![]() They were no longer aesthetes composing the poetry of love. The splits between the Trotskyites and the Communists had been, naturally, ideological, but the split between the Old and the New was more potent, more emotive.Īriyaratne and Malini (were) identified with this split. (I am talking about the eighties.) Theoreticians tend to mumble and distort. The main dividing line between the Old Left (the Communist Party, the LSSP, the NSSP) and the New Left (the JVP) was the fact that the former were theoreticians and the latter were, for the most, proactive agitators. ![]() The “larger humanity” he wrote of in his critique of Pawana comes out, if we are to take his criteria of aesthetic values, in the poetry of Sekera and much of the work of the lyricists who followed him, the early Ariyaratne included. However, where Malinda is wrong, and where those of us who think differently of these two musical sensibilities are not, is that humanity isn’t predicated on the act of reflecting on sorrow and oppression and exploitation it’s not predicated on anything definitive, come to think of it. Malinda Seneviratne never belonged to this crowd, which is why his pieces on Nanda Malini and Sunil Ariyaratne deserve more than a cursory comment. The trouble with vilifying revolutionists is that those who vilify them happen to be those who’d themselves think twice of sticking to a particular cause or ideal.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |