SWATANTRA—SEPTEMBER 13,
1947
WHEN two persons live together for long, each takes on a
little of the characteristics of the other. The morose man is made jolly by
contiguity with the cheerful—and the cheerful one is made dolorous by the
company of the dismal. We all act and react on each other to such an extent
that to live together is barely possible without a substantial exchanging of
one’s qualities with another’s Imitation is an unconscious human trait. It
takes place through all antagonisms, unknown even to those passing through the
process. It has been so between the Andhras sand Tamils and Malayalees
inhabiting Madras City. Amalgams in rich variety of the separate collective
virtues and vices of the three categories can be seen therein in consequence of
their being thrown against each other in schools and colleges, offices,
workshops, buses, trams, streets and cinemas.
* * *
There is charm in the
fraternization of dissimilar units. For all purposes except war, the
attractionsof heterogeneity are superior to the advantages of homogeneity.
Variety is the spice of life in capital cities which have grown out of visitors
from far and near taking roots in them often without loss of contact with their
original homes. As there is going to be no war between province and province,
no dire necessity is involved calling for a change in the present multi-lingual
pattern of cities like Bombay, Calcutta, Madras and Delhi. Like great leaders
who outgrow provincial stature with their greatness and attain national status,
they belong to the whole country and to no province. Their life will be
impoverished if they are forced administratively into the narrower dimensions
of linguistic uniformity. The wide diversity among persons and groups in art,
philosophy, religion, language and the like constitutes the very essence of
culture—a thing to be not only cherished but to be protected in every possible
way. It will be profitable to all concerned if the principle of linguistic
unity in administration should bypass the three or four big multi-lingual
cities situation on the border between different language areas. So they can
serve as microcosms of the vast variety of the nation’s life and cultures,
hospitable homes for all present residents, with no section appropriating
rights of exclusive sovereignty over the rest.
* * *
Andhras in their pristine
condition in their town or village homes are very different from Andhras
abroad. They are given to outspokenness sand emotionalism. Fervour comes to
them more easily than to Tamils with their genius for caution. There is a dash
of defiance to established things in every Andhra heart. They are incorrigible
nonconformists. They love to march in the vanguard of revolution. Their
collective heroism is of a high order. While they lack tenacity they are
endowed with an abundance of the pioneering spirit. They wear their hearts on
their sleeves. The reserves and restraints dictated by considerations of
conventional propriety are comparatively less effective in their behaviour as also
the strains that belong to social sophistication. The generality of them have a
happy go-lucky temperament. Their susceptibility to kindness and grateful
expressions of demonstrative affection is as marked as their capacity for
organising black flag processions and boycott campaigns against disliked
individuals at short notice. Personal indentification with public affairs is
habitual with them—so that their attitude to leaders eminent in public life is
one of personal obligation. Conversely they react resentfully with a sense of
personal injury towards those who in their opinion have let down the public and
not acted worthily in public matters. Their sensitiveness to affronts is acute
and is apt to lead them into manifestations of reckless vehemence. Unpopular
leaders are only too well aware of the advisability of keeping at a safe
distance from them and the danger of getting too near. Premier Omandur, for
example, recently ran to Tanjore in order to hurl a threat of prospective
coercion against defaulting Andhra producers.
* * *
The Tamils are the world’s
inveterate rationalists. They are hard to bluff. They excel in organization and
executive capacity. A silent contemptuous disregard of frothiness in any form
moves them to shift substance from shadow and concentrate on pursuits of
effective benefit ignoring the lures of mere vainglory. They will endure much
in the present for the sake of a benefit in the offing. Their practical
sagacity, added to their flair for the consolidation of small gains to ulterior
ends, has marked them for success in business and administration, but the
inroads of infectious communalism of a virulent sort in their midst, have
latterly been making havoc with their powers of combination for social and
public purposes. They need a little of the lovable imperfections of the
Andhras, just as the Andhras need something of the admirable practicality of
the Tamils, for evolving into a higher order of citizen, and the intermingling
of the two classes in a common capital would seem to have rendered this
inestimable service to each except in the political field where, through some
inscrutable malevolence of fate, neither has copied the virtues of the other.
It has been given to the Malayalees to combine in themselves the gregariousness
of the Andhras and the sturdy realism of the Tamils.
* * *
I regret an error in last week’s
Sidelights and sincerely apologise for it to readers of Swatantra and all others concerned. It was stated that travelling
allowance is not paid to legislators if they arrive in the city more than a day
prior to the meeting of the legislature and the holding of the Congress
Legislature Party meeting just two days in advance of the legislature se3ssion
was for the reason that a large attendance was not desired at the Party
meeting. Actually, under the scheduled arrangement, it was not T.A. (travelling
allowance) that the Party members have to forego but D.A. (daily allowance).
There is a world of difference between the two and the substitution of the one
for the other mars the value of the whole argument and was grossly unfair to
the Premier. I do not know what amends to make for so inexcusable a
blunder.—(September 13, 1947) S A K A.
No comments:
Post a Comment