Yes, you are right about both being popular writers for writing stories and poems. I have read some of Sunil 's writings including including Shei-Shomoi. He did work hard to write that historical fiction. It could have been written better but that is my personal opinion.
The point that I wanted to make is that I always smelled commercialism in Sunil and Humayun's works. No doubt, some of their works struck a chord with the people. And, that is understandable.
-SD
__._,_.___
The point that I wanted to make is that I always smelled commercialism in Sunil and Humayun's works. No doubt, some of their works struck a chord with the people. And, that is understandable.
-SD
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss
-Seuss
On Tuesday, March 4, 2014 9:30 PM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
Sunil was a poet and largely wrote fictions while Nirad C. Chaudhury was an essayist. Satyajit Ray made a movie based on one of Sunil's novels. I read about a controversy in which Sunil accused the great film director Deepa Mehta of stealing the story of her great movie Water from one of his novels. His novels like Purbo-Poschim, Sei Somoy, Prothom Alo, etc. are not only popular, they are quality products also.
Humayun Ahmad is very popular in West Bengal also. He was a progressive writer. He was a great story teller. Great TV serials and a couple of great movies have been made based on his stories.
The time of Manik, Tarashankar, and so on is over. You can easily compare the literature of Bangladesh and WB now. Akhtaruzzaman Elias is well respected among the WB literary critics. Hasan Azizul Huque is also well respected.
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
I would not compare Sunil with Humayun. Sorry to say that I have two different standards for the East and West Bengal. Humayun was a popular writer in Bangladesh but he never really tickled me as a good writer. Since the man is dead, I would not criticize him. He would not have passed the West Bengal standard. For Sunil, he was a factory and wrote too much and some came out OK but he did write for the money as Humayun. Not that, that is bad for a writer. But I prefer non-commercial writer like late Nirad Sri Chaudhury.-SD"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 9:26 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
Sunil had a decent job in Ananda Bazar Patrika to fill its magazines with novels and poems. So his books were the obvious outcome and those were better than made by Humayun. He also had a desk reserved in the National Library in Calcutta. He read as much as he could. I find nothing wrong in his overtures to the Goddess Saraswati, even Kalidas had it when he chanted on the adornment of her breasts.
Sent from my iPadA decent person does not sell that many books now a days. The man was a commercial writer from the get go and most of the products that he has produced are not of that good quality. Now, if create some drama and irrational sensation, suddenly, you get the public attention and with that you can inflate your demand and wallet. Salman Rushdie is another example.
But with the breath, I must say, nothing should be considered as holy. If there is a logic to go after something, I say, go for it!"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 9:08 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
Subimal Chakraborty said: "The point is Sunil could have confined his confession within a drawing room filled with his own cohorts."This is exactly what a decent man would do, but – Sunil was not a decent man. He was an arrogant man, too full of himself. He deliberately wanted to provoke followers of Hindu traditions. He knew he could do it at ease; nobody will catch his neck. In fact, many people from other religions could be pleased with his comment. That could be a reason behind this comment in public, and not in a closed door friendly conversations.Jiten Roy
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 8:47 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
The point is Sunil could have confined his confession within a drawing room filled with his own cohorts. By writing it for everybody, he hurt the feelings of many believers. All believers are not equal. They react in different ways. Our societies are not ready yet for all kinds of shocking information, particularly a piece of information that involves a sacred goddess and aroused sex in a human being.
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 12:53 AM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
There is nothing wrong in winking at Saraswati. She is the Goddess of learning, love and war. Her equivalent in Avesta is Anahita, a stark naked Goddess riding a lion. Those critics of Sunil Ganguly had no knowledge of religious scripture.
Sent from my iPadI mean he was born of a Hindu family. Probably he became an atheist at an old age. In the weddings of his son and daughter he followed the Hindu rituals.Remember Sunil Ganguly created controversy by saying that on his young life the goddess Saraswati used to provoke sex in him? He was sued by a retired Hindu police officer. He was criticized heavily by many atheists, liberals, and believers.
Sent from my iPhoneWhen one stresses upon the need to understand the context, he forgets that it imposes the limits of non-universality upon the person being discussed curtailing the limit of his prophethood. With such followers, who needs non-believers?
On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:How can the man be a Hindu and an atheist at the same time, Professor Chakrabarty? You probably did not mean it that way.On a more serious note, I think Dr. Roy's question of "what's the meaning of "crude bashing"" needs to be addressed, discussed and debated.To me, an example of "crude bashing" of religion would be drawing a so-called prophet/avatar/god in a disrespectful manner, such as pig face or sexually explicit. It would serve only to provoke the believer, with no attempt to educate, and I would condemn it.However, calling an unjust/hateful/barbaric religious teaching unjust/hateful/barbaric is not what I would call "crude bashing", although personally I would avoid doing the criticism. That is primarily because I do realize that people were less educated and less civilized when those teachings came about. There is no point in criticizing, or in trying to find the context for respecting, the ignorance/mistakes of our forefathers (the foremothers had very little power). The point really is not to follow (and not allowing to follow) any unjust/hateful/barbaric teachings, irrespective of what religion/tradition had that.Sukhamaya Bain=========================================On Wednesday, February 26, 2014 6:48 PM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
I have a very close friend. He is Hindu. He was a professor of a renowned university of Bangladesh. Now he lives in a America. He is an atheist. Some of the comments he makes in Facebook are nothing but crude bashing of Hindu religion. I had an opportunity to read one of his ugly comments about goddess Kali in Facebook. This is called crude bashing. This does not help us.
Sent from my iPhone
__._,_.___
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190
