Members Profile


Rajaram Ramachandran Juhu, Mumbai / India, Male, 83
Profession :
Retired Railway Accouonts Officer
Education :
Commerce
Stage
9 Points

Friends of Rajaram Ramachandran

No record.

Rajaram Ramachandran's last comments on poems and poets

Read all 3374 comments »

Rajaram Ramachandran's comments on forums

  • Rajaram Ramachandran (6/22/2004 3:14:00 AM) Post reply

    This is the third instalment of my views on this subject:
    If we look back on the origin of the English language, it starts from a combination of many elements Anglican, Saxon, Norman French, Scandinavian, Dutch, and the various other contributions from Latin and Celtic sources. It became, later on a composite and strong language spoken by all races of English descent besides the settlers in other countries due to the influence of Briton during their colonial regime. Many of the old words have now become archaic, which are no longer in ordinary use. On the other hand the English language adopted thousands of local words from the occupied colonies and thus it developed into a multinational language during the two or three centuries past.

    Consistent with its development as a language of the world, it transformed into different styles according to the men of each continent or country. The phonetic expression of the spoken English differs from person to person, village to village, town to town, state to state, country to country, east to west and north to south. Even so it varies among the people of England, Scotland and Ireland, the three main group of British island. So, the rhyme or rhythm theme becomes diluted to some extent in the context of the phonetic sounds of these various people around the world. Normally, when there is an expansion of any thing, it is likely to dilute itself from the original form due to omissions or commissions or deviations or pronunciation. Had the English been confined to the British Island, perhaps it would have retained its traditional orthodox classic form of poetries. Dilution has taken place because of its mammoth expansion spreading its hands in every nook and corner of the world. The tastes differ and the thoughts also differ. This was the cause for the advent of modern poems, which has become the order of the present day world. A free-lance writer feels more comfortable with this modern prose poems, as he is able to communicate his feelings, both pathos and joyous, in his own words. A message thro’ a simple poem easily reaches a common man, who is not an expert in the English language. After all it is also another medium of communication among the mass to understand the built-in feelings of the so called poets. Call it, if we may, as another form of folk songs. No doubt there is also sweetness in this type of liberalized poetic communication and it can be delivered within the boundaries of the meter, rhythm or rhyme, wherever possible. The classic poets, therefore, should be liberal minded to accommodate the freelancers for the sake of development and further expansion of the language among the larger section of the people today. Hope I will not be misunderstood for my open views and my justification for the liberalization of the rules of poetry. I only mean, it would in the long run create a healthy competition among all sections of people coming up now-a-days in the field of poetry. Ofcourse, it should not ultimately end in malapropism, for example, as I said earlier that 'Why sky is high because grandmother told a lie.' There is rhyme in this sentence, but no meaning relevent to the question asked. I am also open-minded to entertain any other better views from others in this matter.

  • Rajaram Ramachandran (6/21/2004 8:29:00 PM) Post reply

    Further to my comments, I wish to add here as follows:
    The ancient languages Sanskrit, Latin, Hebrew were said to be so rigid that they have lost their currency among the living people. May be a handful of men may be talking and reading these oldest languages. Ramayan and Mahabarat were supposed to be earliest poems written in Sanskrit thousands of years ago, but a common man cannot read them without the aid of teachers well versed in Sanskrit.
    So what I now feel is that there should be a mixer of classic plus modern verses for a change of taste. When we eat food, we don't eat the same food, but our tongue needs varieties. Like this the taste of poetry should not be monotonous by claiming the classic only is the best among the lot. The English language should survive for ages to come and writing poetry should not be the monopoly of few individuals, but should be wide spread among all the lovers of this language. In fact, the poetry brings out the pent up feelings of an individual and make him feel light in his sunken heart. In one way, everyone should be encouraged to write poems in his own way to bring his hidden feelings out, which may keep his heart strong in the long run. Of course, nothing prevents grading these poems according to their merits, say A Class, B Class, C class and so on. Hope the medical profession will accept this as one more factor to reduce the tension of the heart. But still I agree with my doctor friend that classic poems are the best among all the poems flooding this world. Hats off to Dr.CRMA who maintains a classic standard in his contribution to the poetic world to the extent of more than 2000 poems, most of which come under the category of Sonnets. May God give him a long life to enable him to write more and more classic poems for the benefit of the world poets community.
    Rajaram R (21-6-04)

  • Rajaram Ramachandran (6/21/2004 12:50:00 PM) Post reply | Read 3 replies

    What Dr. C.R.M.A says is o.k., but how far a lay man can follow the rules strictly according to the traditions maintained in the old classic. When the old classics were written, the English language was confined to British island, but it became later on a window language for the whole world and it has adopted many changes in the English Language, borrowing words from other countries, which the Britishers ruled world over. The thoughts and words expressed vary from country to country and the style of expression has also undergone a remarkable change from place to place.
    If there is no flexibility, but only rigidity in any form of expression, it is likely to break one day. In the storm a tall tree gets uprooted, whereas a tall grass, that bends, remains firm on the ground. Similarly, the language survives on the basis of flexibility rather than rigidity on rules. The old order changes, yielding place to new. It doesn't mean the basic rules of rhythm and rhymes should be totally sacrificed in the name of modernisation of poetry. The rhythm and rhyme beautify the poetic expression, no doubt, of what we want to say and remain firm in the minds of readers. So, I am slightly in favor of flexibility in expression as against the rigidity. Rajaram R (dt.21-6-04)

Read all 4 forum messages »
[Hata Bildir]