Book reviews / scripts of lectures / published essays & articles by P. Vijaya Kumar. My email address is profpvk@gmail.com. Please comment.

Blog post number 28

[
[
[

]
]
]

PVK letter to the Editor of The New Indian Express, Trivandrum, dated 5/Oct/2011 on the sculptor / liar Kanayi Kunjiraman

Letter to the Editor mailed on 5/10/2011

From

P. Vijaya Kumar
Kamalalayam 2
Kunnukuzhy P O
Thiruvananthapuram

To

The Editor
The New Indian Express
Sasthamangalam
Thiruvananthapuram 10.

Dear Indian Express,

This is with reference to the piece in “City Express” dated 5/Oct/2011 titled “Blame Game Over Memorial to Poet of Love” by Mr N V Ravindranathan Nair.

In this piece Mr Kanayi Kunhiraman is quoted as saying that when the poet’s son Shri K Prabhakaran invited him in 1998 “to make the place worth attracting attention” he accepted the invitation.

There are three untruths in this statement. One is that when the tree-slaughter and house-alteration started in 1998 he had my father’s “blessings”. The fact is that in 1998 my father, Shri Prabhakaran had been dead for nearly a decade.

They did meet in the early 1980s. My father invited Mr Kunhiraman over to ask him where the trees that were mentioned in Asan’s poems should be planted in the memorial compound. Mr Kunhiraman’s response so alarmed him he never invited him again to the Memorial. “That fellow has other ideas”, was my father’s comment on why Mr Kunhiraman was not re-invited.

Therefore, the second falsehood is that he was following my father’s suggestions in making the alterations. (My father wanted to plant more trees; Mr Kunhiraman wanted to cut trees and erect statues.)

A third falsehood is embedded in this statement. Shri Prabhakaran never thought that the Memorial was not a place worth visiting.

Mr Kanayi’s fervent imagination, or his capacity for telling lies, seems to have misled him into making these assertions. He also forgets that his remuneration is not an issue here. I must however thank Mr Kunhiraman for supporting my view that the statue is about his own mind and not about Asan’s. Kanayi considers “the female body as a veena”. Asan did not. So this statue has to be removed from the memorial premises.

Sincerely yours,

P. Vijaya Kumar
(Son of the late Shri K Prabhakaran & grandson of Mahakavi Kumaran Asan.)

P. Vijaya Kumar / PVK

PVK letter to the Editor of The New Indian Express, Trivandrum, dated 5/Oct/2011 on the sculptor / liar Kanayi Kunjiraman

Letter to the Editor mailed on 5/10/2011

From

P. Vijaya Kumar
Kamalalayam 2
Kunnukuzhy P O
Thiruvananthapuram

To

The Editor
The New Indian Express
Sasthamangalam
Thiruvananthapuram 10.

Dear Indian Express,

This is with reference to the piece in “City Express” dated 5/Oct/2011 titled “Blame Game Over Memorial to Poet of Love” by Mr N V Ravindranathan Nair.

In this piece Mr Kanayi Kunhiraman is quoted as saying that when the poet’s son Shri K Prabhakaran invited him in 1998 “to make the place worth attracting attention” he accepted the invitation.

There are three untruths in this statement. One is that when the tree-slaughter and house-alteration started in 1998 he had my father’s “blessings”. The fact is that in 1998 my father, Shri Prabhakaran had been dead for nearly a decade.

They did meet in the early 1980s. My father invited Mr Kunhiraman over to ask him where the trees that were mentioned in Asan’s poems should be planted in the memorial compound. Mr Kunhiraman’s response so alarmed him he never invited him again to the Memorial. “That fellow has other ideas”, was my father’s comment on why Mr Kunhiraman was not re-invited.

Therefore, the second falsehood is that he was following my father’s suggestions in making the alterations. (My father wanted to plant more trees; Mr Kunhiraman wanted to cut trees and erect statues.)

A third falsehood is embedded in this statement. Shri Prabhakaran never thought that the Memorial was not a place worth visiting.

Mr Kanayi’s fervent imagination, or his capacity for telling lies, seems to have misled him into making these assertions. He also forgets that his remuneration is not an issue here. I must however thank Mr Kunhiraman for supporting my view that the statue is about his own mind and not about Asan’s. Kanayi considers “the female body as a veena”. Asan did not. So this statue has to be removed from the memorial premises.

Sincerely yours,

P. Vijaya Kumar
(Son of the late Shri K Prabhakaran & grandson of Mahakavi Kumaran Asan.)

P. Vijaya Kumar / PVK

profpvk@gmail.com

Thank you. Nandri. Namaskaram.

PVK 08/June/2026.

Thank you. Nandri. Namaskaram.

PVK 08/June/2026.