Tamil is bound to change, but its identity remains'

Interview with Sri Lankan Tamil scholar K. Sivathambi.

RENOWNED Sri Lankan Tamil scholar K. Sivathambi discusses in this interview a wide range of issues including the secular nature of the Tamil language, its antiquity and continuity, streamlining of post-doctoral research, and the post-war priorities in Sri Lanka. Excerpts:

As chairman of the Academic Committee of the World Classical Tamil Conference, how do you assess the importance of the meet?

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. So, it is important to know what is going to be the aftermath; what is going to flow out of this; how we are going to institutionalise the whole thing; and how we are going to maintain internationalism the all-world character and the Tamil character.

You have suggested greater coordination among universities with regard to research activities.

In Tamil Nadu, you have six or seven universities and many colleges affiliated to each of them. In the Tamil Department of the universities and in some of the famous colleges, PhD programmes are taken up.

We need not say that certain specialisation should be given exclusively to a particular university but there should be a common body to go through at least the PhD titles in order to ensure that there is no duplication of work. This can be achieved through a consortium of the graduate schools of various universities and colleges. It is very easily done. I know in American universities, there is a tradition by which one knows who is working in which area. In Tamil Nadu or in India, especially with relation to Tamil studies, quite often we find overlapping of research.

There is also another aspect that has to be looked into. Without minimising anyone's ability, I would like to suggest that post-doctoral promotions should take into account the number of research papers and books the scholars have published. I think we should give a chance to every student, especially to those who are involved in academic duties, to take up post-doctoral research programmes. There should be a deposit system of the theses and publications by the scholars at the Connemara Library [in Chennai].

Post-doctoral research should be streamlined and we should work on areas that demand attention. There can be international scholars. Today, there is no coordination between the work that is being done in Tamil studies at the South Asian Department of the European universities and what we are doing here. I would also suggest that these institutions meet once in three or five years and decide the type of specialisation and the type of work they are doing. This is also vital.

Recent trends in research clearly show that scholars prefer modern literature to ancient Tamil literature for their PhD programmes.

That is the whole trouble. The type of research they are doing is again very descriptive. We should go in for more critical reading. I think we should encourage the universities and departments concerned to do research on comparative literature, historical trends and the impact of certain things such as linguistics, social history and anthropology on Tamil literature.

Even in modern literature, please do not think that we have covered all the areas exhaustively or in the critical manner it should be done. Take for instance the research on the language of fiction in Tamil. People have worked on Pudumaipithan, Janakiraman and Kalki. As a student of the language, will you be able to say how the language of fiction differs from Kalki to Pudumaipithan? Have we worked on that kind of research thematically and stylistically?

As you go further and further you will find that there are multidisciplinary or inter-disciplinary approaches. Actually PhD is a student degree and it is not the acme of research. It only enables you to familiarise yourself with research methodology. These notions have not come into Tamil, owing to a self-sustaining cycle in the academic career. I don't think this is good for research. So much so that we are now dependent on foreign scholars for some of the latest developments. Let there be more academic rigour.

Apprehensions are raised about the future of Tamil against the backdrop of UNESCO's report pertaining to the threats faced by at least 50 per cent of the languages in the world. Do you think Tamil will continue to occupy an assailable position in the globalised scenario?

Yes, the onset of globalisation has posed new challenges. We must accept the fact that Tamil does not enjoy the position of English or French. Just because we are speaking English, we do not become Englishmen. Speaking a language is different from belonging to a language culture.

In terms of people who speak a language, there are two processes of socio-cultural interaction: assimilation and acculturation. Take the case of the black community in America. Even though they had a rich oral tradition and tribal religions, the system in America did not favour that. They lost not only their religions but also their tongue. They were completely assimilated. However, in acculturation, you take certain aspects of another culture and work it on in your own culture. I am not expecting any calamity to Tamil because it has a geographical spread, which many other languages do not have within the Indian context. Tamil is a native language to Sri Lanka and Tamil Nadu, and it has constitutional status in Singapore and Malaysia.

Unlike a tribal language, Tamil has a civilisation. When I say so, I mean Tamil's antiquity and continuity. The language has been able to face challenges in every major historical phase. The Sangam period may be one. When the Kalapiras came, that was another phase. We acculturated ourselves with Jainism and Buddhism so much so that we got some of the finest literary works such as Silapathikaram and Manimekalai. When there was Vedic Hinduism, we took it up and gave the colour of bhakti, a personalised relationship with God, and then we gave it back to the entire country. In all these phases Tamil has changed and it is bound to change, but its identity remains.

The creativity of Tamil does not end with the Sangam Age but it continues even in modern literature. Subramanya Bharathi internationalised Tamil in one stroke of the pen. You can experience the highest limits of creative prose in Pudumaipithan's works. Language is not something estranged that can be quantified outside the man who speaks and Tamil, as you know, is not merely a language. It is also the Nataraja image; the Rajaraja temple; the pann music; nadaswaram, thavil, and so on. Tamil has been a secular language: even religions that are competitive in their explanation of the world found it easy and approachable to express their ideas.

How do you evaluate Vaiyapuri Pillai's contribution to the Tamil language with particular reference to the dating of Sangam literature and the placing of the works in a chronological order?

Vaiyapuri Pillai's contributions are very high. Sri Lankan scholarship has always had a high regard for him. But I have a feeling that he has slightly pushed the dates down. I don't accept his conclusion that Silapathikaram is a ninth century literary work. The trouble is that while his research methodology was scientific, some of his findings were not. So much so, his good friend Professor Neelakanta Sastri did not agree with the dates given by Vaiyapuri Pillai. But he is a real landmark in the history of Tamil studies. Whatever you may say, his dating is wrong, I agree, but his chronological placing of the ancient literary works is correct.

Is there scope for a revival of the progressive writers movement in Sri Lanka?

I do think there is scope for the movement to revive. In 1957, we could define what constituted social progressiveness in Sri Lanka. But the future of the progressive literary movement today depends on defining what is progressive. This is very important. Progressive literature is the one that goes forward with a vision. Tell me please, what is the vision we should have? Literature is subservient to social life but without language you cannot think. So, it is wrong to say that you have language only for expression.

I think the task of progressive literature today will be to emphasise the Srilankan-ness of the Tamils and the Tamil-ness of the Sri Lankan Tamil. In this context, the British concept of majoritarianism cannot function, because Tamils will be a permanent minority and the Sinhalese will be a permanent majority. But that does not mean that they do not belong to this country.

Now that the war in Sri Lanka has come to an end, do you think the focus should shift to the development of the Tamil areas?

The focus should be on the efforts to eliminate the questions and situations that led to this so-called separatist rights.

The Sinhalese should accept that we are Tamils and Sri Lankans, and we should accept that they are Sinhalese and Sri Lankans. This does not mean the country belongs to any one of the communities. It is ours. Unfortunately, the colonial tradition did not allow that. It is quite interesting that our entry into democratic or representative rule was on the basis of members representing the Sinhala community, members representing Tamils, and members representing the Muslim community. So, when the public franchise came in the early 1930s in the whole of Asia, we voted along these lines. That was the mistake.

Apart from this, right from the days of the first war of independence in 1857, people in the north and the south participated in the freedom struggle in India. Unfortunately, we did not have a situation in which all our people could join as Sri Lankans. So, we remained as Sinhalese and Tamils. That has caused the problem.

But now we realise. The Sinhalese people also should realise that we are part of the landscape, and Tamils also should realise that this is the only country where the Sinhalese live. So, it is a question of acculturation and not assimilation.