Bharathiyar​​ is called a Mahakavi Bharatiyar

 

Why poet Bharathiyar​​ is called a Mahakavi Bharatiyar is because he was in parts all of the following poets rolled into one.

 

 

A great poet with a wide range of topics and poetic style was at once fluid, flamboyant and flexible to flow with the tone and tenor of the topic. 

 

 

Many people could not tune into his frequencies of ideas.

 

 

He was Robert Browning (poetry known for dramatic monologues)

 

Robert Burns (poems known for rebellion against orthodox religion and its morality) 

 

Wordsworth (portrayal of nature, emotionalism and highlighting individualism)

 

T. S. Eliot (satirical, prophetic and winding into philosophical meditation), 

 

P.B. Shelley (bold radical views on social and political aspects of life),

 

John Keats (natural imagery with unbridled aesthetic sensuality), 

 

Alexander Pope (in terms some mock- heroic poems alluding to didactic observations of hyper consumptions)

 

William Blake (abstract poetry),

 

John Dryden ( his intense devotional poems are as in Religio Liaci unleashing passion - sometimes romance-and reason to process truth),

 

S.T. Coleridge (on conveying nationalistic pride in common conversational vocabulary to ensure it had a reach)

 

And the icing on the cake was that he was a connoisseur of classical music that he could compose even wordy abstract poetry into great songs.

 

It is sad that he has not been as much appreciated as one wish he ought to have been, compared to many other poets. It was because he was not fully understood. 

 

To understand such a unique genius one needs to tune into frequencies of compatibility levels which have a combination of intellectual sharpness, emotional concern, social responsibility, humanitarian compassion, pride in the positives of one's culture and boldness to deride the negatives and above all a combo of romantic and aesthetic sensitivity  which was encapsulated in clarity, conviction and courage.

 

 

 

 

Divisive narrative peddlers

 

Crimes Of Crass Conflation by divisive narrative peddlers claiming to be journalists.

 

Telesis of terminologies tugged in selectively to tout certain ideological framework which conflates issues (biggest mental health issue) to confuse the rest. 'Supposed abuse', 'supposed wrong doing' ' supposed to do' and planting new divisive versions often claiming vaguely it is reliably learnt from certain sources etc. 

 

 

This type of ideological extrapolation is real diversionary tactics which is bad and blocks independent thinking, reasoning and freedom of expression.

 

Often the perpetrators of these narrative peddling activists  are moving around with hidden agendas, ulterior motives, surreptitious undercurrents,  political overtones all coated or covered with a lid of some  ideological insinuations or extrapolation will keep under constant pressure many to merely exist through a life of routine with simmering discontent and lurking suspicion with murky vested interest domineering behavior patterns which will cause more harm to one's own mental peace because of these huge carapace of negativeness that will cover the mind.

 

Language politics -the unending nonsense

 

​Neither one language speakers are the smartest race nor any particular language is the greatest language. 

 

There are billions leading better, peaceful and happier lives​​ without either of them being required. 

 

Any government fiat for or against any language, religion, race is not correct.

Sane individuals know what is required for better livelihood first. Many younger generation people have learnt more programming languages like c, c+, cc+ etc. 

 

The language politics is both right and wrong from both sides. One notices often that in some pan India inner corporate meeting when people start talking in a particular language some Indians feel uncomfortable.

 

Any region that fails to adopt factors that enable common links of civilization to enhance welfare will remain backwards as we have seen in some parts of the world. 

 

Everyone regrets this petty politics. ​ ​Europeans don't clamor for Latin or Greek though through those two wonderful languages the majority of great thoughts and ideas contributed to modern Europe. So was Portuguese for a long period, so was Persian. Those who are academically inclined can dig deeper and bring out gems of wisdom from those languages and share them. But to claim that everyone must learn them and must know them is a sign of sheer linguistic fanaticism.