Dr. Gunadasa Amerasekara Prathyawalokanaya (November 2008 to November 2009):

Fitting celebration for an iconic figure

**********

Dr. Gunadasa Amerasekara, the most matured contemporary Sinhalese writer, novelist, poet, social critic and founder of Jathika Chintana expresses his views on the genesis of the degeneration of contemporary Sinhalese novel which has increasingly become out of touch with Sri Lankan reality. He pleads that the novelist should re-visit realistic tradition in order to make Sinhalese novel relevant to the readership. The Ministry of Cultural Affairs has declared November 2008 to November 2009 as `Dr. Gunadasa merasekara Prathyawalokanaya (Dr. Gunadasa Amerasekara in retrospect).

**********

Q: As a student at Nalada College, you won an international award for the short story “Soma” and it marked the commencement of your literary career.When you look back at your literary career, do you consider yourself as a born writer?

A: As you said I commenced my writing early when I was a student of Nalanda College. In fact, the short story `Soma’ won an award at the World’s Short story Competition conducted by New York Herald Tribune. There were two entries from Sri Lanka; one in Sinhala medium and another in English medium. My entry was for the Sinhala medium competition and was locally conducted by Lankadeepa. Apart from a thousand rupee prize, the award gave me publicity and put me on the literary track.

I suppose one should be born with talent though it is inexplicable what the talent is. Talents alone will not make one a writer. To put in nutshell, a writer has to be a kind of intellectual with wide reading and deep perception. As I said a kind of literary novelist of standing has, invariably, to be an intellectual of some genre.

Q: `Rathu Rosamala’, a short story won readers’ and critics’ admiration.However, your controversial novels are `Karumakkarayo’ and `Yali Upannemi’.What do you think of it?

A: `Rathu Rosamala’ was my first anthology of short stories which was published somewhere in 1952. A number of critics of standing of the time including Mervin de Silva seriously considered it and wrote lengthy criticisms on it. So it became an immediate success. However, looking back, there is little originality in it; it was more imitative of the Western structure of short stories and was not based on Sri Lankan experience.After that I wrote a lengthy novel Karumakkarayo which won the best novel of the year award and became a hit. It marked the new phase in the Sinhala novel. Looking back on Karumakkarayo , what I think, important, in the novel is the depiction of the socio-economic background of a changing village at the birth of the last century; how urbanisation found its way into the village and how capitalist mode of production entered the village and social changes taking place in the village were depicted well in the novel. After Karumakkarayo, one finds the emergence of the petty bourgeois class and construction of roads in the village. That I think is the strength of the novel. I have clearly stated there are two stages of the novel; internal conflict going on in the family and social transformation from feudalism to capitalism. There is a streak of immaturity in handling the inner struggle between the characters. Karumakkarayo was the last attempt at realistic portrayal in Sinhala novel.

Thereafter, one can see the death of realistic tradition and the emergence of the naturalistic or romantic tradition in Sinhala novel which was spearheaded by the Peradeniya School. For instance, Yali Upannemi was written by me when I was at the University of Peradeniya. There was a group of literati at the University of Peradeniya who were particularly heavily influenced by the Western novels written between two world wars; the authors like D.H Lawrence, Camus, Blazac, and Kundera. This happened following the emergence of capitalism. The two world wars brought about a view kind of outlook with the growth of capitalism, which comprised of individualism, extreme self-interest, moral anarchism and disenchantment.These authors were victims of the situation and could not see through the process that it brought about. Authors like Kafka could not go beyond the superficial level. This was the beginning of the degeneration of novel where the realistic approach was given up for naturalistic and romantic approach. Failure to understand the social and historical forces that were at work during that period produced a kind of a superficial analysis of life.

Critic George Lukas stated that writers like Kafka, Camus could not see social and historical roots of the situation and attributed them to be part and parcel of life.Writers of Peradeniya School imitated those writers and their imitative products were worse than the originals.

Earlier, when Martin Wickramasinghe, Piyadasa Sirisena wrote novels in the realistic tradition, there was a social discourse in society. For instance, Piyadasa Sirisena’s novels are really based on dialogues initiated by Anagarika Dharmapala and the theme was on the nationalist movement and social forces at work.

Martin Wickramasinghe did the same in a more refined manner. The culmination of that social discourse was the 1956 transformation. There was no intellectual discourse following 1956 which I described as `Abuddassa Yugaya’ (Unenlightened period).Literature is a super dialogue. For great writings to emerge, there must be a political dialogue; politics in the Aristotelian sense. There should be an enlightened political dialogue in society.

Gandabba Apadanaya

Early as 60s I realised this and that realisation is partly represented in Gandabba Apadanaya. It was a milestone in my literary career.

There was not really a direct reference to the 1971 insurrection. In 1967, I flew to UK to pursue my post-graduate studies and stayed there for four years.I realised the folly of aping the West and understood theirs was an entirely different civilisation and we (Sri Lankans) have our own civilisation.

So we are not either culturally or economically liberated. I also realised that the literature of the Peradeniya School has no relevance to the masses. I wrote Anagarika Dharmapala Marxwadiyekda? (Was Anagarika Dharmapala a Marxist?) . I also realised the fact that the change brought about in 1956 was due to the selfless work of Anagarika Dharmapala. Returning to Sri Lanka, I wrote a number of short stories,Ekama Kathawa,Kathaapahak with a new approach seeking for roots.Intellectuals were interpreting 1956 change differently; D.C. Mendis who wrote long essays was trying to say that barbarians have taken over political power. SLFPers said that the change was due to S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike. I rejected both ideas.

`The seed sown by Anagarika Dharmapala resulted in the creation of the indigenous intelligentsia and they brought about the 1956 transformation.I realised that both the UNP and the Marxists were rootless like two sides of the same coin and the patriots like Anagarika Dharmapala were activists and there was no sophisticated guiding principle for them.The idea of Jatika Chintanaya was conceived in 1986. It was an alternative indigenous ideology around which people should rally. I adapted this new philosophy for my writing. As I mentioned earlier, the degeneration of the Western novel began in the period between the two world wars and the next step was the global novel backed up by ideas of cosmopolitanism, diasporic writing, idea of universal culture and universal psyche. This idea was further re-enforced by post modernism. It has now become a global industry and it has completely destroyed the function of the novel. This ideology has influenced the Sinhala novel; in fact, the influence can be seen in the winning entry of the D.R. Wijewardene Award. What I am saying is that we should go back to the realistic tradition.In `Ganadurumediyama Dakinemi Arunalu’, I spelled out the idea of Jatika Chintana in 1988. This had an impact on society. The outcome of this is the resurgence of nationalistic forces which contributed to the victory of President Mahinda Rajapaksa. It was addressed to the youth, especially to the youth who were active in the JVP.

Encouraging locals to write in English, I think, is a part of the globalisation process. This industry is actively encouraged by presenting awards and conducting seminars. They write for a universal audience. For instance Salmon Rushdie’s `Midnight Children’ was banned in India.

The point here is that Rushdie portrays India in the way the Westerners would like to see India; that Indians are like barbarians. The majority of Sri Lankan writings in English portray Sinhalese Buddhists as barbarians and how Sinhalese treat women as cattle. The films produced on North East depict Sri Lankan Army as butchers.