M. G. Ramachandran 1967 Assassination attempt What happened in the 1967 assassination attempt During the conversation, M. R. Radha stood up and shot MGR in his left ear twice and then tried to shoot himself. Was he arrested? I don't know.
What were the motives?
What were the motives for M. R. Radha's assasination attempt?
The actor and politician M. R. Radha and MGR had worked in 25 films together. On 12 January 1967, Radha and a producer visited MGR to talk about a future film project. During the conversation, M. R. Radha stood up and shot MGR in his left ear twice and then tried to shoot himself.  After the operation, MGR's voice changed. Since he had been shot in his ear, MGR lost hearing in his left ear and had ringing in the ear problems. These further surfaced in 1983 when he had kidney problems. When Sinnappa Devar paid his first visit to see MGR at the hospital after the shooting incident he paid MGR an advance for MGR's next movie. After getting released from the hospital and finishing Arasakattalai, MGR acted in Devar's movie Vivasaayee against doctors' advice. Due to the operation, MGR's speaking parts in the movie Kaavalkaaran were reduced. This was the only movie in which MGR spoke with old and new voices between scenes: MGR was acting in the film Kaavalkaran in 1967 opposite J. Jayalalithaa when the shooting occurred.  Petralthaan Pillaya was the last movie of MGR-MR Radha together. Shooting ended just few days before MGR was shot. The bullet was permanently lodged in his neck and his voice damaged. Within hours of the shooting, some 50,000 fans had gathered at the hospital where MGR had been taken. People cried in the streets. For six weeks, he lay in the hospital as fans awaited each report of his health. He was visited by a steady stream of commoners and luminaries of film industry, polity and bureaucracy. From his hospital bed, he conducted his campaign for the Madras Legislative Assembly. He won twice the number of votes polled by his Congress rival and the largest vote polled by any candidate for the Assembly. CANNOTANSWER
On 12 January 1967, Radha and a producer visited MGR to talk about a future film project.
Marudhur Gopalan Ramachandran (17 January 1917  24 December 1987), also popularly known as M.G.R., was an Indian politician, actor, philanthropist and filmmaker who served as the chief minister of Tamil Nadu from 1977 till his death in 1987. He was the founder of AIADMK and mentor of J. Jayalalithaa. On 19 March 1988, M.G.R. was posthumously honoured with Bharat Ratna, India's highest civilian honour.

In his youth, M.G.R. and his elder brother M. G. Chakrapani became members of a drama troupe to support their family. Influenced by Gandhian ideals, M.G.R. joined the Indian National Congress. After a few years of acting in plays, he made his film debut in the 1936 film Sathi Leelavathi in a supporting role. By the late 1940s, he had graduated to lead roles.

M.G.R. became a member of the C. N. Annadurai-led Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK party) and rose through its ranks, using his popularity as a film star to build a political base. In 1972, three years after Annadurai's death, he left the DMK, then led by M. Karunanidhi to form his own party—the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK). Five years later, M.G.R. steered an AIADMK-led alliance to victory in the 1977 election, routing the DMK in the process. He became Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, the first film actor to become a chief minister in India. Except for a four-month interregnum in 1980, when his government was overthrown by the Union government, he remained as chief minister till his death in 1987, leading the AIADMK to two more electoral wins in 1980 and 1984. 

In October 1984, M.G.R. was diagnosed with kidney failure as a result of diabetes. He died on 24 December 1987 in his Ramavaram Gardens residence in Manapakkam after a prolonged illness. M.G.R. is regarded as a cultural icon in Tamil Nadu and is regarded as one of the most influential actors of Tamil cinema. His autobiography Naan Yaen Piranthaen (Why I was Born) was published in 2003.

Early life and background
Maruthur Gopala Ramachandran was born in Kandy, Sri Lanka, in the Malayali family of Melakkath Gopalan Menon, a Palakkad Mannadiyar Nair and Maruthur Satyabhama, a Vadavannur Vellalar from Palakkad, in the modern-day state of Kerala. Gopalan Menon died when M.G.R. was just two and a half years old. Just after the death of his father, his sister too died due to ill health. His mother had to struggle alone to bring up M.G.R. and his brother. She took the decision to return to India and went back to Kerala where she failed to get the support of her relatives. With the support of Velu Nair of Kumbakonam, Satyabhama put both her sons in school.

It was in school that M.G.R. started his acting career and joined the Boys Company drama troupe taking part in the rigorous training programmes conducted by the troupe in the areas of singing, dancing, sword fighting, diction and memory with active interest and involvement.

The challenges faced by him during his early life and childhood played an important role in shaping his character and political career. After a brief acting stint overseas with the help of Madras Kandasamy Mudaliar, during which he had played female roles, he returned to India and rejoined the Boys Company and started playing lead roles for the first time.

In his early days, M.G.R. was a devout Hindu and a devotee of Lord Sri Murugan, and his mother's favourite god Lord Sri Guruvayurappan. After joining the DMK, he turned a rationalist.

M.G.R.'s first marriage was to Chitarikulam Bargavi, also known as Thangamani, who died early due to an illness. He later married for the second time, to Satyanandavati, who also died soon after marriage due to tuberculosis. Later M.G.R. married for the third time, this time to V. N. Janaki a former Tamil film actress who was once his leading lady and a future chief minister of Tamil Nadu. M.G.R. had no children from any of his marriages.

Acting career

M.G.R. made his film debut in 1936, in the film Sathi Leelavathi (1936 film), directed by Ellis R. Dungan, an American-born film director. Generally starring in romance or action films, M.G.R. got his breakthrough in the 1950 film written by M. Karunanidhi. Soon he role to popularity with the 1954 film Malaikkallan. He acted as hero in the Tamil film industry's first ever full length Gevacolor film, the 1955  Alibabavum 40 Thirudargalum.  He won the National Film Award for Best Actor for the film Rickshawkaran in 1972.

His 1973 blockbuster Ulagam Sutrum Valiban broke the previous box office records of his films. It was one of the few films filmed abroad in those days. It was shot in Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Hong Kong and Japan. His acting career ended in 1987 with his last film Ullagam Suthi Paru, in which he acted even though he had been diagnosed with kidney failure. M.G.R. said there was no question of ‘retirement’ for anyone associated in whichever capacity with the cine field.

Mentor 
 Kali N. Rathnam, a pioneer of Tamil stage drama, and K.P. Kesavan were mentors of M.G.R. in his acting career.

Political career
M.G.R. was a member of the Congress Party till 1953, and he used to wear khādī. In 1953  M.G.R. joined the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), or Dravidian Progressive Federation, attracted by founder C. N. Annadurai. He became a vocal Tamil and Dravidian nationalist and prominent member of DMK. He added glamour to the Dravidian movement which was sweeping Tamil Nadu. M.G.R. became a member of the state Legislative Council in 1962. At the age of 50, he was first elected to the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly in 1967. After the death of his mentor, Annadurai, M.G.R. became the treasurer of DMK in 1969 after Muthuvel Karunanidhi became the Chief Minister.

1967 assassination attempt
The actor and politician M. R. Radha and M.G.R. had worked in 25 films together. On 12 January 1967, Radha and a producer visited M.G.R. to talk about a future film project. During the conversation, M. R. Radha stood up and shot M.G.R. in his left ear twice and then tried to shoot himself.

After the operation, M.G.R.'s voice changed. Since he had been shot in his ear, M.G.R. lost hearing in his left ear and had ringing problems in the ear. These further surfaced in 1983 when he had kidney problems. When Sinnappa Devar paid his first visit to see M.G.R. at the hospital after the shooting incident he paid M.G.R. an advance for M.G.R.'s next film. After getting released from the hospital and finishing Arasakattalai, M.G.R. acted in Devar's film Vivasaayee against doctors' advice. Due to the operation, M.G.R.'s speaking parts in the film Kaavalkaaran were reduced. This was the only film in which M.G.R. spoke with old and new voices between scenes: M.G.R. was acting in the film Kaavalkaran in 1967 opposite J. Jayalalithaa when the shooting occurred.

Petralthaan Pillaya was the last film of M.G.R.-M. R. Radha together. Shooting ended just few days before M.G.R. was shot. The bullet was permanently lodged in his neck and his voice damaged. Within hours of the shooting, some 50,000 fans had gathered at the hospital where M.G.R. had been taken. People cried in the streets. For six weeks, he lay in the hospital as fans awaited each report of his health. He was visited by a steady stream of commoners and luminaries of film industry, polity and bureaucracy. From his hospital bed, he conducted his campaign for the Madras Legislative Assembly. He won twice the number of votes polled by his Congress rival and the largest vote polled by any candidate for the Assembly.

Differences with Karunanidhi and birth of AIADMK

In 1972, DMK leader Karunanidhi started to project his first son M. K. Muthu in a big way in film and politics, around the same time M.G.R. was accusing that corruption had grown in the party after the demise of C. N. Annadurai. Consequently, M.G.R. was expelled from the party.

Upon his ouster from DMK,his volunteer Anakaputhur Ramalingam started a new party called the Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam.  Joined as a member of that party and became its leader and generel secretary.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.vikatan.com/government-and-politics/politics/48-years-history-of-admk-party|title=எம்.ஜி.ஆரை நீக்கியதன் விளைவை தி.மு.க சந்திக்கும்!" அப்போதே எச்சரித்த ராஜாஜி #48YearsOfADMK|website=Vikatan.com}}</ref> later renamed All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), the only powerful opponent of the DMK. He mobilised between 1972 and 1977 to spread and preach his party ambition with films like Netru Indru Naalai (1974), Idhayakani (1975), Indru Pol Endrum Vazhga (1977), etc.

Continued success in TN Assembly elections
1977 Assembly elections
The AIADMK contested the 1977 Tamil Nadu Legislative. The election was a four cornered contest between the AIADMK, DMK, the Indian National Congress (INC) and the Janata Party. The AIADMK allied itself with the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPIM), while INC(I) and Communist Party  (CPI) contested as allies. The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)and Janata Party (JNP) contested the elections alone. The AIADMK did not field any candidate in the Usilampatti Constituency in support of the All India Forward Bloc leader P.K. Mookiah Thevar. Similarly, the AIADMK also supported the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) candidate M. Abdul Latheef in the Vaniyambadi Constituency. In the parliamentary elections that occurred just three months prior to these elections, there had been two major alliances – the AIADMK led AIADMK-INC-CPI coalition and the DMK led DMK-NCO-JNP-CPM coalition. But in the months that followed the parliamentary election, these coalitions fell apart. The AIADMK alliance won the elections by winning 144 seats out of 234 and M.G.R. became the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. Upon winning the 1977 state elections, M.G.R. became the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu on 30 June 1977, remaining in office till his death in 1987. In 1979, members of his party Satyavani Muthu and Aravinda Bala Pajanor became the first non-Congress politicians from Tamil Nadu to be ministers in the Union Cabinet. The AIADMK won every state assembly election as long as M.G.R. was alive. Although Annadurai and Karunanidhi had acted in stage plays in trivial roles, in their younger days, before becoming chief minister, M.G.R. was the first popular film actor to be a Chief Minister in India.

1980 Parliament and assembly elections
All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam allied with Indian National Congress (Indira) in the 1977 parliamentary election. However, when Janata Party won the election and Morarji Desai became the Prime Minister, M.G.R. extended unconditional support to the Janata party Government. He continued his support to the Charan Singh Government in 1979. After the fall of the Charan Singh government, fresh parliamentary elections were conducted in 1980. Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam struck alliance with INC(I). AIADMK and Janata Party alliance won only 2 seats in Tamil Nadu in that parliamentary election. INC(I) won the election and Indira Gandhi became the Prime Minister.
Congress-DMK victory in the 1980 parliamentary election emboldened their alliance and made them think that people lost their faith in M.G.R. government. DMK pressed the central government to dismiss the Tamil Nadu government using similar allegations used by M.G.R. to dismiss DMK government in 1976. The AIADMK ministry and the assembly were dismissed by the central government and fresh elections conducted in 1980.
Despite their victory at the 1980 Lok Sabha polls, DMK and Indira Congress failed to win the legislative assembly election. AIADMK won the election and its leader and incumbent Chief Minister, M. G. Ramachandran was sworn in as Chief Minister for the second time.

1984 assembly elections
Indira Gandhi was assassinated on 31 October 1984. During the same time, M. G. Ramachandran was diagnosed with kidney failure and admitted into a hospital in New York City. Rajiv Gandhi assumed office immediately and this required a fresh mandate from the people. Indian National Congress (Indira) and Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam formed an alliance and contested the election. M. G. Ramachandran was confined to the hospital. Video coverage of M.G.R. recuperating in hospital along with Indira Gandhi's assassination were stitched together by the AIADMK man in charge of campaigning, R. M. Veerappan. The video was distributed and played across all over Tamil Nadu. Rajiv Gandhi visited cyclone-hit areas in Tamil Nadu, which also boosted the alliance. The sympathy wave created by Indira's assassination, M.G.R.'s illness and Rajiv Gandhi's charisma helped the alliance sweep the election.DMK leader M. Karunanidhi did not contest this election, due to the fact that the AIADMK leader M.G.R. was admitted to a hospital in the U.S. and Indira Gandhi being assassinated. It was a landslide victory for AIADMK-Congress combine which won 195 seats in assembly polls. The electoral victory proved the undying charisma of M.G.R. upon the masses.

Achievements as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu

Once he became Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, he placed great emphasis on social development, especially education. One of his most successful policies was the conversion of the "Midday Meal Scheme", introduced by the popular Congress Chief Minister and kingmaker K Kamaraj, which already was encouraging underprivileged children to attend school, into "M.G.R.'s Nutritious Meal Scheme" in the government-run and -aided schools in Tamil Nadu by adding saththurundai – a nutritious sugary flour dumpling. This scheme was at a cost of Rs. 1 billion and was imposed in 1982. A little more than 120,000 children of the state were benefited. He also introduced Women's Special buses. He introduced a liquor ban in the state and preservation of old temples and historical monuments, ultimately increasing the state's tourist income. He set up a free school for the cinema technicians children in Kodambakkam called M.G.R. Primary & Higher Secondary School which provided free mid-day meals in the 1980s. He led the AIADMK to victory in the 1984 assembly elections, despite not taking part in the campaigning. At that time he was undergoing medical treatment in America and his images were broadcast in Tamil Nadu through cinema halls. This was an effective campaign tactic and AIADMK won the elections claiming around 56% of assembly seats, indicating the depth of his popular support. He won his seat in a double landslide victory in 1984. He still holds the record of being the chief minister with the highest consistent longevity of more than a decade.

Failed Merger Talks with DMK

Karunanidhi claimed on 1 April 2009 and again on 13 May 2012 that M.G.R. was ready for the merger of his party with the DMK in September 1979, with former chief minister of Odisha Biju Patnaik acting as the mediator. The plan failed, because Panruti Ramachandran, who was close to M.G.R. acted as a spoiler and M.G.R. changed his mind.

Criticism and controversies
Even after his death, M.G.R. proved to be very popular in the state and his rule has been cited by many of his contemporaries as best in the country. However, his rule is not without criticism. Economic data under his rule showed that annual growth and per capita income was lower than the national average and the state went from being second among 25 industrialised states in development after Kamaraj's rule to tenth. This decline, according to critics has been due to shift of government resources from power and irrigation to social and agriculture sector according to Madras Institute of Development Studies reported in 1988. In addition, the emphasis on "welfare schemes" such as free electricity to farmers, mid-day meal schemes, etc. has been seen by many as taking money away from infrastructure development that could have benefited the poor. In addition, the liquor tax imposed during his rule was considered to contribute to a regressive tax mostly affecting the poor.

Other criticisms have been on M.G.R.'s centralised decision-making, which many blame for inefficiency and corruption taking hold of his administration. Some examples stated by the critics include Goondas act in 1982 and other acts that limited political criticism in the media, which led to a "police state" during his administration. While these criticisms have been in the minority, supporters of M.G.R. counter that most of these problems were a result of the party members serving M.G.R. rather than the leader himself. While he is not considered a divisive figure in the state, critics and supporters alike agree that his charisma and popularity trumped policy decisions that led to his eventual success during his tenure as chief minister.

Natwar Singh in his autobiography One Life is Not Enough alleges that M.G.R. covertly supported the cause of independent Tamil Eelam and financed the LTTE and their cadres were being given military training in Tamil Nadu. He also alleges that M.G.R. considered Jaffna an extension of Tamil Nadu and without informing the Indian Government at the time, had gifted 40 million rupees to the LTTE.

M.G.R. has been accused of being intolerant towards the media. In April 1987, the Editor of Ananda Vikatan S. Balasubramanian was sentenced to 3 months in jail by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly for publishing a cartoon, depicting government ministers as bandits and lawmakers as pickpockets, though specific legislature was not specified. But due to media outcry, he was released and S. Balasubramanian later won a case against his arrest. Earlier, Vaniga Otrumai editor A.M. Paulraj was sentenced to 2 weeks imprisonment by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly for his writing.

Bharat Ratna

After his death in 1987, he became the third Chief Minister from the state of Tamil Nadu to receive the Bharat Ratna after C. Rajagopalachari and K. Kamaraj. The timing of the award was controversial, due to the fact that it was given so quickly after his death and he was elected as Chief Minister only 11 years before the award. Many opponents, mostly outside Tamil Nadu, criticised then ruling party INC, under Rajiv Gandhi to have influenced the selection committee to give the award to help win the upcoming 1989 Lok Sabha election. The ruling party forming a coalition with J. Jayalalithaa, the successor to M.G.R. at that time, were able to sweep Tamil Nadu, winning 38 out of 39 seats, INC were however unable to win nationally.

Commemorative coins
To commemorate M.G.R.'s Birth centenary in 2017, the Ministry of Finance, Government of India decided to issue ₹100 and ₹5 coins that would bear his image as a portrait along with an inscription of "Dr. M. G. Ramachandran Birth Centenary".

Elections contested and positions held
Tamil Nadu Legislative elections

Posts in Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly

Philanthropy
He personally offered relief in disasters and calamities like fire, flood, drought, and cyclones. He was the first donor during the war with China in 1962 (Sino-Indian War), donating Rs. 75,000 to the war fund. He was the founder and editor of Thai weekly magazine and Anna daily newspaper in Tamil. He was the owner of Sathya Studios and Emgeeyar Pictures (willed to charity) which produced many of the films he acted in. He had gifted a golden sword weighing half a Kilogram to Mookambika temple in Kollur, Udupi district.

Illness and death

In October 1984, M.G.R. was diagnosed with kidney failure as a result of uncontrolled diabetes, which was soon followed by a mild heart attack and a massive stroke. He was rushed to the Downstate Medical Center in New York City, United States for treatment, undergoing a kidney transplant. Despite his poor health, he did contest the assembly election held later that year while still confined to the hospital, winning from Andipatti. During the election, photos of M.G.R. recuperating in hospital were published, creating a sympathy wave among the people. M.G.R. returned to Madras on 4 February 1985 following his recovery. He was sworn in as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu for the third consecutive term on 10 February 1985. The next two years and 10 months were spent in frequent trips to the United States for treatment.

M.G.R. never fully recovered from his multiple health problems and died on 24 December 1987 at 3:30 am in his Ramavaram Gardens residence in Manapakkam after his prolonged illness. He was 70 years old, just a month away before his 71st birthday. His death sparked off a frenzy of looting and rioting all over the state. Shops, cinemas, buses and other public and private property became the target of violence let loose. The police had to resort issuing shoot-at-sight orders. Schools and colleges immediately announced holidays till the situation came under control. Violence during the funeral alone left 29 people dead and 47 police personnel badly wounded.

His remains were buried in the northern end of Marina Beach is now called MGR Memorial which is adjacent to the Anna Memorial.

This state of affairs continued for almost a month across Tamil Nadu. Around one million people followed his remains, around 30 followers committed suicide and people had their heads tonsured. After his death, his political party, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, split between his wife V. N. Janaki Ramachandran and J. Jayalalithaa; they merged in 1989.

In 1989 Dr. M. G. R. Home and Higher Secondary School for the Speech and Hearing Impaired was established at the erstwhile residence M.G.R. Thottam, Ramapuram, in accordance with his last will & testament written in January 1987. His official residence at 27, Arcot Street, T. Nagar is now M.G.R. Memorial House and is open for public viewing. His film studio, Sathya Studios, has been converted into a women's college.

Legacy

After his electoral success with in 1977, the DMK has not yet returned to power in Tamil Nadu until his death. On 19 March 1988, M.G.R. was posthumously honoured with Bharat Ratna, India's highest civilian honour. He is widely acknowledged as "Puratchi Thalaivar" (Revolutionary Leader) in Tamil Nadu. One of the major roads in Chennai was named in his honour, Dr. M.G.R. Salai—it was previously called Gokula Kannan Road, and a statue of M. G. Ramachandran now stands there and M.G.R. Nagar, a residential neighbourhood was named after him in Chennai, Salem Central Bus Stand was renamed Bharat Ratna Dr. M.G.R. Central Bus Stand and Omalur Main Road was renamed M.G.R. Salai in Salem, Tirunelveli New Bus Stand was renamed Bharat Ratna Dr. M.G.R. Bus Stand in Tirunelveli and two parks were named Bharat Ratna Puratchi Thalaivar M.G.R. Park and M.G.R. Park in Thoothukudi.

A life-size statue of M. G. Ramachandran was unveiled on 7 December 2006 in the Parliament House by then Lok Sabha Speaker, Somnath Chatterjee in his honour and the function was attended by the former chief minister of Tamil Nadu J. Jayalalithaa and notable politicians.

The central government issued a commemorative coin of ₹ 100 and ₹ 5 denomination to mark the centenary celebrations of him on 17 January 2017 in Chennai.

On 31 October 2017, Government of Tamil Nadu renamed the Mattuthavani Bus Terminus in Madurai as M.G.R. Bus Stand to honour him.

On 9 October 2018, Government of Tamil Nadu renamed the Chennai Mofussil Bus Terminus as Puratchi Thalaivar Dr. M.G.R. Bus Terminus to honour him.

On 5 April 2019, Government of India renamed the Chennai Central railway station as Puratchi Thalaivar Dr. M.G. Ramachandran Central Railway Station to honour him.

On 31 July 2020, Chennai Central metro station in Chennai has been renamed as Puratchi Thalaivar Dr. M.G. Ramachandran Central Metro by Government of Tamil Nadu to honour him.

On 17 October 2021, the AIADMK headquarters in Chennai has been renamed as Puratchi Thalaivar M.G.R. Maaligai by party leaders in memory of the party's founder.

In popular cultureIruvar (1997) by Mani Rantham is based on rivalry between M.G.R. and M. Karunanidhi which Malayalam actor Mohanlal played Anandan (M.G.R.) 
2019 web series Queen which he was renamed as  G. M. Ravichandran which Indrajith Sukumaran portrayed  him . Thalaivi (2021) portrayed by Arvind Swami based on Jayalalithaa's life 

Filmography
As an actor

As producer and director
 1958  Nadodi Mannan, producer and director
 1969  Adimai Penn, producer
 1973  Ulagam Sutrum Valiban, producer and director
 1977  Madhuraiyai Meetta Sundharapandiyan'', director

Awards and honours

Honours

Other cinema awards

See also
 M. G. Ramachandran's unrealized projects
First Ramachandran ministry
Second Ramachandran ministry
Third Ramachandran ministry

References

External links

 
 M.G. Ramchandran: Jewel of the Masses
 
  All about Dr MGR
  MGR Memorial Charitable Trust
 MGR monthly magazine+News portal
 Kandy-born Actor-Politico "MGR" Reigned Supreme in Tamil Nadu Cinema and Politics-by D.B.S. Jeyaraj

M. G. Ramachandran
1917 births
1987 deaths
20th-century Indian film directors
20th-century Indian male actors
Actors from Kandy
Actors in Hindi cinema
Actors in Tamil cinema
Male actors in Malayalam cinema
Best Actor National Film Award winners
Chief ministers from All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam
Chief Ministers of Tamil Nadu
Film directors from Chennai
Film producers from Chennai
Filmfare Awards South winners
Indian actor-politicians
Indian Hindus
Indian male film actors
Indian political party founders
Indian Tamil politicians
Kidney transplant recipients
Malayali people
Male actors from Chennai
Members of the 4th Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly
Tamil Nadu MLAs 1971–1976
Tamil Nadu MLAs 1977–1980
Tamil Nadu MLAs 1980–1984
Tamil Nadu MLAs 1985–1989
Politicians from Chennai
Recipients of the Bharat Ratna
Recipients of the Padma Shri in arts
Sri Lankan emigrants to India
State funerals in India
Tamil film directors
Tamil film producers
Tamil-language film directors
Tamil Nadu State Film Awards winners
In algebraic geometry, motives (or sometimes motifs, following French usage) is a theory proposed by Alexander Grothendieck in the 1960s to unify the vast array of similarly behaved cohomology theories such as singular cohomology, de Rham cohomology, etale cohomology, and crystalline cohomology. Philosophically, a "motif" is the "cohomology essence" of a variety.

In the formulation of Grothendieck for smooth projective varieties, a motive is a triple , where X is a smooth projective variety,  is an idempotent correspondence, and m an integer, however, such a triple contains almost no information outside the context of Grothendieck's category of pure motives, where a morphism from  to  is given by a correspondence of degree . A more object-focused approach is taken by Pierre Deligne in Le Groupe Fondamental de la Droite Projective Moins Trois Points. In that article, a motive is a "system of realisations" – that is, a tuple

consisting of modules

over the rings

respectively, various comparison isomorphisms

between the obvious base changes of these modules, filtrations , a -action  on  and a "Frobenius" automorphism  of . This data is modeled on the cohomologies of a smooth projective -variety and the structures and compatibilities they admit, and gives an idea about what kind of information is contained a motive.

Introduction 
The theory of motives was originally conjectured as an attempt to unify a rapidly multiplying array of cohomology theories, including Betti cohomology, de Rham cohomology, l-adic cohomology, and crystalline cohomology. The general hope is that equations like
 [projective line] = [line] + [point]
 [projective plane] = [plane] + [line] + [point]
can be put on increasingly solid mathematical footing with a deep meaning. Of course, the above equations are already known to be true in many senses, such as in the sense of CW-complex where "+" corresponds to attaching cells, and in the sense of various cohomology theories, where "+" corresponds to the direct sum.

From another viewpoint, motives continue the sequence of generalizations from rational functions on varieties to divisors on varieties to Chow groups of varieties. The generalization happens in more than one direction, since motives can be considered with respect to more types of equivalence than rational equivalence. The admissible equivalences are given by the definition of an adequate equivalence relation.

Definition of pure motives 
The category of pure motives often proceeds in three steps. Below we describe the case of Chow motives , where k is any field.

First step: category of (degree 0) correspondences, Corr(k) 
The objects of  are simply smooth projective varieties over k. The morphisms are correspondences. They generalize morphisms of varieties , which can be associated with their graphs in , to fixed dimensional Chow cycles on .

It will be useful to describe correspondences of arbitrary degree, although morphisms in  are correspondences of degree 0. In detail, let X and Y be smooth projective varieties and consider a decomposition of X into connected components:

If , then the correspondences of degree r from X to Y are

where  denotes the Chow-cycles of codimension k. Correspondences are often denoted using the "⊢"-notation, e.g., . For any  and  their composition is defined by

where the dot denotes the product in the Chow ring (i.e., intersection).

Returning to constructing the category  notice that the composition of degree 0 correspondences is degree 0. Hence we define morphisms of  to be degree 0 correspondences.

The following association is a functor (here  denotes the graph of ):

Just like  the category  has direct sums () and tensor products (). It is a preadditive category. The sum of morphisms is defined by

Second step: category of pure effective Chow motives, Choweff(k)

The transition to motives is made by taking the pseudo-abelian envelope of :

.

In other words, effective Chow motives are pairs of smooth projective varieties X and idempotent correspondences α: X ⊢ X, and morphisms are of a certain type of correspondence:

Composition is the above defined composition of correspondences, and the identity morphism of (X, α) is defined to be α : X ⊢ X.

The association,

,

where ΔX := [idX] denotes the diagonal of X × X, is a functor. The motive [X] is often called the motive associated to the variety X.

As intended, Choweff(k) is a pseudo-abelian category. The direct sum of effective motives is given by

The tensor product of effective motives is defined by

where

The tensor product of morphisms may also be defined. Let f1 : (X1, α1) → (Y1, β1) and f2 : (X2, α2) → (Y2, β2) be morphisms of motives. Then let γ1 ∈ A(X1 × Y1) and γ2 ∈ A(X2 × Y2) be representatives of f1 and f2. Then

,

where πi : X1 × X2 × Y1 × Y2 → Xi × Yi are the projections.

Third step: category of pure Chow motives, Chow(k) 
To proceed to motives, we adjoin to Choweff(k) a formal inverse (with respect to the tensor product) of a motive called the Lefschetz motive. The effect is that motives become triples instead of pairs. The Lefschetz motive L is

.

If we define the motive 1, called the trivial Tate motive, by 1 := h(Spec(k)), then the elegant equation

holds, since

The tensor inverse of the Lefschetz motive is known as the Tate motive, T := L−1. Then we define the category of pure Chow motives by

.

A motive is then a triple

such that morphisms are given by correspondences

and the composition of morphisms comes from composition of correspondences.

As intended,  is a rigid pseudo-abelian category.

Other types of motives 
In order to define an intersection product, cycles must be "movable" so we can intersect them in general position. Choosing a suitable equivalence relation on cycles will guarantee that every pair of cycles has an equivalent pair in general position that we can intersect. The Chow groups are defined using rational equivalence, but other equivalences are possible, and each defines a different sort of motive. Examples of equivalences, from strongest to weakest, are
 Rational equivalence
 Algebraic equivalence
 Smash-nilpotence equivalence (sometimes called Voevodsky equivalence)
 Homological equivalence (in the sense of Weil cohomology)
 Numerical equivalence
The literature occasionally calls every type of pure motive a Chow motive, in which case a motive with respect to algebraic equivalence would be called a Chow motive modulo algebraic equivalence.

Mixed motives 
For a fixed base field k, the category of mixed motives is a conjectural abelian tensor category , together with a contravariant functor

taking values on all varieties (not just smooth projective ones as it was the case with pure motives). This should be such that motivic cohomology defined by

coincides with the one predicted by algebraic K-theory, and contains the category of Chow motives in a suitable sense (and other properties). The existence of such a category was conjectured by Alexander Beilinson.

Instead of constructing such a category, it was proposed by Deligne to first construct a category DM having the properties one expects for the derived category

.

Getting MM back from DM would then be accomplished by a (conjectural) motivic t-structure.

The current state of the theory is that we do have a suitable category DM. Already this category is useful in applications. Vladimir Voevodsky's Fields Medal-winning proof of the Milnor conjecture uses these motives as a key ingredient.

There are different definitions due to Hanamura, Levine and Voevodsky. They are known to be equivalent in most cases and we will give Voevodsky's definition below. The category contains Chow motives as a full subcategory and gives the "right" motivic cohomology. However, Voevodsky also shows that (with integral coefficients) it does not admit a motivic t-structure.

Geometric Mixed Motives

Notation 
Here we will fix a field  of characteristic  and let  be our coefficient ring. Set  as the category of quasi-projective varieties over  are separated schemes of finite type. We will also let  be the subcategory of smooth varieties.

Smooth varieties with correspondences 
Given a smooth variety  and a variety  call an integral closed subscheme  which is finite over  and surjective over a component of  a prime correspondence from  to . Then, we can take the set of prime correspondences from  to  and construct a free -module . Its elements are called finite correspondences. Then, we can form an additive category  whose objects are smooth varieties and morphisms are given by smooth correspondences. The only non-trivial part of this "definition" is the fact that we need to describe compositions. These are given by a push-pull formula from the theory of Chow rings.

Examples of correspondences 
Typical examples of prime correspondences come from the graph  of a morphism of varieties .

Localizing the homotopy category 
From here we can form the homotopy category  of bounded complexes of smooth correspondences. Here smooth varieties will be denoted . If we localize this category with respect to the smallest thick subcategory (meaning it is closed under extensions) containing morphisms

and

then we can form the triangulated category of effective geometric motives  Note that the first class of morphisms are localizing -homotopies of varieties while the second will give the category of geometric mixed motives the Mayer–Vietoris sequence.

Also, note that this category has a tensor structure given by the product of varieties, so .

Inverting the Tate motive 
Using the triangulated structure we can construct a triangle

from the canonical map . We will set  and call it the Tate motive. Taking the iterative tensor product lets us construct . If we have an effective geometric motive  we let  denote  Moreover, this behaves functorially and forms a triangulated functor. Finally, we can define the category of geometric mixed motives  as the category of pairs  for  an effective geometric mixed motive and  an integer representing the twist by the Tate motive. The hom-groups are then the colimit

Examples of motives

Tate motives 
There are several elementary examples of motives which are readily accessible. One of them being the Tate motives, denoted , , or , depending on the coefficients used in the construction of the category of Motives. These are fundamental building blocks in the category of motives because they form the "other part" besides Abelian varieties.

Motives of curves 

The motive of a curve can be explicitly understood with relative ease: their Chow ring is justfor any smooth projective curve , hence Jacobians embed into the category of motives.

Explanation for non-specialists
A commonly applied technique in mathematics is to study objects carrying a particular structure by introducing a category whose morphisms preserve this structure. Then one may ask when two given objects are isomorphic, and ask for a "particularly nice" representative in each isomorphism class. The classification of algebraic varieties, i.e. application of this idea in the case of algebraic varieties, is very difficult due to the highly non-linear structure of the objects. The relaxed question of studying varieties up to birational isomorphism has led to the field of birational geometry. Another way to handle the question is to attach to a given variety X an object of more linear nature, i.e. an object amenable to the techniques of linear algebra, for example a vector space. This "linearization" goes usually under the name of cohomology.

There are several important cohomology theories, which reflect different structural aspects of varieties. The  (partly conjectural) theory of motives is an attempt to find a universal way to linearize algebraic varieties, i.e. motives are supposed to provide a cohomology theory that embodies all these particular cohomologies. For example, the genus of a smooth projective curve C which is an interesting invariant of the curve, is an integer, which can be read off the dimension of the first Betti cohomology group of C. So, the motive of the curve should contain the genus information. Of course, the genus is a rather coarse invariant, so the motive of C is more than just this number.

The search for a universal cohomology 
Each algebraic variety X has a corresponding motive [X], so the simplest examples of motives are:

 [point]
 [projective line] = [point] + [line]
 [projective plane] = [plane] + [line] + [point]

These 'equations' hold in many situations, namely for de Rham cohomology and Betti cohomology, l-adic cohomology, the number of points over any finite field, and in multiplicative notation for local zeta-functions.

The general idea is that one motive has the same structure in any reasonable cohomology theory with good formal properties; in particular, any Weil cohomology theory will have such properties.  There are different Weil cohomology theories, they apply in different situations and have values in different categories, and reflect different structural aspects of the variety in question:

 Betti cohomology is defined for varieties over (subfields of) the complex numbers, it has the advantage of being defined over the integers and is a topological invariant
 de Rham cohomology (for varieties over ) comes with a mixed Hodge structure, it is a differential-geometric invariant
 l-adic cohomology (over any field of characteristic ≠ l) has a canonical Galois group action, i.e. has values in representations of the (absolute) Galois group
 crystalline cohomology

All these cohomology theories share common properties, e.g. existence of Mayer-Vietoris sequences, homotopy invariance  the product of X with the affine line) and others. Moreover, they are linked by comparison isomorphisms, for example Betti cohomology  of a smooth variety X over  with finite coefficients is isomorphic to l-adic cohomology with finite coefficients.

The theory of motives is an attempt to find a universal theory which embodies all these particular cohomologies and their structures and provides a framework for "equations" like

[projective line] = [line]+[point].

In particular, calculating the motive of any variety X directly gives all the information about the several Weil cohomology theories HBetti(X), HDR(X) etc.

Beginning with Grothendieck, people have tried to precisely define this theory for many years.

Motivic cohomology 
Motivic cohomology itself had been invented before the creation of mixed motives by means of algebraic K-theory. The above category provides a neat way to (re)define it by

where n and m are integers and  is the m-th tensor power of the Tate object  which in Voevodsky's setting is the complex  shifted by –2, and [n] means the usual shift in the triangulated category.

Conjectures related to motives 
The standard conjectures were first formulated in terms of the interplay of algebraic cycles and Weil cohomology theories. The category of pure motives provides a categorical framework for these conjectures.

The standard conjectures are commonly considered to be very hard and are open in the general case. Grothendieck, with Bombieri, showed the depth of the motivic approach by producing a conditional (very short and elegant) proof of the Weil conjectures (which are proven by different means by Deligne), assuming the standard conjectures to hold.

For example, the Künneth standard conjecture, which states the existence of algebraic cycles πi ⊂ X × X inducing the canonical projectors H(X) → Hi(X) ↣ H(X) (for any Weil cohomology H) implies that every pure motive M decomposes in graded pieces of weight n: M = ⨁GrnM. The terminology weights comes from a similar decomposition of, say, de-Rham cohomology of smooth projective varieties, see Hodge theory.

Conjecture D, stating the concordance of numerical and homological equivalence, implies the equivalence of pure motives with respect to homological and numerical equivalence. (In particular the former category of motives would not depend on the choice of the Weil cohomology theory). Jannsen (1992) proved the following unconditional result: the category of (pure) motives over a field is abelian and semisimple if and only if the chosen equivalence relation is numerical equivalence.

The Hodge conjecture, may be neatly reformulated using motives: it holds iff the Hodge realization mapping any pure motive with rational coefficients (over a subfield  of ) to its Hodge structure is a full functor  (rational Hodge structures). Here pure motive means pure motive with respect to homological equivalence.

Similarly, the Tate conjecture is equivalent to: the so-called Tate realization, i.e. ℓ-adic cohomology, is a full functor  (pure motives up to homological equivalence, continuous representations of the absolute Galois group of the base field k), which takes values in semi-simple representations. (The latter part is automatic in the case of the Hodge analogue).

Tannakian formalism and motivic Galois group
To motivate the (conjectural) motivic Galois group, fix a field k and consider the functor

finite separable extensions K of k → non-empty finite sets with a (continuous) transitive action of the absolute Galois group of k

which maps K to the (finite) set of embeddings of K into an algebraic closure of k. In Galois theory this functor is shown to be an equivalence of categories.  Notice that fields are 0-dimensional. Motives of this kind are called Artin motives. By -linearizing the above objects, another way of expressing the above is to say that Artin motives are equivalent to finite -vector spaces together with an action of the Galois group.

The objective of the motivic Galois group is to extend the above equivalence to higher-dimensional varieties. In order to do this, the technical machinery of Tannakian category theory (going back to Tannaka–Krein duality, but a purely algebraic theory) is used. Its purpose is to shed light on both the Hodge conjecture and the Tate conjecture, the outstanding questions in algebraic cycle theory.  Fix a Weil cohomology theory H. It gives a functor from Mnum (pure motives using numerical equivalence) to finite-dimensional -vector spaces. It can be shown that the former category is a  Tannakian category. Assuming the equivalence of homological and numerical equivalence, i.e. the above standard conjecture D, the functor H is an exact faithful tensor-functor. Applying the Tannakian formalism, one concludes that Mnum is equivalent to the category of representations of an algebraic group G, known as the motivic Galois group.

The motivic Galois group is to the theory of motives what the Mumford–Tate group is to Hodge theory. Again speaking in rough terms, the Hodge and Tate conjectures are types of invariant theory (the spaces that are morally the algebraic cycles are picked out by invariance under a group, if one sets up the correct definitions). The motivic Galois group has the surrounding representation theory. (What it is not, is a Galois group; however in terms of the Tate conjecture and Galois representations on étale cohomology, it predicts the image of the Galois group, or, more accurately, its Lie algebra.)

See also
 Ring of periods
Motivic cohomology
Presheaf with transfers
Mixed Hodge module
L-functions of motives

References

Survey Articles 

  (technical introduction with comparatively short proofs)
Motives over Finite Fields - J.S. Milne
  (motives-for-dummies text).
  (high-level introduction to motives in French).

Books 
 
 
 L. Breen: Tannakian categories.
 S. Kleiman: The standard conjectures.
 A. Scholl: Classical motives. (detailed exposition of Chow motives)

Reference Literature 

 
  (adequate equivalence relations on cycles).
 Milne, James S. Motives — Grothendieck’s Dream
  (Voevodsky's definition of mixed motives. Highly technical).

Future directions 

 Musings on : Arithmetic spin structures on elliptic curves
 What are "Fractional Motives"?

External links 
 

Algebraic geometry
Topological methods of algebraic geometry
Homological algebra The Stilklassen (German, lit. "style classes") are located in two schools in Berndorf, Lower Austria.

History
After a two-year construction phase, the schools were opened in 1909. What is special about these schools is their furnishing, which was funded by Arthur Krupp. The architect of these unique buildings is Ludwig Baumann. Each of the classrooms is furnished and designed in a different historical style.
Krupp's aim was to teach his workers' children the knowledge about foreign cultures that he was able to obtain on his journeys.

The Classrooms
 the Egyptian classroom: The entrance to this classroom is a replica of the burial chamber in Eimisi. The ceiling and the walls display typical Egyptian images.
 the Doric classroom: The bronze portal is a copy of the door of the tower of Mykena.
 the Moorish classroom: The door is a replica of the Porta aurea in Córdoba. The original pillars can be found at the Alhambra, whereas the motives on the ceiling are a faithful reproduction of the ceiling in the church Alkalda de Heinares.
 the Pompeian classroom
 the Byzantine classroom with motives from St. Sergius' church in Constantinople 
 the Gothic classroom, which displays motives of the churches in Steinakirchen am Forst, Lower Austria and Ptuj, Slovenia
 the Roman classroom by the example of the church of castle Třebíč, Czech Republic
 the Roman Renaissance classroom with a replica of the ceiling of the Palazzo Massimo in Rome
 the Baroque classroom with its reproduction of the entrance of Vienna's Belvedere palace
 the classroom built in the style of Louis XIV
 the Rococo classroom 
 the Empire classroom, built after motives in Palais Modena, Vienna

Interesting facts
Even in Krupp's time, when the schools were founded, parents were concerned that the pupils might be distracted by the colours and ornaments. 

Additionally to this extravagant interior design, Krupp also provided the school with a central heating system, showers and a dental surgery, which was paid for by Krupp himself for a year.

Nowadays, these two buildings do not only still serve as schools but also as tourist attractions.

Literature
 Ilg, Christine: Berndorf und seine Schulen - ein Streifzug durch Berndorf,

External links
 Stilklassen, German and English

Educational institutions established in 1909
Schools in Austria
1909 establishments in Austria