Decoding Lotus-Kawada episode

On May 29, 2025, a member of Kannada Raksha Vedic, a member of Vedic, protests against actor Kamal Haasan for his comment on the Kannada language. , Photo Credit: PTI

ACTOR Kamal Haasan’s comment that “Kannada was born from Tamil” There have been many debate. But this is not a new idea; It exists within the Tamil discourse for two centuries. Robert Caldwell And other linguists have said that the Dravidian languages ​​have been distracted from a common language, called Proto-Dravidian. However, Tamil nationalists have never accepted this approach. He has claimed that all the Dravidian languages ​​are Tamil offshoots. At its peak, this belief was extended to explain that Tamil is the first language in the world and all other world languages ​​were born from it.

More acceptable view

Even today, both these schools of thought thrive in Tamil intellectual places. The idea of ​​a proto-Dravida language has gained traction beyond Tamil Nadu. In contrast, the perception that Tamil is the source of all languages, outside is very low traction or acceptance. Now we live at a time when awareness of linguistic dominance in India’s multilingual context has increased politically. Each national group holds its language as the primary marker of its identity. Any thought or action that is believed to reduce their linguistic pride, often invite a terrible backlash.

In such an environment, it is more appropriate on public platforms to confirm the idea that all Dravidian languages ​​emerged from a common proto-drawidian route. Culturally and politically, this visual promotes harmony and equality. To say that other languages ​​from Tamil can easily assume their language and identity by others. They can see such claims as dominance on them. For Tamil nationalists, who combine the ancestral pride with a political message, such claims can help create a legend of ancient greatness. But beyond this, in contemporary politics, this approach only works to separate Tamil Nadu. Without strong, widely accepted educational evidence, there is no need to emphasize that Tamil is a source of all languages.

Classical qualities of Tamil – its antiquity, literary prosperity, and unbreakable literary tradition – well -known to other language communities and the world on a large scale. It is enough to present these powers to bring respect for Tamil. Even when any Indian language is compared with modern literature, Tamil literature is not the same, if not better. We need conscious efforts to take this prosperity of Tamil into a wider world.

In 2022, Hindi writer Geetanjali Shri won the International Booker Award. This year, Kannada writer Banu Mushtaq also received the same honor. Tamil, also, is eligible to be taken to such global heights. We need a constant cultural effort in that direction – not the unproductive habit of making stimulating statements separating speakers of other languages.

When Mr. Haasan said “Kannada was born from Tamil,” he did not intend to insult that language. Kannada actor Shivarjkumar was on stage, and Mr. Haasan was proudly talking about his warm relationship with the family. He was pointing to kinship between Tamil and Kannada and was trying to say that ‘we are families; We have languages. ‘It is likely that at that moment, the idea that’ Tamil is original ‘ – an idea organized by a part of Tamil thinkers – came to their mind. But there is no reason to doubt his intentions. They have the freedom to publicly express such approaches. People who have anti -views may disagree, and can speak or write in response. But his right to express an opinion to threaten him is a violation of his right to express it.

Court idea

When a case about the release of his film Thug Life came in front of the court in Karnataka, the judge almost forced Mr. Haasan to apologize. While linguistic fundamentalists are designed to convert into conflict between two regional nationalities, should the court contact it in the way that gives them favor? The police can consider it as a law-order issue, but the court cannot see it in this way. Should the court act like a kattpanchayat (extraordinary body) which is implementing the commercial agreement?

The court should have considered it as an issue of freedom of expression. Anyone can say that they are hurt by a particular scene, but what is the way to get hurt? Anyone can deliberately cause social stress. The court cannot consider such people as a party to compromise. The court should have said that it would carefully investigate whether Mr. Haasan has the right to express such an approach; This is not a relationship with the release of the film; And this will allow the release of the film with police security. Whatever case came before the court, it should have been approached from the perspective of freedom of expression. In a democracy, the court is the last asylum that protects that right.

Mr. Haasan did not apologize. He explained that “opinion was not wrong; it was misunderstood.” Generally, if a problem arises around a film, the standard response is to release an immediate apology, to remove the scenes and make a compromise to make the film’s release facilitated. For the first time, someone from the film industry has said, “I will not apologize.”

Whatever commercial calculation can be behind the attitude, the courage to make such a statement should be accepted. As the court said, it is not a matter of ego, but of self-respect. A person has every right to express an opinion and stand by it if they believe that it is correct. Democratic opposition to such ideas can certainly be voiced. But issuing violent threats or denying someone to live should be considered as punishable offenses.

Perumal Murugan, scholar and literary crossgleer who writes in Tamil language