The Subaltern-Regional Paradigm Part 03 of 05

Summary

This session delves into the biases within literary history classifications, particularly in Malayalam literature. It critiques how standardizations favor certain texts and periods, marginalizing others. The lecture highlights the dominance of savarna aesthetics, relegating lower caste art forms to the periphery. It questions the democratic nature of a literary history that celebrates mainstream while denigrating others, and calls for a more inclusive approach that acknowledges the contributions of the marginalized, especially the Dalit community, to truly reflect Kerala's diverse cultural heritage.

Takeaways

• 📚 The script discusses the issue of literary history classifications and their impact on marginalized peoples and texts.
• ⏳ Time and literary history classifications work against marginalized groups by naturalizing fields of perception and appreciation, creating a normative literary history.
• 📖 Literary texts are not just historical artifacts but are also relevant in the present, challenging the idea of standardization that limits their scope to a specific period.
• 🏛️ The concept of 'normative' in literary history refers to texts being seen in accordance with existing norms and general conventions, often favoring a traditional sense.
• 🎭 In Malayalam literature, the savarna aesthetic became the mainstream, overshadowing other forms of expression that were labeled with caste names.
• 🎵 The script mentions 'part' songs, which are caste-specific and reflect the ethos of the community, yet are marginalized in literary history.
• 🚫 Classification methods in literary history have excluded certain cultural forms from being accepted as common, limiting the potential of texts and reinforcing caste hierarchies.
• 🌐 The author questions the democratic nature of a literary history that denigrates some arts while celebrating others as mainstream, especially when all native art forms have caste associations.
• 🏞️ The script highlights the dominance of the upper caste aesthetic in Kerala's cultural representation, questioning the authenticity of such a representation when it excludes the majority.
• 📈 The traditional literary history of Kerala is criticized for being biased towards the upper caste, with only a few voices from the lower strata being acknowledged.
• 🔍 The script calls for an inclusive literary history that recognizes the contributions of the marginalized, particularly the dalit community, as essential to a democratic interpretation of cultural history.

Q & A

What is the primary focus of the session from the provided script?

The session focuses on the classifications made in literary history and how such classifications can marginalize certain texts and cultural forms, particularly in the context of Malayalam literature.

What does the author mean by 'standardizations' in literary history?

'Standardizations' refer to the tendency to limit the scope of a literary text to a particular period, which creates a normative or conventional approach to literary history, often marginalizing certain texts.

Why does the author critique the classification of literary texts into periods?

The author argues that classifying literary texts into specific periods limits their relevance to history and ignores their ongoing significance in the present, thus reducing their impact.

How does Malayalam literary history marginalize certain texts?

In Malayalam literary history, texts from lower castes, such as songs from specific communities like 'Paan' and 'Batter,' are relegated to the margins and classified by caste names, making them inferior to the mainstream literary aesthetic.

What is the significance of the term 'Savarna aesthetic' in the script?

The 'Savarna aesthetic' refers to the upper-caste aesthetic in Malayalam literature, which has been elevated as the literary mainstream, while lower-caste art forms are marginalized.

How does the classification of literary texts affect social movements according to the script?

The classification limits the potential of texts, making it harder for later social movements to embrace a wide range of cultural forms as part of a common heritage.

What question does the author raise about the democratic nature of literary history?

The author questions whether a literary history that marginalizes certain caste-based art forms while celebrating upper-caste practices can truly be considered democratic.

How does Kerala's mainstream culture and art reflect caste hierarchies?

Kerala's mainstream culture and art, such as Kathakali and Bharatanatyam, are dominated by upper-caste aesthetics and are not labeled with caste names, unlike art forms from lower castes, highlighting caste-based biases.

What is the role of Ullure's literary history in shaping perceptions of caste in Malayalam literature?

Ullure's five-volume literary history from 1953 is criticized for being biased toward upper-caste literature, with very few mentions of lower-caste contributions, thus reinforcing caste hierarchies.

What solution does the author propose for achieving democracy in Malayalam literary history?

The author suggests that including the contributions of marginalized and Dalit communities is essential for achieving true democracy in Malayalam literary history.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to Literary Classifications and Their Impact

The speaker introduces the session, guiding students to page 150, paragraph 2, where the author discusses how literary classifications influence marginalized peoples and texts. The text explains that literary history's standardization processes naturalize certain narratives and create a normative literary history. This approach limits the scope of literary texts, confining them to specific periods and contexts, which the author criticizes as it prevents texts from remaining relevant in the present.

05:01

🎨 Mainstream vs. Marginalized Aesthetics in Malayalam Literature

This section discusses how Malayalam literary history classifies art and literature, particularly focusing on the marginalization of lower caste art forms. The upper caste aesthetic is considered mainstream, while lower caste art is relegated to a lower status through caste-specific naming. The author questions whether such biased classifications can be considered democratic, pointing out the injustice in associating native art forms with caste while overlooking the caste associations of upper caste-dominated art forms.

10:02

🏛 Bias in Literary Histories: The Case of Kerala

The speaker delves into how Kerala’s literary history is biased, highlighting the five-volume literary history of Kerala, which only acknowledges a few lower caste figures. The speaker emphasizes that the Dalit community, which forms a significant portion of the population, has been excluded. The section concludes by stating that any attempt to include marginalized voices in literary history is essential for achieving true democracy. Those who resist such inclusion are accused of promoting a communal and sectarian view of history.

Keywords

💡Literary history

Literary history refers to the historical development and classification of literature over time, often categorized by periods, movements, or dominant cultural values. In the video, it discusses how literary histories tend to marginalize certain texts, particularly those from lower-caste or minority groups, by relegating them to a specific historical period rather than recognizing their contemporary relevance.

💡Standardization

Standardization in the context of literary history refers to the process of normalizing or classifying literary works according to certain dominant norms or criteria. In the video, it is criticized for limiting the scope of literary texts, reducing them to a specific time period, and creating a 'normative literary history' that excludes marginalized voices.

💡Normative

Normative refers to something that conforms to or is based on established norms or conventions. The video explains that normative literary history is shaped by existing societal norms, often leading to the marginalization of certain literary texts and art forms that do not align with dominant values, particularly in the context of caste-based aesthetics.

💡Savarna aesthetic

Savarna aesthetic refers to the artistic and cultural practices associated with the upper castes (Savarna) in the Indian context. The video explains that this aesthetic has been celebrated as the mainstream in Malayalam literature, while the art forms of lower-caste communities have been marginalized or labeled as inferior.

💡Caste-specific songs

Caste-specific songs are traditional songs that are associated with specific castes, often reflecting the social and cultural conditions of those communities. The video mentions that songs like 'Paan Paatu' and 'Pulayan Paatu' are examples of such caste-specific songs, which are marginalized in literary history and not considered part of the mainstream aesthetic.

💡Kerala identity

Kerala identity refers to the cultural and social identity of the people of Kerala, shaped by various artistic and literary traditions. In the video, the author critiques how this identity has been predominantly defined by upper-caste aesthetics, excluding the contributions of lower-caste communities, which are integral to the state's cultural heritage.

💡Dalit writing

Dalit writing refers to the literary works produced by the Dalit community, which often focus on the experiences of oppression, marginalization, and resistance faced by lower-caste groups. The video argues that Dalit writing forms a major part of Malayalam literary history but has been largely excluded from the mainstream due to caste-based biases.

💡Power politics

Power politics in the context of the video refers to the underlying power dynamics that shape the classification and recognition of literary works. The video discusses how the process of labeling certain art forms as 'mainstream' while relegating others to the margins is not innocent but rather a form of power politics, where upper-caste aesthetics dominate the narrative.

💡Ullur’s literary history

Ullur’s literary history refers to the five-volume history of Kerala literature written by Ullur S. Parameswara Iyer in 1953. The video criticizes this work as being biased towards upper-caste literature, noting that it largely ignores the contributions of lower-caste and Dalit writers, thus reinforcing caste-based hierarchies in literary history.

💡Democracy in literary history

Democracy in literary history refers to the idea that literary history should represent the voices of all communities, not just the dominant or upper-caste groups. The video suggests that for literary history to be truly democratic, it must include marginalized voices, particularly those of the Dalit community, and not perpetuate caste-based exclusions.

Highlights

The author discusses the role of literary history classifications and how they marginalize certain peoples and texts.

The concept of standardizations in literary history limits a text to a specific period, affecting its relevance and perception.

Standardizations naturalize fields of perception and appreciation, leading to the creation of a normative literary history.

The aesthetic classifications in Malayalam literature, particularly the Savarna aesthetic, became the mainstream while marginalizing other texts.

Caste-specific songs in Malayalam literature, such as 'Paan' and 'Batter,' are labeled with caste names and relegated to the margins.

The upper-caste practices in Malayalam literary history were deemed mainstream, while lower-caste art was denigrated.

The author critiques the lack of democratic representation in literary history when it excludes lower-caste art forms.

The Kerala identity is shaped by the exclusion of lower-caste life, with an emphasis on upper-caste traditions.

Keralan culture is often represented by upper-caste arts like Kathakali and Bharatanatyam, excluding lower-caste traditions from mainstream narratives.

The mainstream culture and art in Kerala are defined by an upper-caste aesthetic that only represents 8% of Kerala’s population.

The five-volume literary history of Kerala by Ullure is biased, regarding literature as an upper-caste domain.

Dalit contributions to Malayalam literature are often overlooked, despite representing a majority of the population.

Any democratic attempt to include the contributions of marginalized Dalit communities is essential for a fair literary history.

The exclusion of Dalit writings from mainstream literary history questions the legitimacy of such classifications.

The author calls for impartial interpretations of literary history that respect the voices of all communities, without perpetuating sectarian or communal biases.

Transcripts

[Music]

dear students

in this session we will begin from page

number 150 paragraph number 2.

here the author talks about the

classifications

made in literary history the discussion

of which he had begun in the previous

pages let us see what is there

in this paragraph it is not time

alone that works against marginalized

peoples and texts but literary histories

classifications as well a text cannot be

a history its narrative may identify an

idea or

value system as the dominant feature of

a period

such standardizations naturalize

fields of perception and appreciation

thereby producing a normative

literary history so he talks about

the classification of literary texts

into different periods

if we do so we are

making some texts as part of history

literary texts are not created to

become a part of history they are

also relevant in the present

such standardizations standardizations

refers to

we there is a tendency of we limiting

the scope of a particular literary text

to

that particular period that kind of

criteria

or criterion that we make of limiting

that particular text to that particular

period is called word

standardization so such standardizations

naturalize fields of perception and

appreciation

thereby producing a normative literary

history so here the meaning of

normative is given okay normative

it is given there in page number 154

in accordance with existing norms

general

conventions so a text is seen

with a particular traditional sense or

in the conventional

sense in malayalam

it was savarna aesthetic

that became loaded as the literary

mainstream lord here

appreciate or praise the meaning of lord

is that

so for example he talks about such kinds

of classifications

of the aesthetic in malayalam what had

occurred

in malayalam it was savarna aesthetic

that became

appreciated or praised as the literary

mainstream pan and potter

parayan party pulayan parter mark pilar

parter

and baden butter are for instance

marked by extra literary concerns

or by their cast names

so there is a reference to part

okay note number six

part means a song in dravidian

meter they are cast specific

songs sometimes it can also be

categorized

as belonging to an ethnic group

religious community

etc so they are cast specific

songs of varied themes

often reflecting the ethos of the

community

in relation to existing social

conditions

so there are different songs

existed there cast specific songs

all those songs are actually part of

literary

texts but those

songs are labeled with

cast names and they are

relegated to the margins

or they are avoided from the literary

mainstream and they are given caste

specific names such as paan and batter

paran patter pulan pata ma pila pata

such a classificatory method adopted by

literary history

precluded the possibility of later

social movements

from accepting a wide range of cultural

forms as common

capital so this is what he says

according to the author such

classifications tend to limit the

potential

of the texts and with that very naming

of the classification certain texts are

considered as lower to the mainstream

aesthetic in malayalam

while malayalam literary history

classified lower caste art and

literature

under cast names the upper caste

practices were determined as mainstream

can a history which denigrated some arts

as cast starts while celebrating

others as mainstream we consider

democratic

so the author asks a question here

some aesthetics are considered as

mainstream aesthetic and some are

considered as

inferior and they are often associated

with cast names the inferior aesthetic

is

often associated with cast name

then can we consider such a literary

history such a tradition

as democratic no we cannot

consider it as democratic especially

when

all the native art forms of kerala have

cast associations the fact that

all the so called mainstream arts are

associated even dominated

by upper caste but not referred to by

their cast names

questions the innocence of such

nomenclatures here the author

is pointing towards that innocence of

writing history or innocence of making

such classifications or

naming to different sections of

the aesthetic in malayalam literature

so it is not innocence actually it is a

kind of

power politics how many are

the lower cause in kadhagali or

kudiyatum

how much of lower caste lives find

representation in their historical and

aesthetic elements

the kerala identity is indeed informed

by

and othering of lower caste life

underlying so this is what is happening

in

the literary history of kerala

or malayalam writing the traditional

literary history consider the lower case

as the other and there is a domination

of the

sovereign aesthetic hence

everything and anything that did not

belong to the lower caste became

the mainstream is karaliyada

the tradition of an uppercast aesthetic

and history

especially since they form only eight

percent of kerala's total population

so another question is asked by the

other

the upper caste aesthetic or the savarna

aesthetic it is produced by

only eight percent of kerala's

population

eight percent of writers of kerala

population so can we give it

the dominant position is that what we

call carelia

that is asked by the author note number

seven

cara liada features pertaining to

the culture of kerala often hijacked and

equated with

mores rituals and

artistic expressions of the upper castes

the persistent appearance of the

kadagali image in brochures that promote

kerala tourism is a case in point

so here carolina the moment that we

talk about cara leader we can see

kadagali the image of

kadagali the image of kudiyata the image

of bharatanatyam

okay likewise we don't find any uh

paran part or parnan part or map pillar

part

as as and when we hear about keralia

so here the author is asking a very

pertinent question that is

can the upper caste aesthetic and

history

be considered as kerala's total

population

as a mark of kerala how is mainstream

culture and art

then defined ullure's literary history

underscores the point

there is a reference to note number

eight

five volume

literary history of kerala

1953 is to a great extent

a biased literary history which regards

literature

as an upper caste domain

so here what is he pointing about urlu's

literary history

underscores the point the eligibility

criteria of the literary history of the

17th

18th and 19th centuries found only

one diverse

[Music]

as worthy of mention so the traditional

history

book that we see in five volumes

they can only see some of the

very few persons belonging to

the lower strata of society

one diverin and two kanyons

okay kanyans is a cause once regarded as

belonging to the lower rungs of the

hierarchical

society if so

who ripped off the social cultural

assets

of the dalits who form the majority of

the population

so if kerala history

is giving importance to the savannah

aesthetic or the upper caste

aesthetic then who had

made the other social

cultural assets that is the writings of

the dalis

who made those writings inferior

so that is a main question and

actually the dalit writing it becomes

the major writing or the majority of the

writings that had occurred in

malayalam therefore any attempt to

include the contribution of the occluded

dalit community

has to be welcomed as the essential

process of

democracy so according to the other if

we have to find democracy in the writing

of literary history

in malayalam we have to find the voices

of the marginalized

also the voices of the dalits also

on the other hand those who continue to

see

such attempts as communal or sectarian

take a twisted view of literary history

so those who respect the voices of

all irrespective of the cause

those people can find

an impartial interpretation of literary

history

all other persons they will be

popularizing a communal sectarian

and twisted view of literary history

so in this section we get an idea

of the classification of literary

history and also the namings

and we also get to know more about the

mainstream

aesthetic in malayalam literature

and also the problem behind such kind of

interpretations happening in literary

history with this i conclude this

session

we will continue the chapter in the

coming sessions thank you

[Music]

you