yaJnam was written by Sree kaaLeepaTnam raamaraavu (AKA
kaaraa AKA kaaLeepaTnam maasTaaru) in May 1964 and was
first published in the 1966 Yuva deepaavaLi special
issue. The story was later printed as a part of an anthology of
three kaaraa stories in late 60s and three editions of that
book were sold out. It was included in the 'kaaLeepaTnam
raamaaraavu kathalu' in 1986, a sold-out volume. Now, it is
available in the anthology 'yaJnamtO tommidi' published in
1994.
In mid-70s, the Andhrapradesh Sahitya Academy gave its
annual award to the yaJnam anthology, which the author
refused to accept. Srisri, raavi Saastri, kodavatiganTi,
velcEru and many others heaped praises on the story and its author.
As vEloorigaaru mentioned in an earlier post, ranganaayakamma
published a long article in prajaa saahiti in 1977,
criticizing the story and that article raised a storm. In
1982, Hyderabad Book Trust published a volume of essays on
yaJnam. In 1983, ranganaayakamma published a volume of
essays criticizing yaJnam. Now in December 1995, the central
saahitya akaaDemi honors the story and its author.
In early 80s, the famous director bi. narasinga raavu
talked about directing a movie based on yaJnam. In late 1980s,
another famous director ji. raamineeDu directed the feature
film yaJnam, based on this story.
I do not know of any other story in Telugu that has
commanded the kind of attention that yaJnam did. What is so
special about this story that it continues to be talked
about even 30 years after its creation? Why do many people
consider it the finest story ever written in Telugu?
The story takes place in a single setting: the
raccabanDa of a small, but developed village in SreekakuLam
district. The events take place during a morning's course of
deliberations at the raccabanDa. The subject of these
deliberations is the payment of the debt owed by the
maala_raitu appalraamuDu to the 'citiki pOyina shaavukaaru'
gOpanna. The story, longer than the usual short story but
shorter than the usual novel, runs to about 35 pages of
small print in the standard (8.5" x 5.5") book size.
At first blush, the story appears like a simple
narration of events of that morning. Soon, we find that
there is more to it than that; that the deliberations of
that morning reflect the culmination of a lifetime of
events; that it is not the story of just the 'taguvu', but
the story of the entire village - nay, the entire country;
that what we think to be true is not always so; that the
accepted practice does not necessarily mean justice; and that
while trying to create and nurture, one can become the tool
of destruction; and a lot more. There are several layers to
this story just like life, and each layer has its own
texture.
The story has two principal characters: the village
elder - Sreeraamulu naayuDu, a Gandhian reformer whose
single minded devotion changed the sleepy village into a
prosperous 'model' village, and appalraamuDu, a low-caste
peasant with a small amount of land, who was a fervent
supporter of naayuDu's reforms. On this fateful day,
Sreeraamulu naayuDu, the head of the village, was being
challenged by appalraamuDu to clarify whether the debt he
owes to the shaavukaaru is a valid debt. naayuDu answers in
the affirmative and appalraamuDu now has to sell his
remaining land to pay off the debt. Before he does that, he
tries to explain to the audience why he thought that the
'debt' was not a real debt. He also talks about his
understanding of the truth about his life; about his family;
about the village; and about naayuDu and his reforms. Then
as all the members of appalraamuDu's family are signing the
land-sale deed, his younger son refuses and protests. The
uniqueness of the defiant protest and its brief aftermath
marks the unforgettable climax.
The story is written simply, from a third person point
of view. As the story progresses, one begins to suspect that
this is not a simple story as it first appears. But one
cannot stop to ponder the complexity as one is compelled to
read on to find out what happens next. And when it ends, one
is stunned and perplexed. One then goes back to reread the
story to understand it much as one tries to rehash every
relevant detail from memory when trying to understand a
dramatic event that happens in front of them.
The author's skill is such that even a single reading
of this story is sufficient to etch the setting, the
characters and the events in one's mind for ever. But, I do
not know anybody that has simply read yaJnam once and could
let it go. There is an urge to discuss this story, dissect
it and to digest it.
Somebody once said that yaJnam is to Telugu story, what
mahaaprasthaanam is to Telugu poetry, kanyaaSulkam is to
Telugu drama, and maalapalli is to Telugu novel. How true!
Regards. --- V. Chowdary Jampala