Karnataka textbook panel out to destroy diversity of thought: Writers

The writers want the government to think of effective education of the future generations

To protest the omission and addition of content by the review committee, eminent Kannada writers are withdrawing their literature from textbooks. Writers contend that the textbook review committee’s move ignores the diversity of thought about many communities in Karnataka and the constitutional values that were embedded in such works.

In the past few days, Devanoor Mahadeva, Du Saraswathi, H S Anupama, Roopa Hassan, Bolwar Mohammed Kunhi, G Ramakrishna, Chandrashekar Talya and other writers had revoked permission to withdraw their content from textbooks.

A sense of responsibility towards Kannada literature’s rich past drove withdrawals from some writers. Writer Anupama H S explained that the history and culture of the Kannada language has many stalwarts and contemporary writers were only carrying forward a rich tradition. “When people are saying things that are affront to them, this was my way of registering dissent,” she said.

If there were any changes to be made, the textbooks should have included the voices of communities that were oppressed until now, she explained. “Only recently Dalit writers, transgender people and others have started writing about their experience. The textbooks are an opportunity to provide introductions, or are windows to India's great diversity.”

Also Read: Teach truth in textbooks, not ideologies, says Bhyrappa

The withdrawals were not against the idea of change, according to prominent writer and poet Aravind Malagatti whose content was dropped in the revisions. “Yagnas, homas and Vedic rituals have been opposed since the 12th century. This resistance is nothing new. Reframing or rewriting our history doesn’t change anything,” he said. “The purpose of academic content must be to inform and should not become a battlefield for different ideologies.”

Unable to understand the logic of dropping texts, K Neela, whose essay ‘Ramjan Surakumba’ was dropped said, “Even when I would travel on buses, children would recognise me from my photo in the textbook and say how they found the subject interesting.” Her essay explored an instance of the simultaneous celebration of Ramzan and Nagara Panchami in Bidar and also included a Janapada geethe which was commonly sung by the women in the region.

“The constitutional values of many of the works have been ignored and sidelined. Selective erasure of Basavanna, Savitribhai Phule and Bhagat Singh’s history is also shameful.”

Writers also expressed disdain with reference to Chakrathirtha’s post that contained an altered version of the naada geethe. Du Saraswathi, a poet who withdrew her content in protest, said, “Healthy criticism of anybody’s work is welcome but there is no need to be derogatory when talking about the state’s movements and writers.”

ALos Read: Report on Karnataka textbook revision doubtful on June 2

Responding to the withdrawals, Chakrathirtha said the writers were free to withdraw their work at will. The textbooks, he said, were not opposed to constitutional values but "propagated the Indian values of artha, sathya, dharma and svadharma. None of the writers have read the textbooks and the reason for resistance is that they are all left-leaning,” he said.

Meanwhile, Chakrathirtha reacting on Neela’s work said: "We dropped the work (K Neela) because it did not further language learning. We found another writer to suit the purpose. We have included a better writer."

Admitting regrets

Some writers have also objected to Chakrathirtha’s post of a satirised version of ‘naada geethe’ written by state poet Kuvempu. Chakarathirtha said, “It was a token of resistance for the incidents of the time and I did not write it. Many such poems were written at the time. It was a 100 per cent anger outburst against the events. There was no intention to disrespect the naada geethe or Kuvempu,” he said. On regrets, he said, “Today, if someone approached me with that poem, I would have probably not shared it.”

As the resistance within the literary community swells, it remains to be seen if the government is willing to take the criticism in the right spirit and, as the writers say, think of the effective education of the future generations.