy in Hinduism? The Brahmin community claimed to have a hold on all the sastras and texts. Because they created such a divide, he was against it. He was against dividing humanity in the name of caste. According to him, that is the biggest crime in the world. He was not against anything blindly; he had logical reasons to everything. He also differentiated between Brahmin and Brahminism. He had an excellent relationship with Rajaji who was a Brahmin but he was vehemently against Brahminism. According to him, reciting of the mantras is a mercantile activity. That was why he fought to make non-Brahmins and harijans poojaris (priests). He wanted priests from all communities and said it should not be the monopoly of one community alone. If he was anti-God and anti-temple, why should he fight for this? He wanted social justice. According to him, God should be equal to everyone. No other leader in any part of India fought for social justice like Periyar did, not even in Kerala. That is why only in Tamil Nadu, you had a non-Brahmin movement . . . . . MY GRAND FATHER NEVER READ- HOW WILL HE MASTER THE TEXTS OF RELIGION BUT I HAVE HEARD OF BALMIKI- DO U KNOW? But didn't that one particular community in Tamil Nadu become victims of the movement? His question was, why should 97 per cent of the people be under 3 per cent? The condition in 1925 was, out of the 23 gazetted officers from Tamil Nadu, 22 were Brahmins. Out of the 7,680 doctors and advocates, 5,452 were Brahmins. So, his question was, why should 3 per cent occupy more than 80 per cent of the posts? What was the social life of the 97 per cent? If there is social justice in Tamil Nadu today, it is all because of Periyar and his movement. No other state can talk of such social justice. Because of him only the first constitutional amendment on reservation came . . . I THOUGHT IT WAS AMBEDKAR! WELL DID THAT SOLVE THE PROBLEM? DID BRAHMIN BECAME UNTOUCHABLES? NO! THEY R STRONGER TODAY. AND OUR LEADERS OF SOCIAL JUSTICE DO LICK THEM- BUT IN THE DARKNESS! Reservation is based on caste, and he was against caste. Why did he then support caste-based reservations? Yes, he fought for caste-based reservations. He felt unless social equality is achieved, you can't have reservation based on economics status. His main aim was to bring about social justice where Brahmins and Dalits had equal status socially . . . . DOES ANY ONE KNOW WHAT EQUALITY MEANS- EQUALITY WILL COME WHEN WE WILL HAVE EQUAL MENTAL POWER WHICH COMES BY EQUAL THINKING- WITH SUPPORT U WILL NEVER BE EQUAL- DID AMBEDKAR GET RESERVATION? OR FOR THAT REASON K.R.NARAYANAN? In 1928, he started a movement called self-respect movement . MY OWN CASTE PEOPLE DON%u2019T RESPECT EVEN NOW At the entrance to the conference, it was written, widows and those who are branded as prostitutes are welcome. He always respected women . . . GANDHI JEE RESPECTED- TO KEEP THEM CLOSER- LIKE A KEPT When he married his second wife, a young woman, there was a lot of opposition.. Yes, it is a fact. According to him, it was a different kind of relationship and he won the battle. Many went out of the party because he married this woman but the party survived. Periyar openly said that he was not marrying her for sex . . . THAT%u2019S WHY KARUNANIDHI TOO MARRIED TWICE . .. BLOODY ALL RASCALS She was from Vellore and was fascinated by his ideas. Her father also was a follower of Periyar. One day, she went to Periyar and declared that she would be with him. He tried to throw her out but couldn't. She was with him like an attendant. Even his enemies say that without Maniammai, he would not have lived that long . . . SEEE THAT%u2019S WHAT SECOND WIFE DOES TO YOU- PLEASE GO AHEAD . . THAT%u2019S HOW U RERSPECT UR FIRST WIFE- MIGHT BE A WIDOWER! He was quite frank when talking about even his parents. After his mother died in her nineties, he wrote, 'She should not have lived that long. Because of the backwardness of her ideas, she was not a fit person to live long'. Can you think of anyone talking like that about his own mother? . . . YEA- THAT SHOWS THE BACKWARDNESS OF THE SPEAKER WHO DOESNOT UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF HUMAN LIFE- NO WONDER %u2018ANTI BRAHMIN ARMY%u2019 WAS BUILT UNDER HIS NOSE. You mean he could detach himself from even his own mother and analyse her objectively? I feel these are the things we should be highlighting about Periyar and not the tags, anti-God, anti-Brahmin, etc. Those are just peripheral things. These descriptions are highlighted because people who are affected and people who are very eloquent are at the top, and they are all Brahmins . . . . SORRY I AM NOT Even today? Even today, to a very great extent. I am not blaming them but that is the fact of life. When he was branded as anti-God, women would despise him as they didn't like anyone who was against God. So, you could alienate and antagonise 50 per cent of the population . . . I THOUGHT U SAID HE HAD DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT WOMEN . . SECOND MARRIAGE . . .AND U R GIVING ANOTHER REASON FOR LADIES TO GO AWAY FROM HIM?????? Although Rajaji persuaded him to continue to be in the Congress party, he refused. Was it because the Congress was a party of Brahmins? Yes. He wanted the Congress to accept social justice. That was why he came out of the Congress. It is very important to note that what he said in the 1920s has become very ordinary today. He joined the Congress because of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi only. He had this very famous big argument with Gandhi and Periyar said, 'Gandhi lived in a fool's paradise and believed that men are all good'. According to Periyar, men are not good. He looked at everything from a practical point of view. When Gandhi accepted that there were problems in our religion, he cautioned Gandhi that if he tried to change his religion, he would be killed one day. He said that in 1928. That was the kind of vision he had . . . . I SAY BOTH OF THEM WERE EQUAL FOOLS He made a visit to Russia. Did communism play an important role in his public life? Joseph Stalin was ruling Russia when he visited it. Periyar was influenced by communism and it lead to a very important phase in the history of Tamil Nadu. It is said that if he had continued his support to the Communist Party, the history of Tamil Nadu would have been different . THAT%u2019S WHY THERE IS ONE STALIN HERE. You mean Tamil Nadu would have been another Kerala or West Bengal? Yes. He moved away from the political aspect of communism and concentrated only on the social aspect of communism. He said as far as the economic policy was concerned, he was with communism . . . .AND HE DIDI NOT KNOW THAT IMPORTANCE OF MONEY IN SOCIAL LIFE . .. BUT HE FOLLOWERS DID KNOW THAT . . .NOW SEE THEM .. Are you a follower of Periyar? No, I am not a follower of Periyar. But I am a very great admirer of Periyar. You cannot make a film on him without admiring him. I may not be following his ideas in toto but I value his contributions to society and original thinking. Now let me go back to your first question where you gave so many descriptions to Periyar. I am making this film because he was misinterpreted. I feel the greatness of Periyar will not be gauged by such interpretations . . . .OH! SO ALL THIS FROM IN SIDE THE AC ROOM! GO MAN TRY THE SUN. NOT TO THE FILM MAKER- TO THE GREAT PERIYAAR TO WHOM I BOW MY HEAD THE GREAT MAN BUT RUBBISH MIOPIC FOLLOWERS AND HE TRAINED THEM- SO DAMN TO HIM
RE:point to point
by rationalbeing being on Apr 30, 2007 03:13 PM Permalink
MANISH I ACCEPT YOUR THOUGHTS IN MANY POINTS,BUT MY THINKING IS THAT KARUNANIDHI FAVORS RAVANA AS MANY PEOPLE BELIEVE HE WAS A DRAVIDIAN.RAMMOHAN ROY,VIDYASAGAR DID NOT SUUFER FROM CASTEISM BUT THEY ACCELERATED SOCIAL REFORMS.RAMAKRISHNA ACCEPTED LOWER CASTE DISCIPLES.BUT THEY DID NO ACCUSE BRAHMINS SPECIALLY TO AVOID HATRED.
RE:point to point
by heramba k on Apr 30, 2007 02:50 PM Permalink
Mr. Manish Kumar, One suggestion! Kindly go to school or private tuition and learn English first! Then you try to write A,B,C in English! If time permits, then you do criticise! Regards, Valluvan R.D.
