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.