11 replies to this topic

[Mamallan]

xena, on Oct 18 2006, 12:48 AM, said:

Landscapes of the body

it strikes me that these poems have faint echoes of eve ensler's vagina monologues which i first encountered in this very forum. does anyone else see the resemblance?

[arnab]

i'm not seeing much resemblance beyond references to the female body. could you elaborate?

[Mamallan]

arnab, on Oct 18 2006, 08:00 AM, said:

i'm not seeing much resemblance beyond references to the female body. could you elaborate?

well here's something ensler has said in an interview (from her website):

Quote

I was drawn to vaginas because of my own personal history, because of sexuality, because women's empowerment is deeply connected to their sexuality. And, I'm obsessed with women being violated and raped, and with incest. All of these things are deeply connected to our vaginas.

these poems appear to share some of the same qualities. when i googled for poetry by the women mentioned in this article, i found this page.

[arnab]

if i understand you correctly then, you're only pointing out a shared interest in reclaiming the female body, and sexual organs in particular, from patriarchal controls. (even there it seems to me these poems have a very different kind of approach--more social than individual*.) or are you suggesting that the aesthetic qualities of these poems owes something to "the vagina monologues"?


*i am not by any means an authority on "the vagina monologues".

[twwc]

offtopic

from xena's link in which one of salma's poems is translated:

Quote

Has been decided by
Time and history
To receive love from you
Even if it is murky
To be the dutiful mother
Of your child
To acquire
Sanitary napkins and
Tools of birth control
And some small help
From the outside world
If possible
To control you a little
And keep in my hold
A little bit of power
With all this understanding
Spreads my yoni

from mamallan's link:

Quote

Mother tells me that all bedroom mistakes are mine...
History and time have clarified my status...
To get impure affection from you,
To discharge my responsibility to your child as a mother,
To get you to pay for sanitary napkins and birth control pills,
And if possible to lord over you for a while,
My knowing vagina widens itself.

edited stuff out.

Edited by twwc, 18 October 2006 - 09:21 AM.

[Mamallan]

arnab, on Oct 18 2006, 08:51 AM, said:

if i understand you correctly then, you're only pointing out a shared interest in reclaiming the female body, and sexual organs in particular, from patriarchal controls. (even there it seems to me these poems have a very different kind of approach--more social than individual*.) or are you suggesting that the aesthetic qualities of these poems owes something to "the vagina monologues"?


*i am not by any means an authority on "the vagina monologues".

yes that is how it struck me. i didn't mean to suggest any aesthetic similarities.

[xena]

I admire these women who have chosen to share their pain so honestly and without self-censorship.

The quote is from No sound of bangles

Quote

[Feminism is a dangerous word. A woman who writes in her own voice is considered a threat to the family. While the need to break out of any form of censure is a common need of all women writers, self-censorship is harder to tackle. Many Urdu writers choose to write in a male voice so as to gain acceptance. They prefer to leave subjects like politics, religion and sex to the men. The Hindi poet Azra Parveen felt that her poetry was trapped inside her, stuck to her ribs. Mridula Garg was arrested and fought a court case for two years because in her novel Chittcobra she dared to write that the sexual act was devoid of all pleasure for her heroine.]

Edited by xena, 18 October 2006 - 03:17 PM.

[noblekinsman]

I was surprised at how terrible the poems were.  

Sometimes when the victims of some specific awful atrocity or circumstance write bad poetry, the utterance is somewhat valuable for carrying the aura of that particular circumstance.  Similarly when a dying child or a severely handicapped person writes, there is a sense that they might have some mystical insight or something that might come through their garbled poesy like a prophecy.  These Tamil women's poems don't seem to fall into such categories exactly so I don't understand why anybody would ever want to read them.  I understand why the women write them.  Perhaps they are therapeutic or cathartic.  But why must others read them?

[xena]

noblekinsman, on Oct 19 2006, 12:53 PM, said:

But why must others read them?

Oh you know - different strokes. One woman's cathartic poem is another man's midget-starring slapstick or japanese anime.

[Mamallan]

i'd like to read the poems in the original before making a judgment on the aesthetic quality. i do agree that the translations are quite poorly done.

[xena]

noblekinsman, on Oct 19 2006, 12:53 PM, said:

I was surprised at how terrible the poems were. ....
I don't understand why anybody would ever want to read them.  I understand why the women write them.  Perhaps they are therapeutic or cathartic.  But why must others read them?

Mamallan, on Oct 20 2006, 02:31 AM, said:

i'd like to read the poems in the original before making a judgment on the aesthetic quality. i do agree that the translations are quite poorly done.

Let's assume that the originals also lack aesthetic value - for some readers, that is. That does not mean that they lack value  - it could be that the value of poetry such as this lies in its ability to act as an instrument of social action - so the history of the poet and her background could be powerful attributes in appreciating her effort, for those who derive permission from this to validate their own feelings?

[yvrajesh]

that definitely is a point, in using art as a medium to convey a very personal emotion. poetry is primarily a medium of art. well art from the renaissance has been used, misused and abused to convey  personal, societal or national emotion be it pain, self pity, freedom, or whatever. but art for art's sake, true tribute to the art in itself is way totally different. the emotion might be conveyed ok, but bad art is bad art. bad poetry is bad poetry. we should learn to accept that.

YV

xena, on Oct 24 2006, 08:08 AM, said:

noblekinsman, on Oct 19 2006, 12:53 PM, said:

I was surprised at how terrible the poems were. ....
I don't understand why anybody would ever want to read them.  I understand why the women write them.  Perhaps they are therapeutic or cathartic.  But why must others read them?

Mamallan, on Oct 20 2006, 02:31 AM, said:

i'd like to read the poems in the original before making a judgment on the aesthetic quality. i do agree that the translations are quite poorly done.

Let's assume that the originals also lack aesthetic value - for some readers, that is. That does not mean that they lack value  - it could be that the value of poetry such as this lies in its ability to act as an instrument of social action - so the history of the poet and her background could be powerful attributes in appreciating her effort, for those who derive permission from this to validate their own feelings?