Appreciation:

Ajith Samaranayake

I was deeply saddened by the death of Ajith Samaranayake. He was one of our finest journalists who displayed an informed interest on a variety of topics - literature, cinema, politics, culture.

He brought to his writings a combative intelligence, a sardonic humour, a concern for the underdog and a desire and uncanny ability to see through cant and hypocrisy that were entirely invigorating. He had an unfailingly perceptive eye for the anecdote.

He was uncompromising in his judgments. He belonged to no school and was never a victim of fads and fashions. He was unafraid to criticize the most established of writers, when he found them to be wanting.

On the other hand, he was quick to spot new talents and encourage them. He read widely, and this wide reading enabled him to maintain his fiercely critical independence and integrity.

Ajith wrote in both Sinhala and English. However, it is through his English writings that he made a deep impression on the discerning readers.

He pointed out to the English readers of Sri Lanka the richness, the virility, the innovativeness characteristic of modern Sinhala literature and culture.

His work belongs to that rare body of literary journalism produced by such eminent writers as Reggi Siriwardena, Mervyn de Silva and A. J. Gunawardena. All of these writers were well read in Western literatures and were able to bring that erudition to the focused exploration of the local cultural landscape.

Beneath Ajith's diverse writings on politics, society and culture, there was in evidence a profoundly significant humanists vision. It was indubitably a critical humanism.

He was deeply interested in the reinvigoration of a humane and democratic society and he was fully aware of the fact that there was no easy path towards it. His alertness to the contradictions of consumerism, class and culture, elitism, politics of culture and culture of politics was closely related to his humanistic ambitions.

Ajith Samaranayake's journalistic writings had a seriousness of purpose, an authenticity, the ability to speak from the margins that were totally absorbing.

Even those who incurred his wrath and were subject to severe criticism (I was no exception) appreciated his honesty and unwavering engagement with social and cultural truths. He had the ability to write lucidly, persuasively, and even poetically.

He wrote a seven-instalment commentary in the Sunday Observer on my book, 'Enabling Traditions', pointing out its strengths and weaknesses I was deeply grateful to him for that effort. A distinguished foreign critic who read these pieces thought very highly of Ajith's insights, arguments and writing style, and conveyed his impressions to Ajith.

The last time I was in Colombo, Sunil Govinnage, my wife and I had lunch with Ajith. It was a wonderful afternoon full of lively exchanges. Ajith was in good spirits.

We talked about Gunadasa Amarasekera, Lester James Peries, Ediriweera Sarachchandra, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida. I described to him my meeting with Derrida, and he found it very enthralling. I promised to bring him a book a book by Susan Sontag that was not readily available on my next visit to Sri Lanka. Unfortunately, that was not to be.

- Prof. Wimal DISSANAYAKE