Books kept at Coimbatore’s E.Ve.Ra. Library are facing serious authenticity questions after Niranjan Bharathi, the great-grandson of poet Subramania Bharati, condemned what he described as the inclusion of fabricated and inaccurate information in the public library’s collection.
According to a report by Dinamalar, Bharathi said an alleged book-related irregularity at the library was both regrettable and embarrassing. He said readers should not be misled by incorrect versions of history and argued that institutions had a responsibility to pass reliable historical knowledge to future generations.
Bharathi specifically referred to a book titled ‘Bharathiyar Kathaigal’, or ‘Bharati’s Stories’. He said the book did not contain the poet’s authentic stories and appeared to include stories written by someone using artificial intelligence technology. The report did not provide details of the book’s publisher, procurement records, author attribution, publication date or the process through which it was selected for the library.
He also said an examination of several books at the Coimbatore library had indicated that they contained what he described as entirely false or fabricated information. One example cited in the report was the portrayal of Naladiyar as an individual person, which Bharathi said demonstrated an attempt to present falsehoods as fact.
The criticism extends beyond the treatment of Bharati’s work. Bharathi said the writings of major poets and authors had been subjected to injustice and called for all books kept in libraries to be examined. He urged authorities to remove books containing fabricated material and replace them with publications carrying accurate and reliable information.
The allegations raise questions about how public libraries verify books before acquiring and displaying them. In a civic library, the collection is not only a reading resource but also a public record through which students, families and first-time readers encounter literature, history and cultural figures. Any failure in author verification, editorial review or procurement checks can therefore affect the reliability of information available to the public.
The report does not include a response from the E.Ve.Ra. Library or the authority responsible for its collection. It also does not identify the number of books under question, the total size of the collection, the vendor or publisher involved, or whether a formal inquiry has been ordered. These details will be necessary to establish the scale and origin of the alleged irregularities.
Bharathi’s demand is for a systematic review of the library’s books, followed by the removal of publications found to contain inaccurate information. The next publicly reported step is therefore the proposed examination of the collection and any response from the library or the relevant civic authorities.
