Connect with us

Features

Remembering Sumithra

Published

on

By Uditha Devapriya

One of the defining auteurs of Sri Lankan cinema, Sumitra Peries made an indelible and enduring contribution to women’s filmmaking in South Asia.Satyajit Ray once reportedly called Lester James Peries, the Sri Lankan film director who passed away at the age of 99 in April 2018, his “only relation east of Suez.” Lester’s wife Sumitra, who was his closest colleague, and who passed away on 19 January 2023 at the age of 87, had her first encounter with Ray in Mexico in 1963.

By that point, Sumitra had returned from her studies in England and earned a reputation as an assistant director and editor. She recalled that Ray had been “kind and courteous”, but a little disdainful of her profession. When she told him of what she did, the Indian director had been somewhat unimpressed, comparing her work to that of a cutter. Temperamentally candid, Sumitra had fired back, “Well, I’m glad I’m not just a cutter!”

Sumitra Peries did not remain a cutter for long. After working on her husband’s films, she made her directorial debut in 1978 with Gehenu Lamayi (Girls). The film established the themes that would preoccupy her for the rest of her career: the rift between rich and poor, the torments of adolescent love, and most significantly, the agony of being a woman in Sri Lanka and in South Asia. Sumitra’s work thus clearly stands out in the pantheon of regional cinema, in ways that critics have so far not done justice to.

Sri Lanka has long been orientalised for its sandy beaches and its cultural sites. In the first half of the 20th century, the colonial government helped establish a local cinema in the capital, Colombo. The first Sri Lankan film, Kadawunu Poronduwa (Broken Promise), came out in 1947, a year before the country obtained its independence.From its inception, however, local films were derided as derivative, because they were shot abroad and were felt to be too artificial, contrived, and unauthentic.

Seeking a better and more grounded cinema, a group of Westernised, urban middle-class artistes moved into this void. The most prominent of them was Lester James Peries, who had worked for some time at the official propaganda arm of the Sri Lankan government, the Government Film Unit (GFU), and who had imbibed the aesthetics of Italian neo-realism and the British documentary. Peries’s first film, Rekava (1956), came out around the same time that Satyajit Ray’s Pather Panchali did in India. Like Ray’s film, it was lukewarmly received by local critics, but went on to establish the country on the world map.

Lindsay Anderson, far left, and Sumitra, far right

Sumitra Peries subsequently established herself in this circle, but she came from a very different background. Born Sumitra Gunawardena on 24 March 1935, she hailed from a family of affluent arrack distillers on her mother’s side and a family of radical, socialist, and anti-imperialist activists on her father’s. Her two paternal uncles, Philip and Robert, had been actively involved in the struggle against British colonialism: a far cry from the middle-class, Westernised, and Anglicised milieu of her husband.

Born in the southwestern village of Payagala, Sumitra was raised in Avissawella, located roughly 30 miles from Colombo. Initially she was educated at the local school, St Mary’s College, where she mingled with her social peers as well as more deprived sections of her village. Though not part of an urban elite, her mother, Harriet Wickramasinghe, moved around in important circles, “playing tennis with her sari on.” In contrast to her two uncles, her father, Henry, adjusted to his wife’s milieu, “practising as a proctor.”

Sumitra’s earliest influence was her mother. Through a distillery that her own mother, or Sumitra’s grandmother, had set up, “she took responsibility for the family.” Sumitra’s father, on the other hand, “sought and went after less practical pursuits.”

Their social status did not limit their daughter’s social interactions. “We lived in the most basic of settings,” she remembered. “No electricity, no proper running water, certainly no attached bathrooms. Only through a small radio did we get to know of what was happening in the outside world. As such I would get out and meet other people, including the sons and daughters of estate workers. I revelled in these encounters.”

Colombo lay a world away from all this. When Sumitra turned 13, a month after Sri Lanka gained independence from Great Britain, her family decided to send her there to study. Her new home was to be at Gower Street, in Colombo 4. It was conveniently located right next to her new school, Visakha Vidyalaya, the island’s leading Buddhist girls’ school. “I took time to adjust to my new setting, but eventually got used to life in Colombo.”

Among her siblings, Sumitra was closest to her elder brother, Gamini or “Kuru.” When their mother died two years after they shifted to Colombo, he entered a long period of depression. “My brother was a very temperamental man. He left everything to us and left the country. We did not know where he was, or whether he planned to return.”

A few years later, he got in touch with Sumitra: he was in Malta, and he wanted her to join him. Though she was engaged with her higher studies, she heeded his call. She packed her belongings and soon boarded a P&O Liner. “I was not quite 21.”

Editing

At Malta, Sumitra joined her brother and a bohemian coterie of friends. Together they sailed across the Mediterranean, dropping anchor in the French Riviera. At Saint-Tropez near the Riviera, Sumitra spotted Brigitte Bardot and Roger Vadim filming And God Created Woman (1956). It was the first time she had seen a film being made.

By then she was at a loss: “I badly wanted to be a psychiatrist. My brother felt it would be best if I went to Switzerland, to study at the Jung Institute.”

Just as Sumitra was about to embark on her higher education, however, Gamini decided to return to Sri Lanka. “This led to a series of misadventures that ended in Paris. There I had a vague desire to settle in the Left Bank.” Fate, however, had other plans for her.

Sri Lanka had just established a Legation in Paris. The country’s Envoy, Vernon Mendis, got in touch with Sumitra and boarded her at his official residence. It was here, at the Legation, that she met Lester James Peries. “He told me to go to England and study film. He felt I was wasting my talents in Paris. Since I had nothing to lose, I heeded his advice.”

Sumitra enrolled herself at the London School of Film Technique (LSFT) in Brixton, the sole female in a class of white and middle-class males.

During her years at the LSFT, she grew very close to the filmmaker Lindsay Anderson, who taught her class. Lindsay had already met Lester a few years before. Needless to say, he and Sumitra became very good friends. Their association grew so strong that in her later visits to England, “we would meet, and he would cook for me.”

Sumitra successfully completed her studies. But finding a job was challenging. “Those days, if you weren’t a member of a union, it was not easy to enter the industry.”

Armed with her qualification, she knocked on the doors of Elizabeth Mai-Harris, one of Britain’s leading subtitling firms. “I passionately argued my case. Fortunately, they believed in me and took me in. My fluency in French may have helped.”

Sometime later, though, she encountered another problem: “I started growing homesick.” Her elder brother ordered her to return. She thus came back home.Sumitra then found work as an assistant to Lester Peries, onboard his film Sandesaya (The Message, 1960). “I was the sole female crew member. We were shooting a world away from Colombo. A tough ordeal for any woman, but I grew to enjoy it.”

She also grew close to Lester. Four years later, in 1964, she married him.

Making full use of her editing skills, Sumitra wound up as her husband’s closest aide. She worked on all his films in the 1960s: Gamperaliya (1963), Delovak Athara (1966), Ran Salu (1967), Golu Hadawatha (1968), and Akkara Paha (1969).

Gehenu Lamai (Girls, 1978)

These films won awards and accolades abroad: Gamperaliya secured the Golden Peacock or the Best Film Award at the 3rd Indian International Film Festival and the Golden Head of Palenque at the Mexico Film Festival, while Ran Salu won the Gandhi Award at New Delhi and was telecast on Raidió Teilifís Éireann, Ireland.

Recalling her years as an editor, she once told me, “What fascinated me during these years was the mise-en-scène. To achieve the right cut is harder than you think. You need to train your eyes and you need to make the decision then and there.” Contrary to what Satyajit Ray may have felt, then, her job was hardly that of a mere cutter.

After a stint in France and a few idle years, Sumitra carved her path as director with Gehenu Lamai in 1978. Based on a popular novel, it became an instant success wherever it went: the British press in particular loved it, with David Robinson of The Times lauding it for its “holistic feminine sensibility.”

Its success emboldened her to make nine more films: Ganga Addara (By the Bank of the River, 1980), Yahalu Yeheli (Friends, 1982), Maya (1984), Sagara Jalaya Madi Handuwa Oba Sanda (A Letter Written in the Sand, 1988), Loku Duwa (The Eldest Daughter, 1994), Duwata Mawaka Misa (Mother Alone, 1997), Sakman Maluwa (The Pleasure Garden, 2003), Yahaluwo (Friends, 2007) and Vaishnavee (The Goddess, 2018).

Apart from her work in film, Sumitra also worked in television, having gained six months’ work experience at the French Radio and Television Institute (ORTF) in Paris in 1971. She served as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to France and Spain from 1995 to 1998, and did her part to secure international goodwill for the country at a time of rising ethnic tensions and separatist conflict.

With Yahaluwo and Vaishnavee behind her, she was toying with several ideas, as late as 2022, for her next venture. Humble to a fault, she remained open to outsiders, in particular young, aspiring directors who would constantly seek her advice.

Sumitra’s passing, given all this, signifies an end and a passing of an era. Linked through her husband to some of the most exciting strides in the arts of post-independence Sri Lanka, she nevertheless carved her own path. Indeed, as Vilasnee Tampoe-Hautin rightly argues in her biography, Sumitra Peries: Sri Lankan Filmmaker, while she is considered a mere appendage to her husband’s work, her career was distinct on its own right.

Moreover, unlike South Asian women filmmakers from her time – including Fatma Begum, Parveen Rizvi, Shamin Ara, Kohinoor Akhter, and Aparna Sen – she did not come to the director’s chair as an actress. In that sense Sumitra, with her education in the West, was a definitive precursor to the likes of Mira Nair and Deepa Mehta. This point has not yet been appreciated or acknowledged by historians of the regional cinema.

A product of a rural upper middle-class, Sumitra Peries remained intimately attached to her people, in particular women. Her films, which dwell considerably on their agonies and their torments, are in that sense an enduring testament, not just to her craft, but also to a bygone era in filmmaking – both in Sri Lanka and in South Asia.

Uditha Devapriya is a writer, researcher, and analyst based in Sri Lanka who contributes to a number of publications on topics such as history, art and culture, politics, and foreign policy. He can be reached at udakdev1@gmail.com.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Revolt in the Temple: Poverty as Structural Control

Published

on

The underlying issue in Anuradhapura is a struggle between a few families who, for years, have waged a quiet cold war over control of the Udamaluwa. Similar situations exist in Mihintale as well. These places, among others, are treated as treasures of Buddhism but, in practice, function as tightly controlled economic centres. The same pattern repeats in Kandy around the Temple of the Sacred Tooth Relic and in Kataragama at the shrine of God Kataragama. Variations of it exist across religious spaces of Islam, Catholicism, and Hinduism too, where institutional authority becomes indistinguishable from localised power networks. What is presented as sacred order often operates as inherited control.

It is indeed devastating to see situations where parents have no alternative but to expose their children to predators in robes for survival. This has nothing to do with religion itself, but with human pathology in the context of survival. These are the questions that demand answers, not superficial responses that treat symptoms while ignoring the conditions that produce them. What is more shocking and disturbing is not the tragedy itself, but the reactions to it. Social media has overwhelmed us, not towards understanding, but towards a fragmented cognitive state with no exit route.

A friend of mine in Nairobi used to keep all his electronic devices at home and go into the forest once a month, spending days there before returning. He called it “detoxification”, but in reality it was an escape from a system that no longer allows uninterrupted thought. Daily life is now saturated with unnecessary content, and attention itself has become a commodity extracted, processed, and sold back to us. This is where we have become unable to understand what really drives certain tragedies we endlessly react to, while remaining blind to the systems that quietly manufacture them.

Multi-dimensional poverty

Poverty is structural, poverty is political, and poverty is functional; it is a tool and a manoeuvring force of power. The question is no longer whether poverty exists, but who benefits from its persistence, and who is forced to survive within it. From education to medicine to basic food supply chains, countries like Sri Lanka are not simply mismanaged; they are structurally captured by a small number of actors who remain stable regardless of who is formally in power. Small-scale enterprises and NGO circuits that circulate foreign funding to “solve structural issues” often operate as hollow administrative performances, producing reports rather than transformation.

Poverty is not merely the absence of money. It is the absence of bandwidth, absence of protection, absence of time, and absence of cognitive stability. As Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir state, “Scarcity captures the mind. Just as the starving subjects had food on their mind, when we experience scarcity of any kind, we become absorbed by it.” This is a description of how human cognition is structurally reorganized under constraint. Scarcity does not sit outside the person; it occupies them.

They also state, “Scarcity leads us to borrow and pushes us deeper into scarcity.” That is the mechanism that must be confronted without euphemism. Poverty is not only deprivation; it is a self-reinforcing trap in which survival decisions generate the next layer of crisis. Once a society crosses a certain threshold of scarcity, it stops producing long-term reasoning as a default condition. It produces short-term survival logic, often mistaken by outsiders for irrationality.

It is precisely here that public discourse becomes intellectually dishonest. Everything is translated into moral language because moral language is easier than structural analysis. But morality without structure becomes theatre. It produces outrage, not understanding, and repetition, not reform.

It is indeed brutal when an individual wearing religious insignia—whether robe, symbol, or institutional identity—is accused of acts that fundamentally contradict the moral authority attached to that position. It is equally brutal when institutions that depend entirely on trust begin to function as shields rather than safeguards. But the deeper question is not shock. The deeper question is what kind of social condition produces families who see placement within such institutions not only as devotion, but as a survival strategy under constraint.

Ethical decision-making

That is where the argument collapses into its most uncomfortable form. Poverty does not produce ethical decision-making environments. It produces constrained optimization under pressure. When food insecurity, debt, and social instability converge, institutional spaces that appear stable become transactional destinations for survival rather than moral choices. To interpret this as purely cultural failure is to deliberately ignore the structural compression of options.

Mullainathan and Shafir describe this clearly: “Instead of saying that scarcity ‘focuses,’ we could just as easily say that scarcity causes us to tunnel: to focus single-mindedly on managing the scarcity at hand.” That tunnelling effect is not abstract. It is visible wherever long-term planning collapses under immediate pressure. Systems then misread this as irresponsibility, when it is in fact cognitive overload produced by structure.

What is rarely acknowledged is how deeply this extends into governance itself. Institutions increasingly operate as if they are managing rational, unconstrained individuals. In reality, they are interacting with populations whose cognitive bandwidth is already structurally taxed. The result is policy failure interpreted as public non-compliance, enforcement interpreted as moral correction, and reform interpreted as communication failure rather than design failure.

Social media has intensified this distortion. It does not merely spread information; it destroys sequencing. Structural problems require temporal depth. Social media removes that depth and replaces it with instantaneous judgment. Every event becomes a surface object, detached from causality. The outcome is a society permanently reacting and never diagnosing.

Poverty, in this environment, becomes invisible in its real form. It is not seen as a continuous structural condition but as episodic failure. A scandal appears, is consumed, and disappears. Another replaces it. Nothing accumulates into understanding because attention itself is exhausted before synthesis can occur.

Modern Condition

The modern condition reflects a reversal of earlier social organization, where human relationships are embedded within abstract systems of finance, law, and administration that often fail to recognize the lived constraints of those they govern. In this disembedded state, institutions increasingly misinterpret human behaviour as their capacity for structural understanding weakens. At the same time, attempts to resolve systemic failures through expanding administrative complexity produce diminishing returns: more regulation, oversight, and reporting generate less coherence. Over time, institutions shift from functional effectiveness to symbolic performance, maintaining the appearance of control rather than achieving it.

This is why public outrage repeatedly fails to translate into structural change. Outrage is not a tool of reconstruction. It is a signal of system fatigue. It circulates, intensifies, and dissipates without altering the underlying architecture. Meanwhile, the conditions that produce repetition remain intact.

The most persistent illusion is that these are separate problems: poverty here, institutional misuse there, media distortion elsewhere. They are not separate. They are expressions of a single condition in which scarcity, complexity, symbolic authority, and fragmented enforcement interact without coordination. The system does not fail in one place; it fails in the gaps between these layers.

Symbolic systems

What makes this condition more severe is that symbolic systems continue to operate at full strength even when structural systems degrade. Religious identity remains powerful. Political rhetoric remains strong. Cultural symbolism remains intact. But enforcement capacity, institutional coherence, and social trust degrade beneath them. That gap is where instability grows. Until that gap is addressed at the level of structure rather than sentiment, repetition remains inevitable. New scandals will emerge, new interpretations will circulate, and new cycles of outrage will follow. Nothing resolves because nothing is being reconstructed beneath the surface of reaction.

This is no longer repairable through adjustment or rhetoric. It is a form of decay that persists until it exhausts itself, because the mechanisms meant to correct it are now part of the same failure. It continues until rupture, not reform. At that point, instability ceases to be episodic and becomes structural. Pressure will accumulate into breakdown, and what follows will not be managed transition but forced reversal. The responsibility lies with those who govern these institutions to prevent that trajectory, not through language, but through change. The drama is ending; farce is over; what we are witnessing is tragedy unfolding with unprecedented consequences.

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa

Continue Reading

Features

Are threats to Buddha Sasana external or from within?

Published

on

As Sri Lanka celebrates the birth, Enlightenment and the Parinibbana of the Buddha, almost a month after the rest of the Buddhist-world did so, there is widespread discussion about threats to Buddha Sasana provoked by some recent incidents. Regarding the views expressed about postponing Vesak celebrations in my article ‘May Day and postponement Vesak 2026’ (The Island, 25 May), my very good friend Dr Upali Abeysiri has sent me the following comments: “The Mahanayakas have a good reason to postpone Vesak. The dawning of the full moon has to be on the same constellation (nekatha) as when the Buddha was born and attained enlightenment. Although Adhi Poya is reckoned as the second full moon arising in the same calendar month, this is supposed to be an odd exception.” Though it would have been ideal if a consensus could have been reached prior to the split of celebrations, perhaps, it does not matter very much as celebrations occur on a symbolic rather than an actual date, there being no historical or archaeological evidence confirming exact dates.

Whilst there are no direct threats to Buddha Dhamma, as the expanding horizons of science continue to confirm the fundamentals of Buddha Dhamma, there is no doubt whatsoever that there are threats to Buddha Sasana. However, these threats become important as the Buddha Sasana performs the pivotal role in protecting and propagating the Dhamma and, hence, become an indirect threat to Dhamma itself. Therefore, it should be the concern of all Buddhists and it is in this spirit I am making some comments which some may interpret as disrespectful to the Maha Sangha. I can reassure that my intentions are entirely directed towards the preservation of the Buddha Dhamma and Sasana. Though the Buddha proclaimed that the Sasana consists of Bhikkhu, Bhikkhuni, Upasaka and Upasika, for all practical purposes Sasana had been led by Bhikkhus, often at the expense of others.

There is hardly any doubt that there are external forces at play in Sri Lanka and even some Buddhists seem to object to Sri Lanka being called a Buddhist country. Interestingly, no one seems to object to countries like the UK and the USA being called Christian counties. I

There is no registration or baptism in Buddhism and there are no rewards for Buddhists for conversions. As I pointed out in a previous article, ‘How does the Buddha differ’ (The Island, 1 May) unlike most other religions, Buddhism is not a ‘high-demand’ religion, nor ‘law-based’ religion and is not exclusivist. Perhaps, it is this liberalism, pacifism and gentleness, which are the real strengths, that are being exploited as weaknesses by others.

There will always be external threats and the Buddha too faced many during his lifetime. Before addressing those, is it not more important to address the threats within? One of the most important problems seems to be the breakdown of discipline. Bhikkhus are bound by Vinaya rules, laid down by the Buddha and some recent incidents highlight total deviations. Though there were many previous incidents like unsubstantiated claims of Arahanthood, Bhikkhus attacking each other on YouTube and Bhikkhus conducting YouTube channels, not for the propagation of the Dhamma but for the accumulation of rupees, attention was focused after the detection of 22 young monks carrying narcotic drugs.

Though many commentators were quick to condemn the Sangha on this account, we need to go deeper. Narcotic menace has become a huge problem in Sri Lanka and it looks as if the drug lords would resort to anything to achieve their objectives. Though it looks as if some gullible young monks had been duped by drug lords, we need to question why it was possible. Is it due to the lack of supervision of these novices by their seniors that allowed them to accept a request in a WhatsApp group? Should there be checks and balances on foreign travel by Bhikkhus?

What shocked Buddhists was what followed next; the arrest of the Nayaka of Atamasthana for allegedly having sex with a minor. Anuradhapura was our first capital and Sri Maha Bodhi is the longest surviving authenticated tree in the world. Ruwanweliseya and Jetawanaramaya were among the ten tallest man-made structures in the ancient world, Jetawanaramaya still holding the Guiness record for the largest stupa in the world. Cyberspace is full of theories. Whilst some have condemned the Nayaka Thero even before the conclusion of inquiries whilst others claim that this was a coup by another Nayaka Thera in an attempt of succession.

I was intrigued, reading in a Sri Lankan newspaper about the 80th birthday celebrations of a Nayaka priest, who was convicted in London in 2012 of historical child sex abuse and sentenced to seven years in prison. I remember the case very well as he was the head of the Vihara, we had our first contact on relocating to the UK. I also remember his devotees, who believed that he was wrongly accused, collecting over £50,000 for an appeal. In spite of being represented by one of the top Barristers in the UK, the conviction was upheld but the jail-term was reduced by a year. His name is still on the sex-offenders register in the UK and he is permanently prevented from association with children. One can argue that as he has served the sentence and not reoffended, this should not be held against him but what baffled me is that he is still being referred to as the Chief Sangha Nayaka. Should a person on the sex-offenders register be the Chief Sangha Nayaka?

It is high time we put our own house in order before fighting the external enemies. It is reported that the former president CBK has written to the Mahanayakas requesting urgent reform and we should be obliged to her for taking the lead.

There are many aspects that need urgent reform, the first being removal of caste barriers practiced by some Nikayas, which is the greatest insult to the Buddha who promoted equality. The second is the active encouragement of Bhikkhuni Sasana which has not happened in spite of the landmark ruling by the supreme court. The third is the establishment of proper disciplinary processes under a single Adhikarana Sangha Nayaka with powers and support than allowing the government to take over the control of even non-criminal Vinaya matters.

There are many other issues that need settlement like the controversy of the land of Buddha’s birth which seems to linger on. An expert committee should hear all evidence and settle this issue once and for all.

As I have pointed out on many occasions in these columns, it is high time a Dhamma Sangayana was held, as the last one was 70 years ago. Ideally, it should be different with active participation of lay experts as well. It is the duty of us Buddhists to ensure that the words of wisdom of the Buddha continue to enlighten generations to come.

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Continue Reading

Features

Vijaya Kumar: Academic, Activist & Genial Fellow-Traveller

Published

on

Professor Vijaya Kumar

The University of Ceylon, Peradeniya, was in our time, a less-crowded residential university, where everybody knew everybody else or at least knew of everybody else.

I knew of Emeritus Professor Vijaya Kumar of the Department of Chemistry at Peradeniya, or Kumar, as we referred to him fondly, before I got to know him. His dear wife Savitri, also a member of the academic staff of the Department of Chemistry, was nicknamed Kumee, by some of their students (of which vintage is unknown to me) and the duo were thereafter referred to affectionately as Kumar and Kumee.

The Faculty of Science became a regular haunt of mine as I would go there in the company of my batchmates to attend lectures on Basic Mathematics given by Professor Maheswaran, as it was a requirement for our General Arts Qualifying Examinations. I would also go there to listen to some excellent talks under a programme that was held in the auditorium of the Science Faculty referred to as “Popular Science Gossip”. The “gossip” at these talks were not confined solely to science but were broad enough to include Literature, History and other branches of knowledge as well. I would often spot Kumar in the audience at these talks or bump into him in the corridors of the Science Faculty. But I got to know him personally only after he became the Warden of Arunachalam, my hall of residence, during my undergraduate years initially, and later, as a member of the academic staff of the Department of English.

Our Science Faculty undergraduate contemporaries, especially those at Arunachalam Hall and its immediate neighbour, Jayatilaka Hall, both within a stone’s throw away from the Science Faculty, shared many an anecdote about Kumar and their other lecturers. One of these anecdotes, had to do with a spectacular (motor car) driving feat of Kumar’s. Legend has it that he drove from his university bungalow-home to the Faculty of Science deploying only the reverse gear of his car! Kumar, on hearing of this, had told certain of his student friends, including some who became his colleagues later on, that this story is one of the biggest yarns he had heard in his life!

Some of his one-time younger colleagues, now in retirement like Kumar, tell me that Kumar exuded warmth and friendliness in all of his professional and administrative interactions with others in the wider university community. But there was no warmth or mercy for those who indulged in the unsavoury pastime of student ‘ragging’. He was a very strong proponent of the need to ensure to all freshers an environment free of the menace of ‘ragging’. He remained ever-vigilant during the ‘ragging’ season. There are stories of his chasing ‘raggers’ and catching them. Professor Maheswaran, who later became an intimate friend and remains so after more than half a century, was another who was fiercely opposed to ‘ragging’. I was a personal witness to Mahes chasing a ‘ragger’ up and down the stairs of the main library to nab him. Yet another of his students has noted that Kumar’s office room in the Faculty was a total mess at all times. It had tables, piled so high with books and documents that one could not easily spot Kumar at his desk. He, however, had the knack of pulling out from amidst the clutter, any document that he needed at any given time. If anybody were to volunteer to help tidy his desk, Kumar would respond firmly with “Don’t you touch my desk!”.

Kumar, like several of his colleagues in the other faculties as well, had his own eccentricities. According to information received from reliable sources, Kumar who taught Organic Chemistry used to carry his lecture notes in his shirt or trouser pocket with ‘the entire lecture condensed in point form on a half-sheet or half of a half-sheet of paper’. The way he rummaged through his sling bag filled to the brim with stuff to find an item that he needed was another ritual that amused onlookers.

Kumar, interestingly enough is a Royal-cum-Thomian product, in that he had his primary education at S.Thomas’ Prep School, Kollupitiya and the entirety of his secondary education at Royal College, which he entered in 1953. In a note written by Kumar himself, he notes that despite having had excellent teachers at Royal, his was not a notable school career. He goes on to say that “the only achievement I could boast of was my being the joint-winner of the school General Knowledge Prize”. However, he had been active in a Scout Group outside of school (1st Port of Colombo, Sea Scouts) where he “was Queen’s Scout, Patrol leader, and later, Assistant Scout Master”.

Kumar entered the Faculty of Science of the University of Ceylon in 1961 and secured from it an honours degree in Chemistry in 1965. He joined the academic staff of the Department of Chemistry in the Faculty of Science, University of Ceylon, Peradeniya in 1965 and left the following year for Magdalen College at Oxford University, from which institution he obtained his doctorate in Chemistry. His entire teaching career was at Peradeniya, where in the period 2003-2006 he served as the Dean of the Faculty of Science, a position that his late father-in-law had held a few decades earlier.

Among the other highlights of his career are: Chairman of the Industrial Technology Institute (formerly the Ceylon Institute of Scientific and Industrial Research, CISIR); Member (representing Sri Lanka) of the Geneva-based UN Commission on Science and Technology from 1999 to 2007 and its President from 2001-2003; President of the Sri Lanka Estate Workers Union from 1989 onwards; Member of the Politburo of the Lanka Sama Samaja Party from 1988 to 2014 and currently, a member of the Executive Committee of the National People’s Power (NPP).

Vijaya and Savitri Kumar are parents of daughters Shamala and Ramya, who are following in the footsteps of their parents: with the former teaching in the Department of Agricultural Economics in the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya and the latter, in the Department of Community Medicine at the University of Jaffna.

(I wish to thank the following who assisted me in the writing of this brief essay: Mr. Bandula Warnakulasuriya, Emeritus Professor Ratnayake Bandara, Professor Mahinda Wickramaratne, Professor Swarna Wimalasiri and Mr. Manik de Silva).

*Editor’s note: Prof. Vijaya Kumar, a member of the NPP’s National Executive Committee and is still active in politics turns 84 today. This article by Tissa Jayatilaka, former Executive Director of the United States – Sri Lanka Fulbright Commission for Mutual Academic Exchange, was written for an upcoming collection of essays on Kumar’s life by his friends.

(Colombo Telegraph)

By Tissa Jayatilaka

Continue Reading

Trending