Group Discussion :- Poems by Praveen Gadhavi (Laughing Buddha), Meena Kandasamy (Eklavyam) 

This blog is group discussion  as a task assigned by Prakruti Bhatt ma'am. 

Poetry often acts as a mirror to the inner self or the social world, revealing truths that prose might conceal. In the Indian post-independence literary landscape, poets like Praveen Gadhavi and Meena Kandasamy have contributed significantly by engaging with themes of spiritual stillness and socio-political resistance, respectively. This activity focuses on critically unpacking the assigned poem, exploring its thematic concerns, symbolic imagery, and cultural relevance. By analyzing its literary devices, tone, and context, we aim to articulate both a long and short answer that reflect an in-depth understanding aligned with the question bank.

Step 1: Based on the poem assigned to your group, discuss the thematic and critical aspects, and prepare one long and one short answer from the question bank.

Poem: 1

Eklavyam:

This note comes as a consolation:

You can do a lot of things

With your left hand.

Besides, fascist Dronacharyas warrant

Left-handed treatment.

Also,

You don’t need your right thumb,

To pull a trigger or hurl a bomb.

1. Discuss the Poem “Eklavyam” by Meena Kandasamy:

Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” is a powerful act of poetic resistance that reclaims a mythological narrative to expose and critique contemporary systems of oppression. Drawing from the Mahabharata tale of Eklavya, the poem reimagines the ancient story through a modern, radical lens. Kandasamy transforms it into a searing condemnation of caste-based marginalization, social exclusion, and institutional injustice. The poem’s ideological framework draws parallels with both Communist and Fascist paradigms, offering a sharp analysis of power, hierarchy, and revolt.

Thematic Aspects

 Caste and Social Exclusion:

The poem highlights how hierarchical structures like the caste system operate to deny access and dignity to the marginalized. Eklavya, excluded from education and recognition, becomes a symbol of the oppressed subaltern—a figure denied tools of empowerment to uphold elite dominance. His plight mirrors the working-class subject in Marxist theory, denied knowledge to maintain systemic inequality.

 Communism and the Call for Class/Caste Uprising:

The poem aligns strongly with Communist ideals of class struggle and revolutionary resistance. Eklavya’s defiance“I will never give you my thumb” is emblematic of refusal to cooperate with oppressive systems. This act of disobedience parallels the Marxist rejection of capitalist exploitation, where the proletariat must resist the bourgeoisie’s control. Kandasamy calls not for reform but for radical self-assertion, echoing revolutionary movements that advocate redistribution of power through collective resistance.

Fascism and Brahminical Patriarchy:

Kandasamy also critiques the fascist impulses within traditional structures. Dronacharya, who denies Eklavya access and later demands his thumb, is cast as a fascist enforcer upholding purity, punishing disobedience, and silencing dissent. The poem exposes how Brahminical patriarchy functions like fascism, suppressing lower castes through discipline and mutilation. In this sense, the poem reads as an anti-fascist statement as much as a pro-Dalit one.

Education as a Political Tool:

Both Communist and Fascist ideologies view education as a critical ideological battlefield. Communism promotes education as a liberatory force for the oppressed, while fascism seeks to control and indoctrinate. In “Eklavyam,” the denial of education becomes a metaphor for intellectual oppression, and Kandasamy demands educational justice and self-reliant knowledge production for the oppressed classes.

Poetry as Protest:

Finally, “Eklavyam” itself becomes an act of protest literature. With minimalist but piercing language, Kandasamy writes in the tradition of agitprop (agitation propaganda)—art that provokes political awareness and incites action. Her poem rejects silence, obedience, and sacrifice, offering instead a bold manifesto for revolution. It reflects her deep ideological commitment to leftist, anti-caste, and anti-fascist politics.

 

Conclusion:

“Eklavyam” reclaims a suppressed voice from mythology and uses it to confront contemporary injustices. Meena Kandasamy transforms Eklavya into a symbol of revolutionary courage, one who refuses to bow to the tyranny of caste or patriarchy. The poem operates simultaneously as a political critique, a cultural intervention, and a poetic act of resistance challenging readers to reconsider the systems that define knowledge, power, and justice.

Critical Aspects of the Poem “Eklavyam” by Meena Kandasamy

1. Myth Rewriting and Subaltern Reclamation:

Kandasamy reinterprets the ancient myth of Eklavya to highlight the subaltern voice silenced in canonical epics. In traditional narratives, Eklavya is seen as an obedient figure whose sacrifice is idealized. However, Kandasamy’s version transforms him into a rebellious, self-aware character, turning the story into a political parable of resistance rather than submission.

2. Dalit-Feminist Perspective:

As a poet grounded in Dalit and feminist ideologies, Kandasamy critiques the intersection of caste, patriarchy, and power. Her reinterpretation is not only anti-caste but also anti-patriarchal, challenging structures that reward loyalty only from those deemed socially inferior. The poem becomes a feminist assertion of agency, questioning who controls knowledge, education, and history.

3. Marxist Undertones:

The poem resonates with Marxist themes of class conflict and the struggle of the oppressed against dominant ideology. Eklavya, denied education and agency, mirrors the proletarian figure in Marxist literature. His defiance becomes a revolutionary act, rejecting the exploitation of labour and talent by the ruling class (represented by Dronacharya).

4. Critique of Brahminical Fascism:

Dronacharya, a symbol of Brahminical authority, is portrayed as a fascist enforcer of purity and obedience. The poem critiques how tradition and religion are used to justify systemic violence against marginalized groups. This aligns with broader critiques of fascism hierarchical control, suppression of dissent, and glorification of dominant culture.

5. Symbolism and Minimalist Style:

The poem uses powerful symbols the torn thumb, the dark forest, the act of refusal to represent suffering and protest. Its minimalist form mirrors the style of political protest poetry, where brevity intensifies emotional and ideological impact. Each line is loaded with meaning, rejecting ornamentation in favor of sharp, uncompromising truth.

6. Language as Resistance:

Kandasamy’s diction is direct, declarative, and confrontational. She abandons the poetic conventions of beauty and harmony, instead choosing a tone that is deliberately unapologetic and radical. This reflects her belief in language as a tool for political liberation, not aesthetic pleasure.

7. Postcolonial and Subversive Narrative Strategy:

The poem subverts dominant narratives, echoing postcolonial literary strategies that question established texts, beliefs, and authority. By rewriting a sacred myth, Kandasamy not only reclaims cultural space for Dalit voices but also exposes the violence embedded in nationalist and religious traditions.

Summary of Critical Lens:

Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” is a multilayered critique rooted in Dalit literature, Marxist ideology, postcolonial subversion, and feminist resistance. It challenges myth, disrupts dominant discourse, and creates a new narrative space for the oppressed to speak, resist, and reclaim.

Short Note: Use of Myth in Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam”

Reimagining the Mahabharata:

Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” draws from the Mahabharata, retelling the story of Eklavya a tribal youth denied formal education by Dronacharya. While the epic glorifies Eklavya’s sacrifice as noble obedience, Kandasamy reclaims the tale as one of systemic injustice, revealing the violence behind such glorified subjugation.

Centering the Marginalized Voice:

Unlike the silent and submissive Eklavya of myth, Kandasamy’s Eklavya speaks with defiance. His declaration “I will never give you my thumb” becomes a bold expression of Dalit resistance, transforming the myth into a platform for the historically voiceless to assert power and agency.

Challenging Heroic Ideals:

The poem questions the integrity of revered figures like Dronacharya and Arjuna. Dronacharya, often seen as a virtuous teacher, is exposed as a symbol of casteist oppression, and Arjuna’s achievements are shown to rest on injustice. The poem subverts traditional values and interrogates Brahminical authority.

Myth as Political Weapon:

Rather than honoring myth, Kandasamy uses it as a tool of critique and protest. The story becomes a metaphor for caste-based exclusion, educational denial, and structural inequality, echoing the broader goals of Dalit literature and anti-caste activism.

Reclaiming History through Rewriting:

By retelling the myth from a subaltern perspective, Kandasamy turns Eklavya into a figure of empowerment and resistance. Her version insists that the oppressed can reclaim their stories, reshape historical narratives, and resist the forces that have long silenced them.

Poem: 2. Laughing Buddha:

(Full Moon day of Buddha's birthday)

There was an

Underground atomic blast on

Buddha's birthday-a day of

Full Moon

Buddha laughed!

What a proper time!

What an auspicious day!

Buddha laughed!

At whom ?

There was a laughter on his

Lips and tears in his

Eyes

He was dumb that day.

See,

Buddha laughed!

Q: 1.  Explain the Significance of Laughing in the Poem “Laughing Buddha” by Praveen Gadhavi

In “Laughing Buddha”, Praveen Gadhavi crafts a powerful poetic moment filled with irony, sorrow, and spiritual critique. Set against the backdrop of an underground atomic blast on the Buddha’s birthday, the poem uses the image of Buddha’s laughter as a symbol of existential anguish and moral protest. Gadhavi subverts the traditional image of the laughing Buddha to confront the violence, hypocrisy, and spiritual decay of modern civilization.

1. Irony and Sarcasm:

The laughter of the Buddha is not joyous it is deeply ironic. It emerges on a day meant to celebrate peace, compassion, and enlightenment, yet marked by a nuclear explosion, a symbol of human brutality. The poem turns laughter into a mocking echo, one that questions how far humanity has drifted from its ethical roots.

 2. Grief in Disguise:

Lines like “There was a laughter on his / Lips and tears in his / Eyes” reveal that the laughter masks an unbearable sorrow. It is not a sign of levity, but a coping mechanism when despair becomes too profound for tears. Buddha’s laughter here becomes a paradox a cry hidden within a smile, a symbol of spiritual devastation.

 3. Silence and Powerlessness:

The phrase “He was dumb that day” reflects a moment of speechlessness not from ignorance but from moral paralysis. Even the Buddha an emblem of wisdom has no words in the face of such inhumanity. Laughter becomes the only form of non-verbal protest, a mute outcry against the loss of values.

 4. Critique of Modern Civilization:

The atomic blast represents scientific advancement divorced from ethics, and political power corrupted by violence. The Buddha’s laughter holds up a mirror to modern society, exposing its spiritual hollowness. In this sense, laughter becomes an accusation, not against any individual, but against a civilization that celebrates violence on a day meant for peace.

5. Philosophical and Existential Undertones:

In Zen and Buddhist traditions, laughter may reflect enlightenment or detachment from worldly illusion. However, Gadhavi reverses this meaning. Here, laughter expresses existential crisis, not transcendence. It is the laughter of one who understands too much, who sees the absurdity of mankind's self-destruction, and finds only despair.

Conclusion: A Laugh That Condemns

Buddha’s laughter in Gadhavi’s poem is neither blissful nor detached it is wounded, ironic, and damning. It embodies sorrow too deep for speech, irony too bitter for satire. The final line“See, Buddha laughed!” functions as a haunting indictment, forcing the reader to reflect: Why did he laugh? At what? At whom? The answer lies in our collective moral failure.

Q:2.  “Laughing” - write a note on the use of this word in Praveen Gadhavi’s Poem.

1. Literal vs Symbolic Meaning

The word “laughing” in the title and core imagery of the poem at first seems to suggest joy, contentment, and spiritual bliss qualities typically associated with the figure of the Laughing Buddha, a symbol of happiness and peace in Eastern traditions. However, Praveen Gadhavi deliberately disrupts this traditional interpretation. In the context of the poem, the Laughing Buddha is imagined laughing at the horror of an atomic blast carried out on the very day of Buddha’s birth a day associated with peace and enlightenment.

Thus, the “laughing” is not innocent or joyful; it is paradoxical, even tragic.

2. Irony and Paradox

Gadhavi’s use of the word “laughing” is steeped in irony. It challenges the reader’s expectation by presenting laughter not as celebration, but as a reaction to destruction and absurdity. The Buddha is not laughing because he is pleased, but because he is helpless a cosmic witness to the moral failure of humankind. This ironic laughter becomes:

• A response to the absurdity of human violence,

• A silent critique of how humanity has betrayed the values of peace and non-violence,

• A paradoxical expression of sorrow through the form of laughter.

This ironic tone aligns with the existential themes of modern poetry, where laughter can be a form of despair.

3. Satirical Undertone and Political Commentary

By making Buddha laugh in the face of an atomic explosion, Gadhavi introduces a satirical layer to the word “laughing.” It mocks the hypocrisy of political powers who carry out acts of mass violence while invoking spiritual or nationalistic justifications. The laughter can be read as:

• Mockery of humanity’s false progress,

• A denunciation of the misuse of science and technology,

• A form of non-verbal protest by a divine figure who once preached love, compassion, and peace.

This elevates the act of laughing into a profound critique of contemporary civilization.

4. Emotional and Philosophical Complexity

The laughter is also emotionally complex. It can be interpreted as:

• Resigned laughter, acknowledging the futility of trying to stop human self-destruction,

• Bitter laughter, expressing suppressed grief and frustration,

• Compassionate laughter, possibly still extending grace to flawed humanity.

Through this single word, Gadhavi complicates the emotional register of the poem, forcing the reader to confront the uncomfortable coexistence of divinity and destruction, of spirituality and nuclear power.

5. Postmodern and Deconstructive Reading

From a postmodern perspective, the word “laughing” deconstructs the binary between sacred and profane, joy and sorrow, spiritual and political. It:

• Subverts the stable signifier of the Laughing Buddha,

• Reveals the collapse of traditional meaning in the face of modern atrocities,

• Highlights the crisis of representation even the Buddha cannot weep anymore; he can only laugh.

This aligns with the poststructuralist idea that language and symbols are unstable, and meaning is often constructed through contradiction and irony.

Conclusion

In “Laughing Buddha,” Praveen Gadhavi transforms the word “laughing” from a symbol of bliss into an expression of despair, irony, and critique. It becomes a poetic strategy to expose the contradictions of modern civilization where celebrations of peace coexist with acts of violence, and where even the Buddha can do nothing but laugh at the state of the world. Through this single word, Gadhavi captures the tragic absurdity of the human condition and compels the reader to reflect on the spiritual emptiness of technological progress.

Step 2: Prepare a report of the group discussion addressing the following questions:
Which poem and questions were discussed by the group? 

1. Poem Discussed:

Our group discus sed the poem “Laughing Buddha” by Praveen Gadhavi. The central theme of the poem  the ironic laughter of Buddha in response to an atomic explosion on his birthday  offered rich material for literary and philosophical reflection.

2. Questions Addressed:
The group focused on the following key questions:

• What is the significance of the word “laughing” in the poem?

• What is the tone of the poem is it ironic, sorrowful, or satirical?

• Why does the Buddha laugh despite the violence?

• What message is the poet trying to convey through the contrast between peace (Buddha) and destruction (atomic blast)?

3. Unique Approach/Technique Used:

Our group adopted a thematic roundtable approach. Each member selected one key idea (e.g., irony, symbolism, historical context, or emotional tone) and presented a 2-minute reflection on it. This helped bring multiple perspectives together without overlapping. We also made use of visual aids, like the handwritten poem image and analytical mind maps, to visualize Buddha’s emotions and the contrast in the poem.

4. Group Dynamics and Contributions:

• Leader/Moderator: [Insert name] effectively led the discussion by keeping time and guiding the flow of ideas.

• Key Contributors: [Insert names] made strong contributions by analyzing literary devices and linking the poem to real-world socio-political events.

• While a few members were quieter, everyone contributed at least once, and the moderator ensured equal opportunity by inviting quieter members to share their views.

5. Easy and Difficult Points:

• Easy Points:

  • Understanding the ironic tone of the poem.

  • Interpreting the image of Buddha with “laughter on his lips and tears in his eyes.”

  • Recognizing the contrast between peace and violence.

• Difficult Points:

  • Interpreting the philosophical implications of Buddha's laughter was it acceptance, mockery, or detachment?

  • Understanding how existential irony and spiritual symbolism work together.

  • Connecting the poem to postmodern or postcolonial critique without prior background knowledge.

Conclusion:

The discussion enhanced our understanding of the poem’s depth, especially how a single word like “laughing” can carry multiple layers of meaning. We also appreciated the value of collaborative interpretation, where different viewpoints helped unlock richer insights into the poem.

Step 3: Learning Outcomes from the Group Activity

Participating in the group discussion on Praveen Gadhavi’s poem “Laughing Buddha” offered several valuable learning outcomes:

1. Deeper Literary Understanding:
   I gained a richer understanding of how a single word like “laughing” can hold multiple layers of meaning—irony, grief, helplessness, and spiritual commentary—all within a short poem. The group discussion revealed how tone and symbolism function together to create deeper emotional and philosophical impact.

2. Collaborative Interpretation Skills:
   Hearing diverse interpretations from my peers helped me see aspects of the poem I hadn’t considered before, such as the political and existential undertones. It taught me how literature can be read from multiple perspectives, each contributing to a fuller understanding.

3. Critical Thinking and Expression:
   The activity helped improve my ability to articulate literary analysis clearly and to respond to others’ ideas thoughtfully. I also learned how to support an interpretation using textual evidence and thematic reasoning.

4. Teamwork and Communication:
   This activity enhanced my ability to collaborate in a respectful and inclusive manner. Everyone’s voice mattered, and I appreciated how different members brought in cultural, emotional, and historical angles to the discussion.

5. Emotional Sensitivity and Ethical Reflection:
   Reflecting on the image of Buddha laughing in the face of violence led to a moral and philosophical awareness of how poetry can speak against war, power, and hypocrisy in subtle yet powerful ways.