Group Activity Report
As part of our classroom activity, we engaged deeply with two impactful poems:
-
“Eklavyam” by Meena Kandasamy
-
“Laughing Buddha” by Praveen Gadhavi
Both poems, while very different in tone and structure, serve a common purpose: to challenge dominant ideologies and expose hidden hypocrisies in our society. Through group discussion, textual analysis, and thematic exploration, we attempted to go beyond surface-level interpretation and explore what these poems really demand from readers today.
Given by: Prakruti Ma’am Bhatt [Click Here]
-
Krupali Belam
-
Bhumi Mahida
-
Bhargav Makwana
-
Nishtha Desai (Group Leader)
Absent Members:
-
Shatakshi Sarvaiya
-
Parthiv Solanki
Poem 1: “Eklavyam” by Meena Kandasamy
.jfif)
Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” reimagines the myth of Eklavya through a revolutionary lens. The poem critiques caste oppression, educational exclusion, and Brahminical fascism, aligning the mythological narrative with modern struggles for social justice and dignity. Kandasamy turns Eklavya from a submissive figure into a symbol of resistance. Her refusal to sacrifice the thumb represents a rejection of forced obedience and a challenge to authoritarian systems, particularly those rooted in caste.
The poem is rich in Dalit-Marxist ideology. The reference to “left-handed treatment” and using the “left hand” for revolutionary acts like pulling a trigger or hurling a bomb, emphasizes subversion. It critiques the violence of institutionalized discrimination and reframes the denial of knowledge as an act of control rather than divine order.
Modern Parallel: Just as Eklavya was denied access to education, many marginalized students today face systemic barriers in elite institutions. The 2023 suicide of Dalit student Darshan Solanki at IIT Bombay highlights how caste discrimination persists even in modern academic spaces.
I found a relevant Instagram post discussing “Eklavyam” and its modern relevance: [ Click here ]
Reclaiming Myth: A Closer Look at “Eklavyam”
“You can do a lot of things / With your left hand…”
✊ Themes We Explored:
-
Caste as Control:Eklavya is not a mere student but a metaphor for all those historically denied access to education and agency. The poem transforms a mythical tale into a modern outcry against caste-based denial.
-
Left-Handed Revolution:The left hand, often stigmatized in traditional systems, becomes a symbol of rebellion. It challenges both Brahminical purity and fascist discipline. The line, “you don’t need your right thumb / to pull a trigger”, blends myth with militancy, tradition with revolution.
-
Refusal as Resistance:Kandasamy’s Eklavya refuses to offer his thumb. This refusal is radical—it breaks the chain of ritual submission and reclaims self-worth. In a world still structured by hierarchies, this poem encourages the oppressed to stop asking for permission and start asserting their existence.
Critical Angle:
-
The poem can be read as Dalit Marxist literature, where myth becomes a battlefield for class and caste critique.
-
Dronacharya, often revered, is seen here as a symbol of institutional fascism—someone who protects power through exclusion.
-
Eklavya, in this retelling, is no longer a tragic figure but a revolutionary hero who refuses to be erased.
Short Note – Myth Reimagined
Kandasamy uses the myth of Eklavya not as a tale of devotion, but as a tool of resistance. She reclaims the narrative, giving voice to the silenced and presenting Eklavya as a figure who refuses to bow. The poem critiques blind obedience to tradition and calls for assertion of identity and refusal to participate in self-erasure.
Poem 2: “Laughing Buddha” by Praveen Gadhavi
Praveen Gadhavi’s “Laughing Buddha” portrays a disturbing irony: a nuclear test occurs on Buddha’s birthday, a day of peace and enlightenment. Buddha’s laughter is not celebratory, but bitter and tragic. It represents a mix of sorrow, helplessness, and existential dismay.
The poet uses Buddha’s silent laughter as a metaphor for humanity’s moral collapse. Despite being the symbol of compassion and non-violence, Buddha remains silent, “dumb that day”—perhaps because even divine wisdom is lost on a world obsessed with destruction.
The poem can also be interpreted through Henri Bergson’s theory of laughter, where laughter is a response to rigidity or mechanical behaviour in society. Here, the laughter is turned upside down—Buddha laughs not at comedy, but at the absurdity and contradiction of a world that preaches peace while engaging in war.
Modern Parallel: The poem recalls events like the Hiroshima bombing (also done in August, a month of spiritual significance in Japan) or even India's 1998 Pokhran nuclear tests, which sparked debate over militarization and peace.
Themes We Analysed:
-
Irony of Celebration vs. Destruction:A day meant to honour peace is desecrated by violence. This tension is the emotional core of the poem.
-
Silent Protest:The line “He was dumb that day” carries immense power. Buddha’s silence is not passive—it’s loaded with meaning. His laughter becomes a form of resistance, a non-verbal accusation against humanity’s moral decay.
-
Philosophy Meets Absurdity:In Buddhist philosophy, laughter sometimes implies detachment or enlightenment. But here, it’s used against that very tradition. Gadhavi’s Buddha laughs not because he is enlightened, but because the world has fallen so far from it.
🌍 Modern Resonance:
This poem reminds us of today’s contradictions:
-
Countries talk of peace while building nuclear stockpiles.
-
We celebrate World Environment Day while destroying forests.
-
We post about kindness but ignore the homeless.
This is the world Buddha is laughing at—a world so absurd that even the Enlightened One can’t help but cry and laugh at once.
Short Note – Use of the Word “Laughing” in the Poem
The word “laughing” carries bitter irony in this poem. It becomes a mask for tears, a reaction to unbearable contradiction. It reflects how far society has drifted from the teachings of non-violence and wisdom. In Gadhavi’s hands, laughter becomes protest.
Step 2: Report of Group Discussion
Approach/Technique Used:
We divided our group into two teams—each focusing on one poem. Then, each member took a question from the question bank and explored it independently. During discussion, we presented our insights, clarified misunderstandings, and connected the poems with real-world issues. This method helped each member engage deeply and contribute meaningfully.
Leadership and Participation:
With Nishtha Desai as the leader, all four present members contributed equally. The pre-assignment of questions allowed smooth coordination. Mutual respect and willingness to correct and support each other helped maintain the quality of discussion.
Challenges and Easier Parts:
Basic comprehension of themes was manageable due to prior readings and the poets’ clear language
Challenging:
Understanding Henri Bergson’s theory of laughter
Drawing comparisons between Fascism and Communism
Interpreting Kandasamy’s poem alongside other texts like “One-Eyed”
These required deeper analysis. We collaborated with other groups for clarification. For example, one of our members consulted peers to better understand Rachana Joshi’s “Leaving India”—reflecting our commitment to collective learning.
What We Learned
1.Thematic Insight
Eklavyam taught us about refusal, dignity, and revolutionary resistance.
-
Laughing Buddha revealed how irony and silence can be powerful responses to modern violence.
2. Relevance of Myth
We saw how poets can reclaim ancient stories to question present-day injustice. Myth isn't just a story—it's a mirror to society.
3. Critical Thinking
Caste politics and Dalit literature
Fascism vs. Marxism
Philosophy through poetry
The psychological and political function of silence and refusal
4. Collaborative Learning
.jfif)
.jfif)