It's been a week since Sanga's speech but the euphoria it created has not died down and I don't expect it to die down soon either. I am sure this will be quoted over and over again by generations to come. There are enough experts who had dissected the speech and given their own two cents. My intention is not to give a competition to them, since I know for sure that its beyond my ability.
But what I cannot stop observing is how different people interpret this lecture as per their own preference. If you observed carefully international media like Economist, Guardian, Telegraph all went to town with the part in which he blasted the board and political interferences in cricket. Tamil media houses picked his description of 83 and his quote about him being an all in one package of a Tamil, Sinhalese and a multi religious type. National media picked the fact he called LTTE a terrorist organization and that the its the time of opportunity for the country.
Not only the media, but usual people too either picked what they liked or heard the bad parts loudly and ended up being hurt, Trinitians were over the moon, Rajans were a bit hurt by his comments, our dear minister was justifiably not impressed, jvp couldn't use it to demand an investigation since they themselves were casualties of his oratory. Tamil extremists were also hurt for the terrorist comment, government die hards thought that he let the country down. But most importantly in the mind of a peasant Sri Lankan cricket fan he immediately was given the crown jewels to be decorated as "King Kumar". Its so contrasting and for me the difference was striking!
This shows that even if you speak for hours, when you say something bad about a person or what they like, that part drowns the rest of the message. On the other hand, some others will always hear only the parts which they liked to hear and nothing else.