Dear Phaniraj Responses by Rahmat, Rajashekhar, you and others are very sober and thought-provoking; I hope younger people will learn how to conduct a useful debate from these. I haven’t seen the special number of Deshakaala yet. But I know Vivek and am sympathetic to what he has been doing. I don’t think he will deliberately promote any factionalism. He has been devoting his time and money for bringing out a good journal. The first issue of it came to me when I was in Iowa and it impressed me very much, for it appeared to have an international standard. Althouth I do not value any journal or book for its external appearance, I still like beautiful production. This is beside the point anyway. What is important to note is, as Rajashekhar has pointed out, Vivek is the editor and one has to appreciate his judgement in the selection of texts for each issue. We may disagree with his selection but that has to be without prejudice. Bringing in caste, creed and religion unwarrantedly makes one no better than what one riticizes. In this context you mentioned my `attack’ on Girish Karnad and certain bad consequences thereof. I fully apologise for that outburst of mine–indeed I had said so in my final response in Prajavani–and today am ashamed of it. (A point to be noted: some of the rhetorical questions I put to writers in my article were based on similar points that Rilke makes in his novel `The Notebook of Laurids Brigge’ which I had been translating at the time.) I did it in a surcharged atmosphere. Being always away from Karnataka and Kannada, a recluse and an exile almost, I probably was trying to be more virtuous like Caesar’s wife! K V Tirumalesh, Arabia]]>