Re: Re : [Great Writers, Biases..Times]
Nyayapathi Srinivasa Rao (vasu@india.hp.com)
Fri, 28 Feb 97 13:16:33 IST
sri raamakRshNa gaaru says:
> That the chandas restricts expression is a fallacious argument. It does
> not, in the hands of a skilled craftsman. On the other hand, it certainly
> enhances the expression, if one is 'knowledgeable'.
>
> Ramakrishna
Chhandas gives you metrical/musical frame. You have to fill-up.
That's basically a mechanical job. Not a creative one.
So it's more a matter of routine and habbit than of knowledge
or even talent.
Choosing a chhandoe meter is like making the first mistake
and doing a lot of clever things to cover the first mistake up.
It is hiding behind words; mere words!
It could not be otherwise.
Poets gifted with 'auditory imagination' (borrowing an Eliot's phrase)
can always do a better job
regardless of whether they choose chhandas or not.
There is no way a chhandoe meter can present itself for
expressions which poets of these days are interested in.
Also it is restrictive for an excellent reason that
it ASKS me to fill-up a frame with words which are subject
to MECHANICAL SCANNING.
(As an aside, of the commnets we have seen in the last
four days or so, how many pertain to the sense?
ALmost all talk about laghuvu's and guruvus, yatis and prasas
gaNas and whatever)
I know you can cite innumerable examples which support your argument.
I too can cite, as you can too, examples from verse libre
which support mine. That's not the point.
Chhandas was there. It is no longer necessary.
--
Regards & Thanks
Vasu.