The National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET), the nationwide entrance exam for medical colleges introduced by the Union government, is just like how Sanskrit was used in the 1920s to prevent students from studying medicines, Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin said.
"Just like NEET today prevents students from rural, backward, and marginalized backgrounds, Sanskrit was once used as a barrier to keep many from studying medicine. It was the Justice Party that eventually removed this mandatory Sanskrit requirement for medical admissions," Udhayanidhi said while speaking at Manorama Hortus, the three- day art and literary festival, organised by the Malayala Manorama at Kozhikode in Kerala.
The DMK youth wing leader said that a century ago if someone wanted to become a doctor, they had to pass the entrance exam in Sanskrit. "Is there any connection between medical exams and Sanskrit? The answer is a big ‘no’, " he said.
“In the 1920s, those who spoke Sanskrit were held in high regard. A Sanskrit professor in Madras University had a monthly salary of Rs 200 while a Tamil professor got only Rs 70. You will know which community would have benefited from Sanskrit,” he further said.
Addressing a huge literary crowd from across the globe at Kozhikode, the deputy chief minister in his 15-minute speech informed the audience on how literature and linguistic ethos of Dravidian politics influenced the people of Tamil Nadu and Kerala to be progressive and keep the fascist forces at bay.
"Tamil Nadu and Kerala have successfully kept fascist and communal forces at bay. Why do the people of the two states stand so strongly against fascism? That is because of the progressive politics firmly established here," Udhayanidhi said.
READ - Madurai AIIMS: ‘That single brick is still with me,’ says Deputy CM Udhayanidhi Stalin
Udhayanidhi spoke on the struggles and efforts taken by the Dravidian movement to place Tamil at the core of the state's identity and how language made the people progressive. Stating that the language struggle which erupted in the 1930s and later in the1960s is still alive because of the union government's attempts to impose Hindi, he said the Dravidian movement recognized the potential of literature to serve as both a cultural force and a vehicle for social change.
"Certainly, Periyar’s writings, manifestos and editorials condemned caste-based oppression, male dominant practices, and rigid social structures. He voiced self respect for all. Our leaders harnessed literature as a tool to connect with the masses," he said, referring to how former chief ministers C.N. Annadurai and M. Karunanidhi's speeches filled with literary references, poetry and pun made the political philosophy of the Dravidian movement easily understandable to the masses.
Mentioning about the Dravidian movement’s core values of equality, rationalism, and anti-religious belief, he said the impact of the literary and linguistic ethos on society in this era reflects in Tamil Nadu’s language policies, cultural festivals and educational curriculum that preserve the unique Tamil identity.
Udhayanidhi said the pride in Tamil language and literature fuels policies and discussions about state autonomy and cultural excellence even at this age.
Explaining why Tamil Nadu's stand of linguistic insubordination cannot be termed as "divisive", he said the nationalists of that era thought the state's opposition to Hindi-imposition would eventually lead to national disunity. "However, after many decades, history has proved otherwise that the so-called nationalists who still want to impose Hindi on all the non-Hindi speaking states are indeed divisive and a threat to national unity," the DMK leader said.
He said he was proud that the struggles carried out by the Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu has in fact, saved most of the Indian state languages from falling prey to Hindi imposition. Stating that the self respect movement was the front runner of the Dravidian movement, he said language was not just a means to communicate but as a voice of a community seeking recognition, dignity and independence from the Hindi imposition.
The Dravidian movement emphasised on the 'Pure Tamil Movement' which aimed to eliminate Sanskrit influences from Tamil by consciously developing a vocabulary that avoided Sanskrit tropes, he said.
Before the 1950s, Tamil cinema was heavily Sanskritised and released with anti-scientific themes, he said. "The downtrodden people hardly understood anything." Today, the Tamil film industry is doing business in billions. Similarly, we have a thriving industry in Kerala. Telugu and Kannada film industries are also performing very well, Udhayanidhi pointed out. "But think for a moment, has any other language in north India spawned a vibrant industry like in south India? The answer is a big ‘no’. Almost all languages spoken in north Indian states have given away to Hindi. As a result, they have Hindi films," said Udhayanidhi meaning that language keeps the art and culture alive.
The Dravidian movement changed the situation. After the 1950s, cinema emerged as a dominant medium for political messaging, with socially conscious narratives and dialogues resonating with the masses, he said. "Dialogue writing became an art form through which political ideas were seamlessly woven into the narratives, achieving unprecedented reach in both urban and rural audiences," he said.
C.N. Annadurai's Velaikari (Servant Maid) of 1949 and M. Karunanidhi's Parasakthi challenged the caste hierarchies. "The dialogues made Dravidian ideology relatable, impactful, paving the way for political aspirations through the emotional power of cinema."
The Dravidian movement worked on rationalising Tamil Language, too. "Our leader Periyar questioned gender bias in the Tamil language such as 'vithavai' which means a widow, and 'vibachari' which means a prostitute. Periyar asked what equivalent words we have to refer to a man who loses his wife and a man who visits a prostitute." Periyar raised these issues when feminism did not even catch the imagination of the Western world, the deputy chief minister said.
Udhayanidhi's speech on the Dravidian movement and why the south Indian states are rooted in language politics had triggered yet another debate. As a leader ideologically inclined to the Dravidian culture and politics, Udhayanidhi had time and again emphasised on social justice and self respect and that he would never slip away from the path laid by the self-respect and Dravidian movement.
At Manorama Hortus, too, he made it a point to speak his mind and how Tamil language for him, like his predecessors, is a political weapon.