Polapragada Rajyalakshmi.
My favorite writers are: Sri Sri, Kodavatiganti Kutumba Rao, Racakonda Viswanatha Sastri, Chaganti Somayajulu and Ranganayakamma.
My opinions of these writers are as follows:
Let us first take Kutumba Rao. He carefully analyzes our society and life, understands the issues and offers rational solutions. His works reflect the realities of life. There is no place in his writings for hypocrisy and pretensions. He does not struggle for style. Only he could apply Marxism to middle class families and write about it. I think there is no other writer who could analyze life and human values like him. Another specialty of Ko.Ku. is writing with a scientific understanding and approach. We see lucidity and precision in his writings. His writings (his essays particularly) help us immensely to understand the society and life, and also for personal growth. Since he is talking about only the class he is familiar with, we also see honesty and reality. His writings clearly show us how "progressive" writings should be. I like his works for all these reasons.
About the second writer, Racakonda Viswanatha Sastri: Sastri brings out the human inside a person and puts in front of us. He can state beautifully how the weaknesses in a person render him incapacitated. He depicts the inner conflicts powerfully. He understands the structure of our society-how one person is robbing another and making us all sacrificial lambs in the process. In addition, I am also taken by his peculiar style.
About the third writer, Chaganti Somayajulu: There is a similarity between this writer and Racakonda Viswanatha Sastri. They do share the topics but there is a difference in their styles. For that reason the similarity is not that obvious. Somayajulu wrote only few but each one of them is a gem. He can show clearly how a man is enslaved to his own weaknesses. There are no words to describe the writings of Chaganti. One has to read his stories to understand how beautiful they are.
And another writer (female writer) is Muppalla Ranganayakamma. She is the only woman who could change the cowardice, slavish mentality, and accommodating nature of women. She deserves credit for depicting powerfully the narrow-mindedness in women and the domineering nature in men. I like the way she rebels against the conceding and compromising attitude of women. She strongly detests the way man has manipulated woman to suit his own views, turned her into a machine, and made her a dependent on him. We can see in her writings her argument that woman should be respected as a person. Ranganayakamma wants that a woman should not just be a piece of kitchen machinery, not a piece of property for man, but an individual who could and should participate in social activities on an equal footing with man. That is why she tried to bring about changes in the way women think and introduce rebellious mode of thinking. But then, for lack of proper understanding of her view, our 'public' labeled her a "man-hater".
The difference between male and female writing:
Usually there is a difference between male and female writing. But in the present day writing, they all are alike (I mean in my opinion). The same drawbacks that are inherent in female writing are also present in male writing. Usually women possess adjustment mentality [sic]. They don't like fighting and rebellion. So that is what we see in their writings as well. Not only that. We also see a light-hearted, leisurely mentality in women's writings. They are forgetting that literature has a purpose; it is a means of creating social awareness and progress. Of course currently, men's writing is not any different either. Thus, for want of knowledge and proper understanding of their topics, the women's writings are insipid and powerless. They lack critical thinking and are not knowledgeable in their chosen topics. Besides, they are not talking about the real life around them. Instead, they are creating a fantasy world.
What did the women accomplish through their writings in the past 30 years?
It is notable that women have achieved an important status, especially in the category of fiction. Women, after suffering from slavery and male domination for generations, woke up and, in an attempt to prove their own status quo, are using the medium of writing as their weapon and are presenting forcefully their pain and their concerns to the society, and raising questions [propriety] with anguish. However, their writings have become insipid for want of integrity, also because they fail to understand the influence of their surroundings. For all these reasons the women's writings are turning into wishy-washy fiction. Some writers are opinionated while others are projecting a negative image. And the end, the result is increase in volume but not in quality. Women writers when writing about women's issues are not showing a proper understanding, nor reflecting critical thinking. Therefore, their works are sounding like political manifestos. They are not at all touching on the other social issues. However it is no surprise that woman does not focus on other topics, considering the woman is kept ignorant, and under slavery for thousands of years.
Now there is a grave need to extricate ourselves out of that ignorance and focus on contemporary social issues. It should not be very difficult to create good fiction depicting our society, changing values, and reflecting on historical and physiological [?] issues. Thus, although there is not much accomplished [in substance], we can still say they did attain a status as writers. Everybody knows how much a female writer is respected in our society. To erase that bad image, women writers must work on producing good fiction with a better perception.
In your opinion what are the features that attracted the readers' attention?
At present women writers are mostly creating illusory literature. These writings attract especially women readers. So it appears that women writers are writing with these women readers in mind. Usually teen-age girls read these stories. They read about the things that are not available to them in real life, and escape into that dream world and, as a consequence, bring disaster upon themselves. These teen-age girls do not have a correct perspective on life, society and the realities of life. So they start believing that this dream presented in the fiction is real and thus live under delusion. Most of these stories are wound around the cobweb called 'love'. These women writers do not have the courage to stay put on the ground and write about the realities of life.
And there is yet another feature that captures readers' attention. In this kind of fiction, we see an attempt on the part of the writers to depict the horrible suffering and problems of the humans in a heartrending language. Readers take that to be real. There is also a misconception among the readers that the more a story makes the reader cry the better it is. There is no other use for this kind of writing except to arouse pity and sympathy in readers. The women writers should be able to tell the readers that it is not pity and sympathy that is needed but self-confidence and integrity. Those are the qualities that enable a person to resolve his or her own problems. That's not all. The readers also need to change. A good literature comes only when the readers also focus on good values and develop an appreciation for good literature. In other words it is crucial that a change has to come both in readers as well as writers.
[sd] P. Rajyalakshmi.
Note: In response to your request, I tried to express my opinions as a reader. But then I may not have expressed myself very well. I must however mention that asking for readers' opinions like this is an admirable effort on your part.
