Hoole on Sivathamby

Sivathamby did face criticism from a variety of sources in his lifetime and, it appears, even after his death. Only a benighted polemicist would attribute this to his membership in a particular caste. Sivathamby, along with Kailasapthy and Jeyaraj Canagaratne, brought to Tamil studies a certain critical style, influenced strongly by what we may call literary Marxism and it elicited the animosity of the more tradition-minded scholars and even journalists.

by R.S.Perinbanayagam

(August 21, New York, Sri Lanka Guardian) One can admire Prof.Hoole’s courageous and principled stand on many issues—as I do-- concerning Sri Lankan politics and academic life, but his tribute to the late Prof.Sivathamby contains many claims that should be challenged. It is indeed full of polemical nonsense that one should not let it pass without commentary. To begin with, I have known Sivathamby for over 50 years and even after I migrated to the United States I have been keeping in touch with him. Every time I visited Sri Lanka I saw him and spent hours talking about political and cultural matters and also kept in touch with him by telephone from New York as well. So, I can claim to have known him at least as well as Prof.Hoole and never during this years did he indicate that he personally suffered discrimination that hampered his career. He did however have a scholarly interest in the social structure of Jaffna society,particularly its caste system, but these two must not be confused. On the face of it, however, even without these personal reminiscences, Sivathamby had a spectacular career and seems to have fulfilled nearly all his life's ambition. Hoole says, “His caste background ensured that he would be denied many offices for which he was qualified and entitled.” Pray tell ,what are these offices? In any case it is the lot of everyone in life to be deprived of something irrespective of caste—as Hoole should know. Having said that Hoole goes into a non-sequitor that a scientist of his reputation should be ashamed of: the Hindu Board shut down a school that was founded by,I believe, Hooles’s grandfather, Canon Somasunderam. This must have happened in the 1920’s!Futhermore,in spite of the nefarious activities of the Hindu Board, Christian schools prospered and indeed there were more Christian schools in Jaffna than Hindu schools at one time. Then he puts this in: “It is thanks to Zahira College that Sivathamby received a sound education.” This implies that Sivathamby couldn’t get admitted to colleges in Jaffna because of his caste! I have never seen such egregious nonsense in print outside propagandist literature.Does Hoole have evidence that Sivathamby applied to Hartley College,in his own neighborhood,or St.John’s College or Jaffna College or central College or Jaffna Hindu College and was refused admission? Off hand I can mention several members of Sivathamby’s caste who studied with me and went on to fame and fortune. So, Hoole’s claim that Sivathamby was somehow a victim of exclusion from the good life because of his caste is without foundation. Of course like all human beings he may have wanted more but who among us, irrespective of caste, have not met with some disappointments in life?As the good Christian poet said, ”It is the blight that man was born for”. The incident Hoole cites, about an OBE, quoting Sivathamby, is so slight an event that only an extremist polemicist will give it any weight. In any case, caste or no caste, who in the world who had to work with others in committees have not experienced slights from fellow members? And in Sivathamby’s case he should have expect such criticism since he was working in a controversial area of study. Furthermore this is a minor rebuke and pales into insignificance compared to the criticisms that Sivathamby has made of the work of others.

Furthermore the implication that Sivathamby overcame many obstacles put in his way and achieved great success in a casteist society was a singular one can be made only by one who not familiar with the facts on the ground. Far from this being true, the number of people from Sivathamby’s community and from the parallel castes, who achieved fame and fortune, in the professions and in business and among university people is truly large. I do not want to mention names here but even a cursory inquiry among the people of Jaffna will reveal the number of people who have become lawyers, judges, doctors and professors and lecturers, teachers, principals from Sivathamby’s community is large enough. In fact the two Jaffna schools in which I studied and later taught had principals who were from Sivathamby’s community. In fact for them to have become principals in the fifties they would have begun their high school education in 1910,entered the university in 1920 and graduated soon after. 

Sivathamby did face criticism from a variety of sources in his lifetime and, it appears, even after his death. Only a benighted polemicist would attribute this to his membership in a particular caste. Sivathamby, along with Kailasapthy and Jeyaraj Canagaratne, brought to Tamil studies a certain critical style, influenced strongly by what we may call literary Marxism and it elicited the animosity of the more tradition-minded scholars and even journalists. Kailasapathy himself was subject to truly vitriolic attacks during his lifetime as well as after his death. Surely Hoole is not going to attribute this to his being a Velllala! Another source of the antipathy to Sivathamby was his stance on various political matters and considering the social climate in Sri Lanka during the last 30 years, it would have been difficult to avoid displeasing some. I too was not too enamored of his politics and had occasion to tell him so. I am sure that my displeasure at his political stances, and that of his critics, had nothing to do with his caste! 

For Hoole this “tribute” to Sivathamby is another chapter in his polemic against Hindu customs and traditions of the Jaffna. Hoole began this polemic in a book that he published some time ago. Many of his criticisms of Jaffna society were indeed valid and there is much in Jaffna society that demands condemnation. I hold no brief for either the customs of the Hindus in Jaffna or for the Christians, local or foreign, being neither a Hindu nor a Christian. However Hoole’s attempt to dragoon Sivathamby’s life and achievements on the basis of flawed information and specious logic for his own purposes should be resisted and rejected.