॥ सुभाषित-रत्न-भाण्डागारम् ॥

बेङ्गलूरु-नगरे चामराजपेट-स्थितम् आपणं वॆदान्ताभिधानं भारतीय-संस्कृतौ आस्कतेषु सुविख्यातम् । तत्र संस्कॄतग्रन्थानाम् अवलोकनं तु नितराम् प्रमोदावहम् । तर्क-व्याकरण-मीमांसा-वॆदान्त-शास्त्र-विषयकाः ग्रन्थाः तत्र तत्र स्थिताः रॊमाञ्चनमेव जनयन्ति । अन्यत्र कविवराणां माघ-बाण-भास-भारवि-कालिदासादीनां शिशुपालवध-शाकुन्तलादि-महाकाव्यानि रसभरितानि नम्रेषु तरुषु पक्व-फलानीव शोभन्ते । बालॊ यथा मिष्टानाम् आपणे "किं खादेयमि"-ति वक्तुमजानन् मुग्धॊ भवेत् तथैव मम स्थितिः ।

अस्यापणस्य समीपमॆव अन्यदापणं पूजाभिधानम् । तत्र न सर्वाणि पुस्तकानि लभ्यन्ते परं यानि लभ्यन्ते तानि न्यून-मूल्ययुतानि भवन्ति वॆदान्तापणापेक्षया । एतावत्पर्यन्तम् एताभ्यां न जाने कियत् धनं दत्तं कियन्ति च पुस्तकानि क्रीतानीति । तदस्तु ।

प्रौढशालायां पठनसमये सुभाषितानाम् अध्ययनं तु सर्वैस्संस्कृतच्छात्रैः क्रियते । अपि च पाठ्यपुस्तकॆषु यदा सुभाषितानां मूलं लिखितं तदा तु सामान्यतया "सुभाषित-रत्न-भाण्डागारम्" इति लिखितमासीत् । मया तु तदा चिन्तितं यत् भाण्डागारं नाम किमपि पुरातनं स्यादिति । एष एव ग्रन्थः पूजाभिधाने आपणे दृष्टः । तस्मिन् उपोद्घाते यद् दृष्टं तेन त्वहं चकिततां गतः ।

गते शतमाने निर्णयसागर-मुद्रणालयः उत्तमानां संस्कृतग्रन्थानां सुष्टु मुद्रणं कृत्वा सार्थकतामाप्नॊत् । तस्यैव कार्यमेतत् भाण्डागारमिति ज्ञात्वा त्वहं विस्मयावृतः । न केवलं तत् । मुद्र्णालयस्य विद्वद्भिरेव महाकार्यमेतत् कृतमिति तु ज्ञात्वा कृतज्ञतापूर्वक-नमःसुमाञ्जलिः मनसैव दत्ता ।

स ग्रन्थो महानिति वक्तुमपि हर्षमनुभवामि । तस्मिन् उपचतुःशतपृष्टात्मकॆ ग्रन्थे देवतास्तुतिभिरारभ्य नानाविषयकाः श्लॊकाः कतिपयेभ्यॊ ग्रन्थेभ्यो द्विरेफाः यथा नानापुष्पॆभ्यः मधु आहरन्ति तथैव आहृताः दृश्यन्ते । आङ्ग्लादि-लॊकभाषासु अनुवादः अस्मिन्नास्ति परं किञ्चित्संस्कृतज्ञातृभ्यो मादृशॆभ्यॊऽपि अन्वर्थानामायं ग्रन्थः ।

एतच्चिन्तयन् ग्रन्थक्रयम् अकरवम् । अस्य इदानीं चौखम्बामुद्रणालयेन पुनःप्रकाशितस्य मूल्यं त्रिशतं रूप्यकाणि परं त्रिदशालयसुखं तु निश्चप्रचं आप्नुवन्त्यस्य पाठकाः।

तस्योपरि श्लोकद्वयं रचयित्वा स्वानन्दं प्रकटीकृतम् मया लेखकेन ।

अहो भाग्यमहॊ भाग्यमहॊ भाग्यं ममैव यत् ।
महाकृतिरियं नित्यं काव्यास्वादाय कल्पते ।।

सुभाषितसुधाभाण्ड! काविवाग्रत्नमण्डित !
गृहमेतत्त्वयास्माकं सुधर्माम्बुधिसन्निभम् ॥

तेन युग्मेन एतत् लेखनं समाप्यते ।

॥ सर्वेभ्यः शुभं भूयात् ॥

ಬದುಕೂ ಬಂಡಿಯೂ

ಹಿಂದಿನ ವಾರ ಒಂದು ಮದುವೆಯ ಸಮಾರಂಭಕ್ಕೆ ಹೋಗಿದ್ದೆವು. ಮದುವೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಒಂದು ರೀತಿಯ ಸೊಗಸಿರುತ್ತದೆ. ಆ ಹರುಷ, ಸಂಭ್ರಮಗಳು. ಮಕ್ಕಳಿಗೆಲ್ಲ ಓಡುವ ಅಥವಾ ಐಸ್-ಪೈಸ್ ಆಟ. ದೊಡ್ಡವರಿಗೆ ಮಾತಿನ ಆಟ. ಬಹಳ ದಿನಗಳಿಂದ ನೋಡಿರದಿದ್ದ ಬಂಧು-ಮಿತ್ರರನ್ನು ಸಂದರ್ಶಿಸುವ ಕಾಲ. ಹೆಂಗಸರು ಸೀರೆಗಳ ಕಂತೆಯನ್ನೇ ಒಯ್ಯುತ್ತಾರೆ. ವಧುವಿಗೆ ಸಮಾನವಾಗಿ ತಾವೂ ಅಲಂಕಾರ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳದಿದ್ದರೆ ಹೇಗೆ? ಹೀಗೆ ವರಪೂಜೆಗೆ ಒಂದು ಸೀರೆಯಾದರೆ, ಊಟಕ್ಕೆ ಇನ್ನೊಂದು. ಧಾರೆಯ ಸಮಯಕ್ಕೆ ಒಂದಾದರೆ, ಮಧ್ಯಾಹ್ನದ ಊಟಕ್ಕೆ ಮತ್ತೊಂದು. ಆರತಕ್ಷತೆ (ಈ ಪದ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಸರಿಯಿಲ್ಲದಿದ್ದರೂ ಇದನ್ನೇ ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸಿದ್ದೇನೆ) ಅಥವಾ ರಿಸೆಪ್ಷನ್-ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮದಲ್ಲಂತೂ ಬಿಡಿ! ಆ ಮಿಣಮಿಣ ಬೆಳಕು. ಒಂದೊಂದು ಮದುವೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಕೇಳಿ ಬರುವ ಅಬ್ಬರದ ಸಂಗೀತ. ಅಲ್ಲಂತೂ ಝಗಝಗಿಸುವ ಉಡುಪುಗಳೇ. ಯೋಚನೆ ಎಲ್ಲೋ ಹೋಯಿತು. ಇರಲಿ. ಮದುವೆಗೆ ಹೋಗಿದ್ದೆವು ಅಂದಿದ್ದೆ.

ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಹೋಗಿದ್ದು ನಮ್ಮ ಮನೆ ಮಂದಿಯೆಲ್ಲ. ಗಾಡಿ ನಡೆಸಿದ್ದು ನಾನೇ. ಅದೇ ಕ್ಲಚ್, ಅದೇ ಗೇರ್, ಅದೇ ಆಕ್ಸೆಲೆರೇಟರ್, ಅವೇ ದಾರಿಯ ವಾಹನಗಳು, ಅವೇ ರಸ್ತೆಗಳು. ಕುಳಿತ ಜನರೂ ಅವರೇ. ಆದರೆ ಮದುವೆಗೆ ಹೊರಟವರ ಹಾಗೆ ಉಡುಪು ಧರಿಸಿದ್ದೆವು. ಮದುವೆಗೆ ಕೆಟ್ಟದಾಗಿ ಬಟ್ಟೆ ಧರಿಸಿ ಹೋದರೆ ಏನೂ ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ, ಅಲ್ಲವೇ? ದೇವಸ್ಥಾನದ ಮದುವೆ ಮಂಟಪದಲ್ಲಿ ಕಾರನ್ನು ನಿಲ್ಲಿಸಿದ್ದೆ. ಕಾರು ನಿಲ್ಲಿಸುವಾಗ, ಹತ್ತುವಾಗ ದೇವರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಯೋಚನೆ.

ಅದರ ಮುಂದಿನ ದಿನ ನಮ್ಮ ಸಂಬಂಧಿಕರೊಬ್ಬರನ್ನು ನೋಡಲು ಹೋದೆವು. ವಯಸ್ಸಿನಿಂದ ಕೃಶಾಂಗರಾಗಿದ್ದಾರೆ ಆಕೆ. ಇಳಿ ವಯಸ್ಸು. ಅದರೊಡನೆ ಮುಂದೇನಾಗುವುದೋ ಅನ್ನುವ ಭಯ ಅವರಿಗೆ. ಬಹಳ ದಿನಗಳಿಂದ ನಮ್ಮನ್ನು ನೋಡಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಪಾಪ ನಮ್ಮನ್ನು ನೋಡಿ ಅತ್ತುಬಿಟ್ಟರು. ಅವರಿಗೆ ಕಿವಿ ಬೇರೆ ಸರಿಯಾಗಿ ಕೇಳದಿದ್ದರಿಂದ, ಸಮಾಧಾನವನ್ನು ಮೆಲ್ಲನೆ ಹೇಳದೆ, ಅರಚಬೇಕಾಯ್ತು. "ಅಳಬೇಡಿ" ಎಂದು ಅರಚುತ್ತಿದ್ದುದ್ದನ್ನು ಕೇಳಿ ಬೀದಿಯ ಜನ ಬಗ್ಗಿ ನೋಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ಅವರು "ಇಲ್ಲೇನು ಪಾಪ ಇಳಿ ವಯಸ್ಸಿನಾಕೆಯನ್ನು ಬೈಯುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾರಲ್ಲ" ಎಂದು ಕುತೂಹಲದಿಂದ ನೋಡುತ್ತಿರುವಂತೆ ಆಯ್ತು.

ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಕೂಡ ನಾವೆಲ್ಲ ಹೋಗಿದ್ದೆವು. ನಾನೇ ಕಾರೋಡಿಸಿದ್ದು. ಅದೇ ಕಾರು. ಅವರೇ ಜನಗಳು. ಈ ಬಾರಿ ಉಡುಪು ಬೇರೆ ಇತ್ತು! ರಸ್ತೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ನಿಲ್ಲಿಸಿದ್ದೆ. ಯಾರೋ ಒಬ್ಬರು ಜೋರಾಗಿ ಹಾರ್ನ್ ಮಾಡಿ - "ನಿಮ್ಮದೇನಾ ಗಾಡಿ" ಎಂದು ನಾವು ಹೊರಡಲು ಅನುವಾದಾಗ ಕೇಳಿದರು. "ಹೌದು, ಇನ್ನೇನು ಹೊರಟೆವು" ಎಂದು ಅಲ್ಲಿಂದ ಹೊರಟೆವು. ರಸ್ತೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ನಿಂತಿದ್ದ ಕಾರು. ರಸ್ತೆಯ ಜನರೊಂದಿಗೆ ಮಾತು.

ಇಂದು ಮುಂಜಾನೆ ನಾನು ನನ್ನ ಹೆಂಡತಿ ಗಾಡಿ ಹತ್ತಿದೆವು. ಒಬ್ಬರ ಮನೆಗೆ ಹೋಗಬೇಕಿತ್ತು. ದಾರಿ ಸರಿಯಾಗಿ ತಿಳಿಯದು. ಸುಮಾರಾಗಿ ಜಾಗದ ಪರಿಚಯ ಇತ್ತು, ಅಷ್ಟೆ. ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಇಲ್ಲಿ ಕೇಳಿ, ಕೇಳಿ ಆ ಮನೆಯ ಕಡೆಗೆ ಹೋದೆವು. ಆ ಮನೆಯನ್ನು ಎಂದೂ ಮುಂಚೆ ನೋಡಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಅದೇ ಮನೆಯೆಂದು ತಿಳಿದು, ಒಳಗೆ ಹೋದೆವು. ಒಳಗೆ ಜನ. ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಕೋಣೆಯ ಮಧ್ಯದಲ್ಲಿದ್ದ ಪುಷ್ಪಾಲಂಕೃತ ನಿರ್ಜೀವ ಶರೀರ. ಇಡೀ ರಾತ್ರಿ ಗೋಳಿಟ್ಟಿದ್ದರಿಂದ ದುಃಖವೇ ಸುಸ್ತಾಗಿ ಕೋಣೆಯ ಒಂದು ಕಾಣದೆಡೆ ಕುಳಿತಂತಿತ್ತು. ಸಾಂತ್ವನದ ನುಡಿಗಳು ಇನ್ನು ನಮಗೆ ಸಾಕೆಂಬಂತೆ ಕಂಡ ಮನೆಯವರು. ಮುಂದಿನ ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮದ ಸಿದ್ಧತೆಗಳು ನಡೆದಿದ್ದವು. ಅಗಲಿದ ಮಹನೀಯರಿಗೆ ನಮನ ಸಲ್ಲಿಸಿ ಹಿಂದಿರುಗಿ ನೋಡದೆ ಕಾರಿನೆಡೆ ಹೆಜ್ಜೆ ಹಾಕಿದೆವು.

ನಮ್ಮ ಕಾರು ಅಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ನಿಂತಿತ್ತು. ಅದೇ ಬಣ್ಣ. ಅದೇ ಕ್ಲಚ್. ಅದೇ ಆಕ್ಸೆಲೆರೇಟರ್. ಅದೇ ಬ್ರೇಕ್. ಅದೇ ಸ್ಟಿಯರಿಂಗ್ ಚಕ್ರ. ನಾವೂ ಅವರೇ.

ಮನೆಯೆಡೆ ಗಾಡಿ ಹೊರಟಿತು.

ನೆನಪು: ಪಿ. ಸುಶೀಲಾ ಅವರ ಮಧುರ ಗೀತೆಗಳು

ಚಿಕ್ಕಂದಿನಿಂದಲೂ ನನಗೆ ಕನ್ನಡ ಚಿತ್ರಗೀತೆಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಒಲವು. ನಮ್ಮ ತಾಯಿಗೆ ಹಿಂದಿ ಚಿತ್ರಗೀತೆಗಳ ಗೀಳಿದ್ದರೆ ನಮ್ಮ ತಂದೆಯವರು ಇದು ಯಾವುದಕ್ಕೂ ಲಿಪ್ತರೇ ಅಲ್ಲ. ಬೆಳಗಾಗೆದ್ದು ರೇಡಿಯೋ ತಿರುಗಿಸಿದಾಗ ಹಲವು ಹಿನ್ನೆಲೆದನಿಗಳ ಹಲವು ಹಾಡುಗಳು. ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಕೇಳಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದ ಹೆಸರುಗಳು - ಪಿ.ಬಿ.ಶ್ರೀನಿವಾಸ್, ಡಾ|| ರಾಜಕುಮಾರ್, ಎಸ್.ಪಿ.ಬಾಲಸುಬ್ರಹ್ಮಣ್ಯಂ. ಸ್ತ್ರೀದನಿಗಳ ಹೆಸರುಗಳು - ಪಿ.ಸುಶೀಲಾ ಮತ್ತು ಎಸ್.ಜಾನಕಿ. ಈ ಎಲ್ಲ ಹಾಡುಗಾರರದೂ ಅವರವರುಗಳದೇ ಆದ ವಿಶಿಷ್ಟ ಬಗೆಗಳು. ನನಗೆ ಆಗ ಸುಶೀಲಾ ಅವರ ಧ್ವನಿ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ರುಚಿಸುತ್ತಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಜಾನಕಿಯವರೇ ನನಗೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಇಂಪಾಗಿ ಕೇಳುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು.

ಸುಶೀಲಾ ಆವರ ಧ್ವನಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಮೂಗಿನದು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಪಾತ್ರವಿರುತ್ತಿದುದು ನನಗೆ ಕೇಳಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದ ಮೊದಲ ಸಂಗತಿ. ಅದು ಅವರ ಧ್ವನಿಯ, ಹಾಡುಗಾರಿಕೆಯ ಇತರ ಸಂಗತಿಗಳನ್ನು ನೋಡದಿರುವಷ್ಟು ನನ್ನನ್ನು ಆವರಿಸಿಬಿಟ್ಟಿತ್ತು. ಜಾನಕಿಯವರದೋ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ಕಂಠಸಿರಿ. ಮೂಗಿನ ನಂಟು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಕಡಿಮೆ. ಅದರ ಜೊತೆಗೆ ಆ ಕಾಲಕ್ಕೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಚಾಲ್ತಿಯಲ್ಲಿದ್ದ ಗಾಯಕಿ ಜಾನಕಿಯವರೇ. ಸುಶೀಲಾ ಅವರು ಹಿಂದಕ್ಕೆ ಸರಿದಿದ್ದ ಕಾಲ. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ ಅವರ ಧ್ವನಿಯೇ ನನಗೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ರುಚಿಸುತ್ತಿತ್ತು.

ಆದರೆ ಒಂದೆರಡು ವರ್ಷಗಳ ಹಿಂದೆ ಹೀಗೆ ನಾನು ಆಗಾಗ ಮಾಡುವ ಗಾನವಿಹಾರದಲ್ಲಿ ಸುಶೀಲಾ ಅವರ ಹಳೆಯ ಹಾಡುಗಳನ್ನು ಮತ್ತೆ ಕೇಳುವ ಅವಕಾಶ ಸಿಕ್ಕಿತು. ಆಗ ನನಗೆ ಆಶ್ಚರ್ಯ ಕಾದಿತ್ತು. ಅಷ್ಟು ಸಮೃದ್ಧಕಂಠಸಿರಿ ಆಕೆಯದು! ಎಂಥಾ ಹಾಡುಗಳು! ಎಂಥ ಭಾವಪೂರ್ಣ ಹಾಡುಗಾರಿಕೆ! ಒಂದು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪವೂ ಫಾಲ್ಸ್-ವಾಯ್ಸ್ ಇಲ್ಲದ ಮಂದ್ರ-ಮಧ್ಯಮ-ತಾರಸ್ಥಾಯಿಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಸುಲಲಿತವಾಗಿ ವಿಹರಿಸಬಲ್ಲ ಆ ಧ್ವನಿ! ನನಗೆ ಆಗ ದೊಡ್ಡದಾಗಿ ಕಂಡಿದ್ದ "ಮೂಗಿನಿಂದ ಹಾಡುವ" ವಿಚಾರ, ತಾನು ಮಾಡಿದ ಅಪಚಾರವೋ ಎಂಬಂತೆ ತಾನೇ ತಾನಾಗಿ ಬಹಿಷ್ಕ್ಕೃತಗೊಂಡಿತ್ತು. ಅದರ ಸುಳಿವು ಕೂಡ ನನಗೆ ಸಿಲುಕದೇ ಹೋಯಿತು. ಆ ಗಾನಸುಧೆಯಲ್ಲೇ ಮಗ್ನನಾಗಿದ್ದೆ ನಾನು.

ಎಚ್ಚರದ ಸ್ಥಿತಿಗೆ ಮರಳಿದಾಗ ನೆನಪು ಮರುಕಳಿಸಿತು. ಹಿಂದೆ ಮಾಡಿಟ್ಟಿದ್ದ ನಿರ್ಣಯ ನೆನಪಿಗೆ ಬಂದಿತು. ಏಕೆ ಹೀಗೆ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದೆ ಅನ್ನುವ ಜಿಜ್ಞಾಸೆ ನನ್ನನ್ನು ಕೊರೆಯಿತು. ನನ್ನ ಸಂಗೀತದ ಕೇಳ್ಮೆಯ ಮಟ್ಟ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿದೆಯೇ? ತಾಳೆ ಮಾಡಲು ಬೇರೆಯ ಸಂಗೀತ-ರಸಿಕರನ್ನು ಕೇಳಿದಾಗ ಹಲವರಿಗೆ ಸುಶೀಲಾ ಅವರೇ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಪ್ರಿಯರಾಗಿ ಕಂಡಿದ್ದರು! ಏನಾದರೇನು ? ಇನ್ನೊಂದಷ್ಟು ಸಂಗೀತವನ್ನು ಅಲ್ಪ-ನಿರ್ಣಯವೆಂಬ ಕೆಟ್ಟ ದುರ್ಬೀನಿನಿಂದ ಮುಕ್ತವಾಗಿ ಕೇಳುವ ಹಾಗಾಯ್ತು.

ಹಾಗೆ ನೋಡಿದಾಗ ಸುಶೀಲ ಅವರ ಹಾಡುಗಳು ನನಗೆ ಬರುಬರುತ್ತಾ ಇಷ್ಟವಾಗಿದ್ದವು. ಆ ಗೀತರತ್ನಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಕೆಲವು -
- ತನುಕರಗದವರಲ್ಲಿ ಪುಷ್ಪವನೊಲ್ಲೆಯಯ್ಯ ನೀನು (ಕಿತ್ತೂರು ಚೆನ್ನಮ್ಮ, ಅಕ್ಕಮಹಾದೇವಿಯವರ ವಚನ)
- ಶರಣೆಂಬೆ ನಾ ಶಶಿಭೂಷಣ (ಮಲ್ಲಮ್ಮನ ಪವಾಡ, ಸದಾಶಿವ ಅವರ ಸಾಹಿತ್ಯ)
- ವಿರಹ ನೂರು ನೂರು ತರಹ (ಎಡಕಲ್ಲು ಗುಡ್ಡದ ಮೇಲೆ,)
- ಲೀಲಾಮಯ ಹೇ ದೇವ (ಪಂಡರೀಬಾಯಿ ಅವರ ನಟನೆಯಿಂದ ಕೂಡಿದೆ. ಚಿತ್ರದ ಹೆಸರನು ನಾ ಅರಿಯೆ)
- ಇದೇನ ಸಭ್ಯತೆ, ಇದೇನ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಿ (ಮಣ್ಣಿನ ಮಗ)
- ಹೂವು ಚೆಲುವೆಲ್ಲಾ ನಂದೆಂದಿತು (ಹಣ್ಣೆಲೆ ಚಿಗುರಿದಾಗ)
- ಕಣ್ಣ ನೋಟದಲ್ಲಿ ನೀ ಕಾಡಬೇಡ ಸಾಜ್ನಾ (ಸಿಪಾಯಿ ರಾಮು)
- ಮೆಲ್ಲುಸಿರೇ ಸವಿಗಾನ/ಊಹಲು ಗುಸಗುಸಲಾಡೆ (ವೀರಕೇಸರಿ)
- ಕರ್ಪೂರದ ಗೊಂಬೆ ನಾನು (ನಾಗರಹಾವು)
- ಎಲ್ಲೇ ಇರು, ಹೇಗೇ ಇರು (ಕಸ್ತೂರಿನಿವಾಸ)
- ನೀ ಬಂದು ನಿಂತಾಗ (ಕಸ್ತೂರಿನಿವಾಸ)
- ಅಮರ ಮಧುರ ಪ್ರೇಮ (ರತ್ನಗಿರಿ ರಹಸ್ಯ)
- ಇವ ಯಾವ ಊರಿನ ಮಾವ ಈ ಚೆಲುವ (ಕಾಡು ಕುದುರೆ)
- ಮುದ್ದಿನ ಗಿಣಿಯೆ ಬಾರೋ (ಬೆಳ್ಳಿ ಮೋಡ)
- ಬಾಳೊಂದು ಭಾವ ಗೀತೆ (ನಕ್ಕರೆ ಅದೇ ಸ್ವರ್ಗ)
- ಬಿಳಿಗಿರಿ ರಂಗಯ್ಯ (ಶರಪಂಜರ)

ಆಹಾ !! ಮೇಲಿನ ಪ್ರತಿಯೊಂದು ಹಾಡೂ ಎಷ್ಟು ರಮಣೀಯ!

The Lord of the Rings - my take on the book

This book has been the reason for my not interacting with most of the world for the past few days. Anyway, I finished reading the book - more like speed-read it - and it prompted quite a few reflections. I'd like to share these with others who might have read LotR. Of course, this post is on the book and not on the movie, as expressly mentioned in the title.

I first came across this book in the late 80s - when I used to regularly frequent KQA quizzes as a high school student. More than a few quizzers (studying in college mostly) carried the book around with the elan of a fashion model wearing a precious piece of jewellery. And I saw "The Hobbit" with them too. At that time, I was just mildly curious to know more about this book and that was it. Fast forward to 2001 and New Line Cinema's extravagant and profitable interpretation of this "trilogy". This led to quite a few people getting hooked on to the book, including yours truly. I suppose the Tolkien Society's membership must have gone up because of this. But my ignorance in this matter was considerably exposed. Just before seeing this movie, I bought the book and as is my wont, did not get around to read it. My wife, however, read it (she was another Tolkien newbie) and was spellbound. I was content with the trio of movies. My wife pestered me for a while to read it (quite a while, actually) as she felt the book was much superior to the movie - but gave up in the face of pretty stubborn (and stupid?) resistance from my side.

They say in Kannada that for something to happen, the time has to be ripe for it ("kAla kUDi barabEku"). And surely, the time last week was quite ripe for my reading of the book. I took the book in my hands unsuspectingly, much similar to Bilbo Baggins when he laid his hands for the first time upon the ring. I had no idea that I would be sucked into Tolkien's Middle Earth with such force. And for a week or so, I did little other than reading the book.

Tolkien was professor of Anglo-Saxon and the language used in his book is a curious mix of various tongues - invented, old and new. I don't know much about Finnish or Icelandic to even comment on his construction of Elvish (and its multiple dialects). His English was a refreshing and relaxing change from the modern version that we Indians have come to now associate with business and technology. The literary style is somewhat like champU (a mixture of prose and poetry seen in Indian literature) with a greater bias towards prose.

The story is epic-like with multiple types of characters across the "goodness" spectrum ranging all the way from Elrond, Galadriel and the Elves to the dwarves and Men and hobbits and finally the orcs, ringwraiths and the Dark Lord, Sauron himself. In Indian literature of this type, there is a tendency to always look at existing stories such as the rAmAyaNa, the mahAbhArata and the purANAs for any interesting story which could then be interpreted or improvised by a poet. But Tolkien has created this world - Middle-Earth, completely in his mind. Of course, he tells us in the introduction as well as in other places that Beowulf and the Finnish Kalevala were the chief inspiration in this matter. But inventing a completely new world with a new set of languages and a new history is simply amazing. His motivations might have been purely linguistic but the depth and scope of the story and its background do not convey that at all. I was amazed to discover later that Tolkien was a staunch Roman Catholic. Yet, I did not find any evidence of any of that in that book. It could be pretty subtle. But his creation idea of Middle Earth (detailed in his Silmarillion) is similar to the Christian tradition and yet close to Indian and other "pagan" religious traditions.

As everybody knows, the story is mainly of the evil Ring and the long, laborious attempt to destroy it. I will not go to the story in detail as you can find a better synopsis here.

As to what the title itself means - it could mean the Ring itself - which is of course "the One Ring to rule them all". It could also mean Sauron, the dark spirit, never seen in person who had actually made the Ring in the first place. It could also mean the humble Frodo, who finally succeeded in his attempt (with a lot of help, of course) to destroy the Ring. It could also mean Providence (or the Invisible Supreme Spirit) whose gentle nudges are seen throughout the story. For instance, Gollum's presence was completely necessary for the ring to be destroyed and several hints are dropped in the story. But his presence seems to be a hindrance too. Another instance is when Merry gets his sword from the Barrow-Wights in the Old Forest and only such swords had the ability to wound the Nazgul, which Merry does in the Battle for Gondor. The fact that every small thing, small event has some purpose is one of the central themes of the LotR.

Any movie made from a book is usually no match for the book itself and it is quite true here. The movie skips several parts and interesting conversation and even intriguing characters like Tom Bombadil. The overall story-line is what the movie barely manages to hold. To be fair to the movie version, a movie capturing an entire book with all its suggested variations, is very difficult and what we have now is close to the best movie version of LotR we could have.

The work is quite literary in nature and there is no comparison between this and the Harry Potter series. The latter comes across as quite juvenile compared to the scale of the LotR. In fact, I am sorry that I brought up the Harry Potter series at all. Both of them are not even in the same graph, so to speak.

I couldn't help but compare our epics with LotR. I should say that Tolkien, as a single person - though standing on the shoulders of giants, has managed to create something worth comparison, which is saying a lot. Our epics are multi-dimensional in that they are partly history, partly literature, partly spiritual, partly religious and even educational and fantasy-like. Tolkien's epic is more uni-dimensional or at the most bi or even tri-dimensional - it cannot have the same dimensions as works of a living tradition such as our epics. If Elves and Dwarves were real people, I would assume that LotR would be as revered as our epics are. Our rAmAyaNa and mahAbhArata are more rooted in reality than LotR. Our epics, IMHO, show more of exhortation for puruSha prayatna or individual effort than LotR. In more than one place, I saw characters in LotR being nostalgic of eras gone by and some times even being fatalistic in outlook. While I saw the Indian epics giving out "positive" messages in several parts, LotR seems quite bleak in comparison. Mordor's description as a bleak, desert like landscape with grey all around and Frodo's almost hopeless struggle is a point in this matter. This "armageddon" type of confrontation is seen in many places in Semitic as well as European myths and it is no different in the LotR. Though the rAmAyaNa and the mahAbhArata also have major conflicts at their climaxes, a feeling of "the-world-will-continue-in-spite-of-any-result" permeates them and it is not "armageddon". Whereas in the LotR, Frodo's success or failure would change the world completely. In this, LotR is influenced by Semitic ideas. I did not see any Eastern or Oriental sources acknowledged by Tolkien and I would carry on with that assumption. But there are enough situations which would have seemed quite at home in an Indian work. These probably show the common-ness of all human ethos.

It was tough not to see the Lord of the Rings as an allegory, in spite of Tolkien's explicit statements to the contrary. Impressions of a life-changing war permeate the LotR. WWI and WWII, during which Tolkien was directly and indirectly involved, respectively, seem to have influenced him quite a bit. I also saw Tolkien's clear opposition to vulgar industrialization and stretching it by a bit - to even Communism in his post-war depiction of the Shire. The Ring stood for absolute power. Frodo, in my perspecive, stood for that small but enduring "human" spirit that leads to great accomplishments.

Now for some miscellaneous observations. The classification of characters into Wizards, Elves, Men, Dwarves, Hobbits, Orcs, Ents, Uruk-hai and other interesting classes is quite similar to what we see in Indian traditions (Rushi, rAkShasa, martya, deva,yakSha, gandharva, kinnara, kimpuruSha, vAnara and several others). Also, Tolkien seems to like benevolent monarchy over other forms of government. A feudal spirit, exemplified by Sam's serving of Frodo, shows where Tolkien's preferences lie. This kind of echoes the spirit behind the Indian varNa system - which is still practiced implicitly across the world - but lies coded explicitly only in old Indian "casteist" works.

There are too many observations to be brought out in a blog-sized piece. But I would like to summarize my take finally. The Lord of the Rings deserves all its popularity and more. In fact, I was surprised to see that the LotR was quite famous in the "Flower-Power" generation. It can be safely classified as literature, which means that it is something that can be read and re-read and enjoyed many times over in spite of knowing the story line and the eventual outcome. There are several maxims and subhAShita like quotes coming out of several characters and these are worth mining for in the gem-mine that the LotR is.

So, gentle reader, if you have read till this sentence and have not read the LotR, I urge you to go to the nearest bookstore and pick up a copy for years of refined literary pleasure.

Thomas Edison - greener and brainier than we thought?

Thomas Edison - Henry Ford - Energy and Power - New York Times (Registration required)

Read this informative piece on what Thomas Edison, arguably the most innovative inventor of his times, thought about renewable fuels.

I was astounded to learn from this article that a certain Charles Brush had invented a wind-powered house as early as 1888. Edison wanted to use a windmill for clusters of four to six houses. How forward thinking was this man!! Edison even thought of a battery driven car (something that has barely happened just now) that could be as affordable as Ford's revolutionary Model T. Apparently Henry Ford was a close friend of Edison.

So is it really surprising that Edison wrote the following to his friends sometime before his death?

“I’d put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don’t have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that.”

Wow! Edison! You're brainier than I'd figured!