Good day, Dr. Keerthana. S. I'm Arjun. I've had a look through your background and your professional record. I'm interested in hearing more about your work and how you see yourself fitting in here with our faculty. Ready to start?

Yes.

Uh.

So I am as kirtana I completed my PhD, the department of humanities and social sciences, IIT Madras and my In examining the 19 post 1960s Tamil women narratives my doctoral thesis, I explored the tensions between bodies and social molds and also resistance and.

In taking cultural studies and gender studies as theoretical background, my research argued how theories differs from and depend on one social location and besides utilizing various theoretical frames including biological essentialism, homosociality, new materialism and caste studies among others, my thesis argued how writings by women, Tamil women especially after the 1960s became.

Uh intervention in terms of literary and cultural, uh practice.

Professor, could you clarify your question? Are you inquiring about the role of interventions in literary and cultural practices, or is there a specific context you'd like to explore?

I was in my research thesis, I mean I talked about how the women's writing post 1960s became, I'm talking about literary aspect and I don't essentially contextualize it in the ideal with literary text and not essentially cultural images. So yes, from the point of view of literature, how they become a point of become an intervention. In terms of how they are radically different from.

The other writers who were writing before.

Yeah, go ahead, please.

Yeah. Hmm. Yes, please.

Thank you, Professor. Can you share specific examples or texts that illustrate these literary interventions? How do these works demonstrate a radical departure in narrative, voice, or themes compared to earlier women's writing?

Uh, so yeah, uh, uh, as, uh, I have uh, cited in my literature, uh, like thesis as well, how writings by women post till 1960s. How like, let's say from the 1940s or 50s, we see writers emerging from a particular class or a, a cast. However, after the 1960s, we see women emerging from different social location. For instance, there are writers like Sivakami and Bama. Like Sivakami, for instance, is often credited.

As the first Dalit Tamil Dalit women writer and and also Bama who was who is a radical Dalit writer who established A niche for herself which was absent during before in the prior to 1960s.

And I also, yes, and I also would like to add, just hold on a bit, Amma.

Of course, Professor. Take your time.

Yes, sorry. Like actually my cat ran inside my room. Sorry. So yeah, I would also like to add that in. As we can see in the 1960s was 1960s, women started exploring about their bodies in literature, which was absent prior to 1960s. We talked about women talking about sexuality, we talk, we see women talking about the various. Phases that they go through like Mumbai for instance, she talks about.

The pain of postpartum. What is this?

Menopause, for instance, in her writing so we don't find all these things and even Salma for instance, talk about.

Salma, for instance, talk about the operation of sexuality in women, particularly pertaining to Muslim households. So all these types of writing is absolutely absent in in writings prior to 1960s.

Thank you, Professor, for elaborating. You've drawn an important distinction here: how post-1960s women's literature not only diversified in terms of social locations but also began to dismantle taboos around female embodiment and sexuality. Writers like Mumbai and Salma introduced themes such as postpartum struggles, menopause, and the oppression of sexuality—topics that had been largely silenced before. In this light, how do you interpret the reception of such works among their contemporary readership? Did these narratives provoke broad cultural shifts or resistance at the time?

Yeah, that's a very interesting question. I would like to elaborate on it. So when these writer, particularly when Shivakami wrote, she was, she was ostracized and she was critiqued as an outsider because she talked about or exposed the idea of Dalit patriarchy and moving on.

To writers like like, especially if this happened with poets like Salma Kutti, Revathi, Malathi, Maitri.

Uh, and uh, uh, Sukhir Tarani, all these 4 writers works where uh, publicly disowned and it all their works where uh, uh, what you say they, they, they have been a huge protest happened especially in the after the 1990s and early 2000s and their works have been castigated and they received death threats for writing explicitly about. Bodies, whereas men have been writing about it.

And she like women writers have told, like writers like Sandley and well, they describe women's body. It is considered as a part of the norm. Whereas when women, when women start exercising their agency, it becomes a problem. It it became a, a public, it became a, a point of public rage.

That's

Thank you, Professor. Your points emphasize the double standards in the reception of literary works addressing women's bodies. While male writers, like Sandilyan, could depict women's bodies without much controversy, women exercising agency in writing about their own bodies—such as Salma Kutti, Revathi, Malathi Maitri, and Sukirtharani—faced severe backlash, protests, and even death threats. How would you interpret this discrepancy in societal and cultural terms? Do you view this resistance as a reflection of deeper systemic anxieties about women reclaiming their narratives, or as a broader fear of challenging patriarchal norms?

Yeah, my article on Sivakami's work is published in Intervention, the Journal of International Postcard. Earlier studies where I have termed where I have introduced this term called ricochet behavior in men like especially in counts in the context of masculine anxiety when men see. I I have talked in the context of Shivakami's novels. So when when particularly for instance, there is a character called Kathamuthu where he sees.

But his wives are bonding, and when there is agency among women, that unsettles men and that reflects their anxiety, and that anxiety is masked or couched by showcasing external showcasing.

This masculine aggression comes as a form as a result of their anxiety as pent up frustration because they're because of their inability to accept female agency.

Violence, showcasing or putting.

As women have always been at the receiving end of.

Of patriarchy.

Yes, of course. Like if you ask me in the context of uh, Tamil society, as I have exploded in my research, you can see the public public outrage as a result of the publication of Salma Sivakami, Sukhir Sarani and Kuti Revathi's work where we see male poets burning their copies of women's poets. It's itself is an example to show their masculine anxiety.

Thank you for sharing this, Professor. Your concept of "ricochet behavior" in the context of masculine anxiety is fascinating, particularly as it applies to Sivakami's novels. The character of Kathamuthu illustrates this vividly: female agency, such as his wives' bonding, becomes a catalyst for his anxiety, which he then masks with aggression—clearly an external projection of internal turmoil. How do you see this concept of ricochet behavior being applicable to broader literature or cultural discourses? Does it provide a lens to interpret similar patterns across other works or in societal structures at large?

Indeed, Professor, the reaction you describe—male poets resorting to burning copies of women’s works—serves as a stark example of this masculine anxiety manifesting in a collective symbolic act of rejection and dominance. This aligns directly with your concept of “ricochet behavior,” where the challenge posed by female agency in literature triggers externalized aggression rooted in deeper societal insecurities. How do you think this dynamic has evolved over time in Tamil society? Do you believe there has been a shift in the reception of such works, or do these patterns largely persist?

I think the shift is right now. I think we see like as I said, we see women writers in like let's say we have been talking about 19 writing, like let's talk about Sangham literature where we see women.

Like Andal, like poets like Andal, where poets like Karakal Amir, we see them exploring the aspects of sexuality in terms of literature and as it progresses, we see let's come to.

The early the late 18th and early 19th century where we have women writers often confining themselves to themes such as domesticity, such as.

Maybe household and marital relationship and how it pertains to the larger picture of a family and and moving on to the coming as I I've already talked about my research. I mean after post 1960s like.

Women's agency to accept women's work and also to celebrate, not just accept, to celebrate such progressive portrayals of women.

Thank you, Professor. Your analysis offers a compelling narrative arc—from the exploration of women’s agency and sexuality in Sangam literature, as exemplified by poets like Andal and Karaikkal Ammaiyar, to the domestically confined themes of the 18th and 19th centuries, and finally, to the post-1960s and contemporary periods, where women’s explorations of diverse themes, including agency and identity, are not only accepted but celebrated. In light of this positive shift, do you believe there are any particular areas in literature where societal acceptance still lags or where challenges remain for women writers in Tamil society?

Uh, till right now, I can say that, uh, women, uh, writers, like maybe there's a particular area when we don't get much about, uh, a lot other area that reminds, you know, and under studied, maybe I would say how women, the idea of women solidarity, the idea of how. Female friendship emerge across various medium. That is a thing that that is one particular aspect that I think is under represented in literature.

Uh, where women and that needs attention because that solidarity brings them brings eventually agency. And that is a conscious rising that is essential for a society to improve and bring better, you know, dynamics in society that brings that also ensures gender, gender equality in society. So it is essential to talk about females solidarity as well. And apart from that, I also want to highlight this idea of what. Bama brings in her works that is called Dalit humanism. Where?

We see as how characters as we can see Dalit characters embracing apart from humans, it becomes posthuman embracing animals, plants as a part of their life and not exclude them. So it becomes opposed humanist humanistic idea and it becomes anthropocentric and that is essential. It is essential we focalise on that aspect so that it becomes it brings an inclusive society.

Thank you, Professor. You've raised two critical and underexplored facets of literary focus—women's solidarity and Dalit humanism. The lack of representation of female friendship and solidarity in literature is indeed striking, and as you noted, this solidarity fosters agency and has the potential to promote societal transformation and gender equality. Similarly, your point about Dalit humanism, as articulated through Bama’s works, is profound. The inclusion of animals, plants, and the marginalized within a posthumanist framework challenges anthropocentrism and fosters an inclusive worldview, crucial for reshaping societal dynamics. Do you believe these themes—female solidarity and Dalit humanism—are beginning to receive more attention in critical literary discourse, or do they still remain peripheral in most analyses?

I would say they're emerging. I won't say they are at the periphery. They are emerging and they have a potential to, uh, reconceptualize how you, the very idea of, uh, human is uh, conceived and they have a potential to unleash.

Let's say unleash more critical ideas that might, you know, reconfigure society in more progressive ways. And I won't say they are at periphery. I would say they're at the incipient.

Stages where they're at 2, maybe they're starting to emerge and maybe I hope, I have this hope that they will emerge eventually and they have started already.

And I also want to mention like as I talk about post humanism, I have, I can cite 2 examples or three, for instance, like 3 examples. For instance, the image of flora and fauna in Bama's works and also in the critically acclaimed director Amari Silva. Of course, like it digresses it, it digresses from literary studies to movie. But I want to. Critique. Conceptually they belong to the same category, so.

I have to mention that. And apart from that, I can also mention the idea of posthumanism as explored in Amber's short stories also. So, uh, they are at the starting stage and they have the potential to, as I said, uh, refigure, reconceptualize, uh, the way the society works.

Thank you, Professor. Your insights elucidate the emerging prominence and transformative potential of these themes. The examples you’ve cited—such as Bama’s integration of flora and fauna in her narratives, the conceptual overlap in Amari Silva’s films, and the exploration of posthumanism in Ambai’s short stories—further affirm the growing relevance of these ideas in reshaping societal and literary paradigms. Given their current incipient stage, what role do you believe academics and educators like yourself can play in fostering critical engagement with these themes to ensure their continued growth and influence?

Yes.

Through humanities we see how how humanities works is a bridge between the, the struggles of common people and entrepreneurs and business and engineering. So I, I think it is, I think it is expected or essential that humanity like and and also it does of course, humanities pay attention to the details of the everyday routine, the details.

Yeah. Oh, so I can. It's the very idea of humanities comes comes here because.

Of how you know how you know our relations change across various for instance, as we can see for a critic called Karen Barrett through her theory of interaction says how matter becomes like how the interaction between human and the human produces.

Bringing this concept and it is I believe it is the duty of professors in humanities to bridge this gap to to as it takes 2 wider audience and it I don't think like professors from humanities like does this job better than other fields of knowledge.

Brings identity, so it is essential we foreground humanities to bring in this ideology.

Thank you, Professor. Your point about the centrality of the humanities as a bridge—between the struggles of common people, broader societal structures, and other fields like entrepreneurship, business, and engineering—is compelling. By attending to everyday details and evolving relational dynamics, the humanities indeed provide critical tools for understanding and reshaping identity, as articulated, for instance, through Karen Barad's theory of interaction, which you mentioned. Your emphasis on the role of humanities professors in disseminating these ideas to wider audiences strikes at the heart of fostering inclusive and transformative discourse. Do you see any specific strategies or methodologies that should be adopted in teaching and academic discourse to amplify the impact of these inclusive and emergent concepts?

Sorry to interrupt, we're down to the last 5 minutes.

So I would say introducing courses or, uh, uh, humanities post, uh, particularly posthumanism across disciplines is one way to achieve this, uh, achieve, achieve this goal. I would say. So introduce, not limit humanities, the idea of humanism or post humanism and the idea of ethics that becomes more essential when it comes to, uh, you know, when it comes to, uh, society. So I think and technology, for instance.

Sense so I would say humanities uh uh, works as a.

As a, as a link, uh, and it works as a, uh, portfolio of, uh, ethics, uh, as a connector, it works between technology and humanity and, and essential needs and also.

Post Humanism also said so. It is essential to forum ethics, technology, Post Humanism not just in literary classes, but across disciplines, across engineering, management.

So that is that becomes essential and that is one way to achieve this.

Thank you, Professor. Introducing courses and frameworks that integrate ethics, technology, and posthumanism across disciplines—beyond just literary studies—is indeed a vital step toward fostering a more inclusive and progressive educational environment. As you pointed out, the humanities serve as a vital connector, providing critical ethical perspectives that can inform not only technological advancements but also broader societal dynamics. Your suggestion to embed these themes in fields like engineering and management highlights the interdisciplinary potential of the humanities. Do you think collaborative teaching methods, where educators from multiple disciplines come together, might further enhance this integration and amplify its effectiveness?

Definitely, that is what I've also said. And I also as I was preparing for this interview, I also saw that VIP interview has this method called Caltech where in where it integrates technology as a form of pedagogy. So I think it's interesting that we introduce technology particularly in humanities classes and take humanities in technological classes to bring this to bring this progressive confluence that will lead to.

More inclusive and, you know, caring society that is all the more essential today.

I guess, uh, that's all. Like I've answered. I hope I have answered all your questions.

Professor, that is a wonderfully articulated vision. The idea of leveraging technology, as you mentioned in Caltech's approach, to enrich humanities pedagogy—and conversely, embedding humanities principles into technological disciplines—offers immense potential for fostering a more inclusive and ethically conscious society. This progressive confluence, as you eloquently described, can bridge divides and cultivate an environment of mutual understanding and care, something increasingly essential in our interconnected world. Thank you for sharing such thoughtful insights. Before we conclude, is there anything specific you’d like to add or discuss further?

Yes, you’ve provided thoughtful and insightful answers, Professor. Thank you for sharing your deep expertise and perspectives. If there’s nothing else you’d like to add, shall we conclude the interview?

Yeah, sure.