,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
It's interesting how the same ideal is perceived as either "noble" or "elitist" depending on the source it emanates from
If Thiruvalluvar had written in Sanskrit, and were perceived as "brahminical", would he be revered as much in TN, regardless of his content?
If Thiruvalluvar had written in Sanskrit, and were perceived as "brahminical", would he be revered as much in TN, regardless of his content?
Now to be perfectly honest, there is great ambiguity about Thiruvalluvar's social background, and his varNa
For all we know he may have been a migrant from the north, or even a brahmin - but a key reason for his popularity is that his social identity remains unclear
For all we know he may have been a migrant from the north, or even a brahmin - but a key reason for his popularity is that his social identity remains unclear
So his ideas are not antagonistic to Dravidian ideologues, though he definitely was no populist, and appears to have been someone who cogitated in that "elitist" way on what constitutes a "good life"
But that's OK because it is now positioned as "ethical humanism" not "brahminical ivory tower talk"
Labels matter. Identity matters. When you wish to proselytize
Labels matter. Identity matters. When you wish to proselytize
This has implications for our own times...
Eg: Would Deng Xiao Peng have had popular support for his market reforms if he were a University of Chicago educated English speaking Chinese American?
Perhaps not
Eg: Would Deng Xiao Peng have had popular support for his market reforms if he were a University of Chicago educated English speaking Chinese American?
Perhaps not
