Connect with us

Features

PMs official visit to Japan – she tells us “don’t get late and don’t go to a geisha house!”

Published

on

Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike reviews the honour guard with Japanese Prime Minister Takeo Miki during the welcome ceremony at the Akasaka State Guest House on November 13, 1976 in Tokyo, Japan. (Photo by The Asahi Shimbun)

“Rarely have we laughed so much” swapping stories

(Excerpted from the autobiography of MDD Pieris)

At 8 a.m. next day, November 12, 1976. the State drive to the airport commenced. We took off for Tokyo. The flying time was around three hours 45 minutes, and we arrived at 1 p.m. According to the Japanese arrangements, the Prime Minister was met by the Head of the Suite of Honour, the Chief of Protocol, Ambassador Uchida and wife, as well as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador Bernard Tilakaratna and wife. The only ceremony at the airport was a gun salute.

The formal welcoming ceremony was to be held later. We were accommodated at the luxurious and opulent Akasaka Palace Hotel, with shining marble, rich brocades and ornate furniture. Some of us were assigned very large suites of rooms. The marble floors were so shiny that walking was somewhat of a hazard. We spent a quiet afternoon, settling in and getting our bearings. At 8 p.m. the Prime Minister was interviewed on Japanese TV, for which we prepared during the early evening. Thereafter, at 9 p.m. we went to Ambassador Bernard Tilakaratna’s for a relaxed private dinner.

The following day, the very colourful, formal, official welcoming ceremony took place at 10 a.m. out in the spacious courtyard of Akasaka Palace, with long red carpets, a smartly turned out guard of honour and a band playing the National Anthems. It was quite cold outside, uncomfortably so at times. The Japanese Prime Minister Mr. Miki and Mrs. Miki were present, and so were the diplomatic corps. The ceremony was over by 10.30 a.m. At 11 a.m. we left from Tokyo railway station, by the super express “Hikari” to Nagoya. Lunch was served on the train. At Nagoya we changed trains and at 3 p.m. arrived at Toba station in rain and gloom.

By 3.15 p.m. we were at Mikimoto Pearl Island. The Prime Minister was personally taken around by Mr. and Mrs. Mikimoto. We were shown the process of culturing pearls. The oyster is first delicately opened up. A small shard of skin taken from inside the oyster and a type of round oyster shell piece is placed within. The oysters are then tied to grids, and the grids immersed in water. After a period of three years the secretions of the oyster make a pearl, which is really a natural pearl, but artificially induced. All this was very interesting. Also fascinating was to see the women pearl divers in action. They were diving in fairly heavy rain and in the cold looking for oysters.

At around 4.45 p.m. we left the island for the Shima Kanko Hotel, about one hour’s drive on a picturesque winding mountain road, with a view of numerous small islands and the Pacific ocean below. The view was obscured somewhat by the rain. At 7.45 p.m. we had dinner at the hotel with Mr. & Mrs. Mikimoto.

The next day the 14th, it was still raining heavily. At 9.20 a.m. we left by train to Kyoto, a journey of about three hours. We were accommodated at the comfortable Miyako Hotel. The afternoon was free for sight-seeing. We were taken to see a silk weaving centre; a beautiful Japanese garden neatly laid out; ponds full of beautiful multi-coloured fish; Temples; and Kyoto Palace, a one time residence of emperors. The Palace was quite spartan in appearance. There was little ostentation or opulence. Wood was the predominant building material and the inside was somewhat gloomy. The white pebbled courtyards were simple and attractive.

We got back to the hotel around 5.30 p.m. At 7.30 p.m. the Chief of Protocol, Ambassador Uchida and wife, who had accompanied us took the Prime Minister and us to an excellent restaurant where we had varieties of Japanese food. We got back at 10 p.m. and Ambassador Uchida invited Arthur Basnayake, Bernard Tilakaratna and myself to go out and have a drink at a Geisha house. He wanted us to have this cultural experience, before we left Japan. It fell to my lot to inform the Prime Minister that we were going out. “Alright, but don’t get late, and don’t go to a geisha house!” she added humorously.

Ambassador Uchida and a couple of other senior Japanese officials took us to a geisha house. We removed our shoes at the entrance, and got into a comfortable pair of slippers. The lady in-charge dressed in an elaborately patterned Kimono, stylistically done hair and heavily touched up face bowed and received us. She led us to a room with subdued lighting, tatami mats and low tables, with cushions placed on the mats around the tables. A number of elaborately made up ladies dressed in traditional silk kimonos bowed and greeted us here, and they acted as hostesses until we left a little past midnight.

We spent only about one and half hours there. But it was an experience worth having. The ladies helped us to remove our jackets, and they loosened our ties to make us comfortable. We sat on the cushions and was soon sipping sake, the Japanese rice wine, and eating some delicious food served in small quantities by our hostesses. The senior Japanese officials with us were much traveled and experienced. They spoke perfect English, and the time was spent in relating a number of humorous anecdotes and experiences by everyone, some bordering on the risque.

Seldom had we laughed so much. The anecdotes were interspersed with witty remarks and irreverent comments. In the meantime, our hostesses, who were seated by our sides, gently saw to it that we ate and drank. After about 40 minutes of this, the room lights gradually dimmed, to near darkness, and a kimono clad figure appeared with some kind of classical string musical instrument, which she played whilst singing a plaintive and haunting song. It was a well-designed break from our uproarious exchanges, and was meant to slow the tempo and afford us relaxation on a different plane.

After the song, the lights brightened again and we resumed our chatter. But it was interesting, that we took awhile to transit from serenity and song, back to our previous mode of conduct. Altogether, it was a delightful evening. We had laughed so much, that we were sweating. The food and drink were excellent, and the ladies attending to us, concerned and diligent hostesses. This whole episode exemplified an important aspect of Japanese life style at a particular level.

They work very hard and long. At the same time, their culture and their practices provide them with opportunities to completely take their mind off work and relax totally. During the entire one and half-hours of socializing, not once did anyone refer to anything official, other than to satirize or lampoon. We were not there to discuss grave issues. We were there to enjoy ourselves.

The next morning, November 15, we had to make an early start, and take the 8.05 a.m. train from Kyoto to Tokyo. The Prime Minister had a very good memory, and in the morning when we met her in the lobby of the hotel just prior to our departure for the station, she remembered to ask “So how was last night?” We replied that it was most enjoyable. “What time did you return?” was the next question. We told her. But whilst answering that question our minds were working on an answer to a possible third question, as to where we went. That question did not come, but we wondered whether we detected a twinkle in her eyes.

Kyoto to Tokyo was a three-hour journey. En route the Prime Minister discussed with us details pertaining to that afternoon’s official meeting with the Japanese Prime Minister. But before that meeting, the Prime Minister and some of us had a most important luncheon engagement. It was with Emperor Hirohito, the Empress, and other members of the Royal family and some distinguished guests. Having arrived back at Akasaka Palace Hotel at 11.20 a.m., the Prime Minister, Ambassador Bernard Tilakaratna, Mackie and I left for the Imperial Palace at 12.20 p.m. Only the Prime Minister and the Ambassador attended the audience with the Emperor.

We were ushered into a hall, where two distinguished invitees in long frock coats were already there, the Chief Justice and the Speaker of the Lower House of Parliament, (The Diet). In due course, we were all introduced to the Emperor and Empress and the other members of the Royal family who sat for lunch with us. They were Crown Prince Akihito, Princess Michiko and Prince Mikasa, and his wife. Prince Mikasa had earlier visited Sri Lanka as a special envoy during the Buddha Jayanthi Celebrations in 1956.

The other distinguished Japanese invitees besides the Chief Justice and the Speaker, were the Prime Minister Mr. Miki, the Foreign Minister and the President of the Senate. It was a formal, subdued lunch, with polite conversation in soft modulated voices.

We got back at 3 p.m. and almost immediately afterwards left for the Prime Minister’s office for talks with the Japanese Prime Minister at 3.30 p.m. The discussions, as usual covered both bilateral and international issues, and were conducted in an atmosphere of great cordiality. We were back at the hotel at 5.30 p.m. and had a short break before dressing for dinner. At 7.30 p.m. Prime Minister Miki hosted a banquet in honour of the Prime Minister at his residence.

Whilst dressing to attend this, I found to my consternation that my dress shirt had come back from the laundry, with two buttons missing and a third wobbly. The two bows that I had packed also proved to be defective. There was nothing else to be done except to prop up things with judiciously placed pins, which took time and effort, with the departure deadline approaching. I had a most uncomfortable evening, thereafter, wondering what would happen every time I bowed, in a milieu where a great deal of bowing was mandatory.

To my great relief, the evening passed without a major disaster, but with stress as a companion. I was particularly concerned about the prospect of the bow ending up in the soup with a loud plop and endangering my clothes, as well as possibly my distinguished neighbours! We got back at 10.30 p.m. and as was customary, worked with my senior colleagues on the day’s cables to Colombo, the Joint Communique and other matters. We finally, went to sleep at 1.15 a.m. after a particularly long and eventful day.

The new day, the 16th, which had already dawned was not as hectic as the previous one. There were however some important appointments. The lunch hosted by the Economic Organization of Japan gave the Prime Minister an opportunity to talk to a number of industrialists and businessmen. There followed at 4.30 p.m. an Embassy reception to meet Sri Lankans living and working in Japan. At 6.15 p.m. we were at the National Theatre and watched a part of a Kabuki play. We got back at 8 p.m. and after dinner, the senior official team got down to some extended work on a number of matters, which included an important opening statement for the Prime Minister’s press conference, the next day, refining the language and adjusting the content of the draft joint communique between the two governments; and finalizing cables to Colombo. We finished only at 2.30 a.m., which meant another day of little sleep.

Later this day November 17, there was a further round of talks between the two Prime Ministers commencing at 9.15 a.m. At this meeting, Japan pledged increased grant and project aid. The sessions concluded at 10.30 a.m. We then accompanied the Prime Minister to a 10.45 a.m. reception hosted in her honour by the Japanese Buddhist Federation. After lunch, at the hotel we accompanied the Prime Minister to the Nippon Press Centre for a 4 p.m. Press Conference. It went quite smoothly, and without any problems. We got back at 5.30 p.m. for a short rest, and then came down for the 8 p.m. formal black tie dinner hosted by the Prime Minister in honour of Prime Minister Miki and Mrs. Miki, held at the plush banqueting hall of Akasaka Palace Hotel.

This was our final day in Japan, and after dinner the Prime Minister and all of us exchanged views and attempted to sum up our experience and what had been achieved in Japan. I went back to my room afterwards, and drafted the Cabinet Paper on the entire visit to the three countries. I had made this both a practice and habit, for two main reasons. The first was my belief in the necessity for promptness. The second was the more practical issue of the load of work you were going home to.

Although acting arrangements were always made, and I had a person of the calibre of WT Jayasinghe acting for me, yet the convention and practice were that important matters, unless urgent were kept back, for the permanent incumbent to tackle. Therefore, it was also a matter of practical good sense that you covered as much ground as possible of issues related to a foreign visit, before you arrived home to an accelerated period of work. You then only had to attend to the inevitable area of the follow up on certain matters, which every visit entailed.

On the 18th, our last morning in Japan, there was heavy rain. Therefore, the formal departure ceremony which was to be in the Palace courtyard, was shifted indoors to a large hall at Akasaka Palace. The guard of honour; the band; the flags of the two countries and the distinguished invitees were all accommodated in this hall. After the arrival of Prime Minister Miki and wife, the ceremony began. The band sounded very loud indoors. At 9. 30 a.m. we left Tokyo, by the British Airways flight to Colombo via Hong Kong. On the flight, I showed the draft of the Cabinet Paper, which was rather long to the Prime Minister and obtained her approval.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Viktor Orban, Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump: The Terrible Threes of the 21st Century

Published

on

Orban (center) Trump and Netanyahu

In the autumn of 1956, Hungary staged the first uprising against the 20th century Soviet behemoth. Seventy years later, in the spring of 2026 Hungary has delivered the first electoral thrashing against 21st century right wing populism in Europe. The 1956 uprising was crushed after seven days. But the opposition scored a landslide victory in Hungary’s parliamentary election held on Sunday, April 12 and. Viktor Orban, Prime Minister since 2010 and the architect of what he proudly called “the illiberal state”, was resoundingly defeated. Orban who has been a pain in the neck for the European Union was a close ally of US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Trump even dispatched his Vice President JD Vance to Budapest to campaign for Orban. After Orban’s defeat, Trump and his MAGA followers may be having nightmares about the US midterm elections in November. Similarly, Orban’s defeat has reportedly caused “great concern in the halls of power in Jerusalem.” Netanyahu has lost his only ally in the European Union and the opposition victory in Hungary does not augur well for his own electoral prospects in the Israeli elections due in October.

Ceasefire Hopes

Trump and Netanyahu have bigger things to worry about in the Middle East and among their own political bases. Trump is going bonkers, blasphemously imitating Christ and badmouthing the Pope, launching a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz and strong arming more talks in Islamabad. Netanyahu has been forced to sit on his hands, pausing his fight against Iran while pursuing peace talks with Lebanon. The leaders and diplomats from Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey are shuttling around drumming up support for another round of talks in Islamabad and a prolonged extension of the ceasefire.

Further talks in Islamabad and potential extension of the ceasefire received a new boost by Trump’s announcement of a new 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. The background to this development appears to be Iran’s insistence on having this secondary ceasefire, and Trump insisting on ceasefire abidance by Hezbollah in return for his ordering Netanyahu to stop his brutal ‘lawn mowing’ in Lebanon. All of this might seem to augur well for a potential extension of the primary ceasefire between the US and Iran. There are also reports of the narrowing of gap between the two parties – involving a potential moratorium on Iran’s uranium enrichment, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran’s access to its frozen assets estimated to be $100 billion.

Meanwhile the IMF has released its latest World Economic Outlook with a grim forecast. “Once again, says the report, “the global economy is threatened with being thrown off the course – this time by the outbreak of war in the Middle East.” Before the war, the IMF was expected to upgrade its growth forecasts for the global economy. Now it is going to be weaker growth and higher inflation with oil price optimistically stabilizing around $100 a barrel in 2026 and $75 a barrel in 2027. In a worst case scenario, if the oil prices were to hit $110 in 2026 and $125 in 2027, growth everywhere will further weaken and inflation will go further up in countries big and small.

In a joint statement on the Middle East, the Finance Ministers of the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Spain, Norway, Republic of Ireland, Poland and New Zealand have called on the IMF and World Bank “to provide a coordinated emergency support offer for countries in need, tailored to country circumstances and drawing on the full range and flexibility of their tool kits.” They have also welcomed “advice on domestic responses that are temporary, targeted, and effective, and encourage work to identify steps needed to protect long-term growth.”

Subversion from the Right

The two men, Trump and Netanyahu, who started the war and precipitated the current crisis are not being held accountable by anyone and they are still free to do what they want and as they please. The third man, Victor Orban, who did not have anything to do with the war but extended wholehearted ideological and political support as a faithful apprentice to the two older sorcerers, has been democratically defeated. Together, they formed the terrible threes of the 21st century, spearheading a subversion from the right of the emerging liberal status quo of the post Cold War world. Orban’s defeat is a significant setback to the illiberal right, but it is not the end of it.

The three emerged in the specific historical contexts of their own polities that are both vastly different and yet share powerful ingredients that have proved to be politically potent. The broader context has been the end of the Cold War and the removal of the perceived external threat which opened up the domestic political space in the US, for locking horns over primarily cultural standpoints and climate politics. This era began with the Clinton presidency in 1992 and the election of Barack Obama 16 years later, in 2008, created the illusion of a post-racial America.

In reality, the right was able to push back – first with the younger Bush presidency (2000-2008) pursuing compassionate conservatism, and later with the foray of Trump (2016-2020) threatening to end what he called the “American Carnage.” Of the 32 years since the election of Bill Clinton, Democrats have controlled the White House for 20 years over five presidential terms (Clinton – two, Obama – two, and Biden -one), while the Republicans won three terms (Bush – two, Trump – one) spanning 12 years.

Trump has since won a second term for another four years, but already in his five+ years in office he has issued executive orders to roll back almost all of the liberal advancements in the realms of civil rights, equality, diversity and inclusion. All that the celebrated acronym DEI (Diversity, Equality and Inclusion) stands for has been executively ordered to be banished from the state, its agencies and its programs.

In Europe, the European Union became the champion and bulwark of liberalism and subsidiarity, which in turn provoked the rise of right wing populism in every member country. Brexit was the loudest manifestation against what was considered to be EU’s overreach, but after Britain’s bitter Brexit experience the populists in the European countries gave up on demanding their own exit and limited themselves to fighting the EU from their national bases.

Viktor Orban became the face and voice of anti-EU nationalists. But he and his political party, the Christian Nationalist Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance, are not the only one. Nigel Farage’s Reform UK in Britain and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally Party in France are becoming real electoral contenders, while right wing presidents have been elected in Argentina and Chile.

The rise and fall of Viktor Orban

Of the three terribles, Orban is the youngest but with the longest involvement in politics. Born in 1963, Viktor Orban became a political activist as a 15-year old high schooler, becoming secretary of a Young Communist League local. He continued his activism while studying law in Budapest, visiting Poland and writing his thesis on the Polish Solidarity movement, giving lectures in West Germany and the US as a potential future Hungarian leader, and undertaking research on European civil society at Pembroke College, Oxford.

At the age of 26, Orban gained national prominence with a speech he delivered on June 16, 1989 in Budapest’s Heroes’ Square to mark the reburial of Imre Nagy and other Hungarians killed in the 1956 uprising. Imre Nagy was the leader of the 1956 Hungarian uprising against the puppet Soviet Union outpost in Budapest.

To digress and make a local connection – the pages of Sri Lanka’s parliamentary Hansard of 1956, contain an impressive record of the political debate in Sri Lanka over the events in Hungary. The LSSP’s Colvin R de Silva eloquently led the Trotskyite prosecution of the Soviet invasion of Hungary and the suppression of its freedoms. Pieter Keuneman of the Communist Party used his wit and debating skills to defend the indefensible. GG Ponnambalam, the unrepentant anti-communist, used the opportunity to take swipes on both sides. Finally, for the government, Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranaike deployed his own oratorical skills to empathize with the uprising without condemning the USSR. The four men were Sri Lanka’s foremost verbal gladiators and they used the occasion to put on quite a display of their talents.

Back to Hungary, where Orban began his political vocation identifying himself with Imre Nagy and demanding the withdrawal of the Soviet army from Hungary and calling for free elections in that country to elect a new government. That same year in 1989, Fidesz was recognized as a political party; Orban became its leader four years later in 1993 and led the party and its allies to their first victory and formed a new government in 1998. At age 35 Orban became the second youngest Prime Minister in Hungary’s history.

During his first term, Orban started well on the economy, reducing inflation and the budget deficit, was welcomed to the White House by President George W. Bush, and led Hungary to join NATO overruling Russian objections. But the slide into authoritarianism and corruption was just as quick, including the attempt to replace the two-thirds parliamentary majority requirement by a simple majority. By the end of the term the ruling coalition disintegrated and Orban lost the 2002 election and became the leader of the opposition over the next two terms till 2010.

Orban returned to power with a two-thirds majority in 2010 and immediately introduced a new constitution that set the stage for ushering in the illiberal state. What had been previously a communist state now became a Christian state where ‘traditional values’ of gender rights, sexuality, and exclusive nationalism were constitutionally enshrined. The electoral system was changed reducing the number parliamentarians from 386 to 199 – with 103 of them directly elected and 93 assigned proportionately. Orban went on to win three more elections over 16 years – in 2014, 2018 and 2022 – each with a two-thirds majority, and used the time and power to transform Hungary into a conservative fortress in Europe.

The new constitution and its frequent amendments were used to centralize legislative and executive power, curb civil liberties, restrict freedom of speech and the media, and to weaken the constitutional court and judiciary. It was his opposition to non-white immigration that made him “the talisman of Europe’s mainstream right”. He described immigration as the West’s answer to its declining population and flatly rejected it as a solution for Hungary. Instead, he told his compatriots, “we need Hungarian children.” His ‘Orbanomics’ policies restricted abortion and encouraged family formation – forgiving student debt for female students having or adopting children, life-long tax holiday for women with four or more children, and sponsoring fixed-rate mortgages for married couples.

Orban wanted to make Hungary an “ideological center for … an international conservative movement”. Orban heaped praise on Jair Bolsonaro for making Brazil the best example of a “modern Christian democracy.” He endorsed Trump in every one of Trump’s three presidential elections, the only European leader to do so. In return, Orban has been described by US MAGA ideologue Steve Bannon as “Trump before Trump.” Orban’s attack on universities for being the citadels of liberalism have found their echoes in Trump’s America and Modi’s India.

For all his efforts in making Hungary a conservative ideological centre, Viktor Orban’s undoing came about because of Hungary’s growing economic crises and the depth of corruption and systemic nepotism that engulfed the government. The economy has tanked over the last three years with rising prices and the national debt reaching 75% of the GDP – the highest among East European countries. Orban’s critics have exposed and the people have experienced systemic corruption that enabled the siphoning of public wealth into private accounts, the creation of a ‘neo-feudal capitalist class’, and the enrichment of family and friends. Orban’s corruption became the central plank of the opposition platform that Peter Magyar and his Tisza Party presented to the voters and caused his ouster after 16 years.

The Prime Minister elect is not a dyed in the wool liberal, but a member of a conservative Budapest family, and a politician cut from the old Orban cloth. Magyar (literally meaning “Hungarian”) was once a “powerful insider” in the Fidesz government – notably active in foreign affairs, while his ex-wife was once the Minister of Justice in Orban’s cabinet. Mr. Magyar may not fully roll back all of Orban’s illiberalism, but he has committed himself to eliminating corruption, increasing social welfare spending, limiting the prime ministerial tenure to two terms, and being more pro-European, EU and NATO.

EU and European leaders have openly welcomed the change in Hungary, and may be looking for the new government to change Orban’s vetoing of a number of EU initiatives, especially those involving assistance to Ukraine. In return, the new government in Hungary will be expecting the unfreezing of as much as $33 billion funds that the EU extraordinarily chose to freeze as punishment for Orban’s illiberal initiatives in Hungary. For Trump and Netanyahu, the defeat of Viktor Orban removes their only ally and supporter in all of Europe.

by Rajan Philips

Continue Reading

Features

ICONS:A Dialogue Across Centuries

Published

on

Sky Gallery of the Fareed Uduman Art Forum is dedicated to bringing audiences, cultures, and time periods together through meaningful and accessible art experiences to create the closest possible encounters with the world’s greatest paintings. Previous exhibitions include, Gustav Klimt, Frida Kahlo, Paul Gauguin, Vincent Van Gogh, Salvador Dali.

ICONS is conceived as “a dialogue across centuries” bringing together over a dozen artistic geniuses whose works span the Renaissance to the modern era. These works at their original scales of creation changes the conversation. You can finally stand in front of a life-size Vermeer or a monumental Monet and feel the dialogue between artists who never met but shaped each other across time. Each exhibit is meticulously presented on canvas, hand-framed, and finished at the exact dimensions of the original masterpieces, preserving the integrity of composition, texture, brushwork, color and scale.

At the heart of the exhibition is Jan van Eyck’s ‘Arnolfini Portrait’, a work that epitomizes the detail, symbolism, and human intimacy that have inspired generations of artists. Alongside it, visitors will encounter paintings that shaped the renaissance, impressionism, modernism, and the evolution of visual storytelling by Munch, Matisse, Monet, Degas, Da Vinci, Renoir, Vermeer, Rembrandt, Cézanne, Caravaggio, and more. The exhibition invites audiences to experience a rare conversation across centuries of artistic brilliance.

By bringing together works that are geographically and historically dispersed, ICONS creates a compelling space for comparison, reflection, and discovery. Visitors are invited to move beyond passive viewing into a more engaged encounter—tracing artistic influence, identifying stylistic shifts, and uncovering unexpected connections between artists who never shared the same physical space, yet remain deeply interconnected across time.

Designed and curated for both seasoned art enthusiasts and first-time visitors, ICONS offers an experience that is at once educational, immersive, and accessible—removing many of the traditional barriers associated with global museum-going.

Exhibition Details:

Dates: April 24 – May 3
Time: 10:00 AM – 5:00 PM (Monday – Sunday)
Venue: Sky Gallery Colombo 5

Continue Reading

Features

Our Teardrop

Published

on

BOOK REVIEW

Ranoukh Wijesinha (2026)

Published by Jam Fruit Tree Publications.
82 pages. Softcover. ISBN 978-624-6633-81-3

The author is a graduate teacher at St. Thomas’ College, Mount Lavinia; his alma mater. On leaving school he read for a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English Language and English Literature at the University of Nottingham (Malaysia). On graduating, in 2024, he went back to his old school to teach these same disciplines. There seems to be a historic logic to this as his grandfather, a notable Thomian of his day, also started his working career as a teacher at the College before moving on to the world of publishing; as a newspaper journalist and sub-editor.

On his maternal side, Wijesinha’s grandfather was an accomplished journalist, thespian and playwright of his day, and his mother is also a much sought after teacher of English and English Literature and, as acknowledged by him, his first, and foremost, English teacher.

Ranoukh Wijesinha and friends at STC

Though there are some well-written, almost lyrical, pieces of prose in this publication, it is the poetry that dominates. Written with a sensitivity to people and events he has either observed himself, or as described to him by those who did, it also encompasses all genres of poetic verse, from the classical to the modern, including sonnets, acrostics, haiku to free and blank verse, the latter more in vogue today. All in all, it presents as a celebration of English poetry and its ability to, sometimes, express depth of thought and feeling far better than prose.

Dedicated to his mentor at St. Thomas’, his Drama and Singing Master had been a great influence on Wijesinha His sudden, premature, death understandably came as a shock to the still developing student under his tutelage. The poems “The Man who Made Me” and “The Curtain Called” best demonstrate this. In addition, it is apparent that Wijesinha has endured much mental trauma in his young life. Spending much time on his own, the questions these moments have raised are expressed in “When No One is Listening”, “There was a Time”, “Midnight Walks” and the prose “A Ramble through Colombo”.

However, the majority of the poems concern ‘Our Teardrop’, Sri Lanka, for whom the writer has a great love. He explores its history, its natural wonders, its people, its tragedies, its corruption and the hope that things will get better for all its people. “Bala’ and “Dicky” address a time of violence from days gone by when there were few glories, just victims. “Easter Sunday” brings this almost to the present time.

There also is humour. “Ado, Machang, Bro, Dude” celebrates his friends and friendships in a way that will reverberate with all the present and previous generations of those who are, or were once, in their late teens and early twenties.

There is little to criticise in this first of the writer’s forays into published works except, as referred to previously, to re-state that the prose quails in the face of the power of the poetry. It is all well written, filled with passion and compassion, and gives comfort that there still are young Sri Lankan writers who can be this brave, and write so powerfully, and profoundly, in English. It is hoped that this is just the first of many from the pen of this young writer.

L S M Pillai

Continue Reading

Trending