Discussion on Secular Themes in CM

Miscellaneous topics on Carnatic music
Post Reply
Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Vidya,

Thanks for the effort. Let me try to explain in a different way.

I fully comprehend your point. When I was a teenager, I was somewhat frustrated (are you are) by the seemingly "recurrent" or "templated" compositions. I had mentally categorized (half in jest and half in frustration) Dikshitar as "Mr. Bhajeham", Shastri as "Mr. Nannubrova", and Swati as "Mr. Pahimam". The compositions of Tyagaraja seemed to directly speak to me without the seemingly roundabout approach of compound words and personality-based dissemination of ideas.

Later on it became clearer to me that this had little to do with who was more or less creative, but rather had to do with the objective. MD, ST, and SS used the "templated" approach because it greatly suits their objective of disseminating spiritual ideas through puranic legends. Tyagaraja used the "direct" approach because he went out into the street to do "bhajan", wherein a direct dialogue with his audience would generate "easier results" in the manner of draksha rather than narikela.

Note that MD and Tyagaraja were friends, they are supposed to have listened regularly to each other's compositions. I am pretty sure neither had a feeling that one was at a "lower rung" than the other. At the same time, MD did not deviate (for the most part) from his approach, and Tyagaraja from his. Note that Tyagaraja had no lack of Sanskrit ability. Most likely, both he and MD could converse fluently in Sanskrit. However, when he composed in Sanskrit he also adopted the same "templated" approach. That should tell you something about the reasons for adopting the "epithet"-based (or "templated" as you call it) approach.
In this process I frequently ended up being challenged in trying to express what I wanted to express. Perhaps a reflection of my limited/rusty sanskrt vocabulary . I found that the same thought process flowed much more freely in Tamil. Again I typically stop with writing poetry as I am rather musically challenged in a lot of ways.
Clearly, I am not in a position to advise you why you are challenged by this. As I mentioned, this is not particularly difficult to do. The bhagavad gita is written in this style (with the adavntage that it can afford to ramble on for 18 chapters unlike the CM composer who has 5 minutes to express his idea). The upanishads are written in a contemplative style, sometimes switching to dialogue between characters.

Let me make it clear that I am all for different approaches to compositions. If you decide to compose in the "direct" style satisfying the technical guidelines, you have my full support. This thread is regarding overarching secular themes, not to promote the specific composition style of one composer or other.

What is strongly disagree with is your notion of "templated approaches" being on a "lower rung" of creativity. As I have explained above, this has nothing to do with creativity. Simply two different methods that appeal to different people and have different objectives.

Now, my specific responses to your concluding points:
1.Whether you write secular or religious or musical theme why are'nt we as a generation emulating the trinity
in their 'out of the box' thinking and stop with emulating in their templates and contents?
Emulation is not the root cause of what you see today. As with all change, it is gradual. Some elements of the "older" approaches are retained, some others are changed. As I said, I am not against your approach to composition. Please go ahead. As I also mentioned, I will be happy to compose in this manner as well. Hopefully it will convince you that both approaches have merit.
2.If you want to compose please do not stop at the lowest rung of creativity.
I think we all understand this. However, your notion of "epithet"-based composition style (regardless of theme) being on a "lower rung" is not well considered. Possibly, your own frustration with your perceived linguistic capabilities drives you to this assertion. I am pretty "catholic" in my reception to new ideas, and I have never claimed that secular themes are "superior" to religious ones. I only claimed that they need to be emphasized more and are equally valid in CM experience. I urge you to take a similar approach to the technical issues such as composition style (which are not really the primary subject of this thread).
3.A hundred theoritical arguments apart, this is a suggestion to the active members of this site:
Why don't we take up some theme of the month in the innovations forum and let the various folks here take a jab at composing, the more the languages the better (The more languages the better and see where it goes, it certainly would be a good exercise)
Sure, please go ahead. I personally do not compose for a specific occasion or as an exercise. I prefer to "craft" my compositions over a long period of time. One point that has not been mentioned (but I am sure you understand) is that it is ultimately about music as an art. Simply composing a nice poem is no use if it does not seamlessly integrate with the pure music.

Best Wishes,
SR

vidya
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 23:26

Post by vidya »

Uday,
Since this thread was about secular themes I referred to innovation in lyrical content. Musical innovation is another dimension and obviously if you take the musical context out it ceases to be a composition.Ideally one should have both. Just as lyrics are stuck in the template-mode , my complaint is that musical innovation in the last 50-100 yrs stops with creating, naming and a varja patterns in scales. May be explore creation of a new navrOj or a sthayi based rAga etc?
SR,
In that case I would like to request you to craft a composition just to see how it turns out
1.That is not on a person
2.That is not on a deity

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Uday_Shankar wrote:The lyrical content of musical compositions I should imagine are at the lower rungs of poetry ? Can't one look for much more creative poetry towards Kalidasa, etc.. than say towards MD ?
Uday, right on. There was a discussion on this in a different thread. Modern composers have actually put in some thought/comparison of different approaches to composition as taken by previous composers. Only a tiny fraction of that thought is expressed on this forum:

http://rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=3362&p=2

(posts #43-48 of that thread are probably relevant to the issue of "quality of poetry").

The poetry in CM is indeed much different from that in classical Sanskrit poetry, not because composers like MD, Tyagaraja etc. were not capable, it is primarily because they used what suited their musical objectives best. On the other hand, ST shows shades of classical poetry in his "flights of fancy" that he engages in. If one is talking about *demonstrated* felicity with poetry, then one can argue superficially that Kalidasa was a way better poet than Dikshitar, or whether Tyagaraja's composition style was on a "higher rung" than Dikshitar. But indeed I think such comparisons are apples-to-oranges and ultimately futile.

SR

arasi
Posts: 16774
Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30

Post by arasi »

Well said, Uday!
Bhakti (I mean it strictly in the temple-going sense here) with unlimited use of styrofoam is just as bad as committing atrocities and depositing huge sums of money in the tirupati huNDi.While temple-going is a good practice and is good for our kids, HOW you go about it is yet another thing. The styrofoam which figures in an american temple is figurative too in that it stands for not caring about: feeling one with humanity, helping out , feeling a sense of tranquility, all of which make temple-going an elevating experience.A temple is a gathering place for the community where children can learn by example--worshiping in an atmosphere of joy, meeting friends, listening to chants and singing, enjoy looking at the architecture, the decorated gods and listening to music, watching cultural programs and learning to care about social and environmental issues--where business, the stock market and property prices are not discussed...

SR,
You are right. We have reached the limit of our discussions, it seems. It wasn't meant in the first place that secular themes should oust the religious ones. If one were to ask, 'why isn't such and such a rAgA not sung at all nowadays? We should hear more of it', no one minds. This question about including more of non-religious songs in concerts seems to disturb some.
While many of my compositions are about one god or the other, I am glad I have a few which can be sung without connecting them to any particular god. I have thought often that it would be nice if I could get more of such songs...
Last edited by arasi on 06 Feb 2008, 21:59, edited 1 time in total.

hsuvarna
Posts: 138
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 06:47

Post by hsuvarna »

Sorry. I could not get back due to work load. By the time, the thread has grown a lot.

Arasi, you mentioned about lullabies and peasants singing freely in the fields, singing about earth or water or nature. All these subjects are universal. Everyone had experienced it, depend on them and enjoyed. So any song on them would be great to here. All these items are on doing duty without expecting anything in return. I welcome items centering on these themes. This is what I was thinking when I started to read the posts and the thread.

I commend the efforts of Sangita Rasikan for thinking newly. I also commend himn for using sanskrit to compose some of his songs. I also appreciate heartily, when he said more compositions are needed about Indian Civilisation which is rich. Indian Civilisation or the culture is all about that secret 'what after life/death', 'who am i' 'what is my dharma/duty'. Tons of stories and subjects centering around this theme of looking inner side are available in India for thousands of centuries. Compositions on these are welcome. Let us remember dadhiichi's sacrifice, about shibi, about the yaksha prashnalu, about vidura niti, about ranti deva's sacrifice or about the mongoose in dharama raja's yaga or about river ganges or himalayas or aaravali mountains or importance of satyam/shivam/sundaram or about all the preachings which make our life balanced.

But when I started to read the other thread on SR's compositions pointed to by Vasantha Kokila. I was hugely disappointed to see some of the the compositions on some contemporary persons. Do you need sanskrit and also the grammar/rules of CM to write on these? What a waste of knowledge by SR. I condemn secular music and I am very apprehensive of what may come out. Once the corruption of CM starts, no one can stop it. Where is my Tyagaraja's greatest ranjani composition 'Palukubotini sabha lona patita maanavula kosagi, khalula nechhata pogadana' and where are these compositions? How can I hear the neraval on some of these contemporary subjects chosen by SR? I am hugely dissapointed. Do we want to add subjects like reservations/religion-balance/dowry problems to a CM concert? We have lots of other channels to discuss these problems. Today if I goto CM concert, I know, what to expect? I am content with that. The tools like Rama, krishna, Murugan, compositions by unselfish/sacrifice-surrounded Tyagaraja/Ramadasu/MD help me point me to iiner side. Why you want to take away that from me?

I don't need any secular music. I am quite happy with it. Some other member bala or sbala said some thing like 'we agree up on the secular theme....' kind of statement. No that is not true. I am not agreing with this theme. I am very afraid of where it will lead me to and what kind of concert it will lead me to. For this reason, I also request the respected administrators to close this thread.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

hsuvarna wrote:But when I started to read the other thread on SR's compositions pointed to by Vasantha Kokila. I was hugely disappointed to see some of the the compositions on some contemporary persons. Do you need sanskrit and also the grammar/rules of CM to write on these? What a waste of knowledge by SR. I condemn secular music and I am very apprehensive of what may come out. Once the corruption of CM starts, no one can stop it. Where is my Tyagaraja's greatest ranjani composition 'Palukubotini sabha lona patita maanavula kosagi, khalula nechhata pogadana' and where are these compositions? How can I hear the neraval on some of these contemporary subjects chosen by SR? I am hugely dissapointed. Do we want to add subjects like reservations/religion-balance/dowry problems to a CM concert?
:D There is no need to get worked up, I think. As I mentioned, this thread is not about my compositions. Also, this is not the first time (nor probably the last) that my approach has caused concern of "corruption" and "waste of knowledge". However, this is changing and unfortunately, it cannot be prevented by insular reactions by those who want to maintain "purity" of CM . Regarding some of the subjects you mentioned, I don't see why not (the main question is how it is done).
We have lots of other channels to discuss these problems. Today if I goto CM concert, I know, what to expect? I am content with that. The tools like Rama, krishna, Murugan, compositions by unselfish/sacrifice-surrounded Tyagaraja/Ramadasu/MD help me point me to iiner side. Why you want to take away that from me?
Are you OK or in an excited state ? Is anyone "taking away" your favorite compositions or themes ?
I don't need any secular music. I am quite happy with it. Some other member bala or sbala said some thing like 'we agree up on the secular theme....' kind of statement. No that is not true. I am not agreing with this theme. I am very afraid of where it will lead me to and what kind of concert it will lead me to. For this reason, I also request the respected administrators to close this thread.
Nobody asked you to accept it. This is not a poll or election, nor a thread asking for your decision on the subject. However, every society has a small number of people who are willing to try new things, a small number of people who are very much against doing so, and a large number of fence-sitters. As for your "thread-closure" request, I will be extremely surprised if mods close this thread.

SR
Last edited by Sangeet Rasik on 07 Feb 2008, 00:11, edited 1 time in total.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

vidya wrote:In that case I would like to request you to craft a composition just to see how it turns out
1.That is not on a person
2.That is not on a deity
Yes, as I mentioned before. It is on my list of "things to do", and should be fun as well.

SR

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

No thread closing though I thought of closing it for half an hour just to get SR surprised :P

On such lighter note, I think hsuarna is afraid that SR's ideas will spread like wild fire causing the 'secular isai movement' to take hold. Then I can imagine ( my flights of fancy ) Music Academy passing a resolution that those who pertake in such 'nonsense' would be banned from singing at the Academy ;)

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

I feel totally handicapped not being able to participate in this fascinating discussion due to my overriding computer problems. SR, Vidya and VGV have held their forts valiantly and I hope something good comes out of these verbal duels from performers who read these threads and who are capable of charting 'new' directions in CM. At present I could not resist expressing some views though it may take a while before I could participate fully!

I view CM as a 'phonetic language' with a clear grammar and structure with potential to evolve (by this I mean it is not a 'closed' language and that the final word has been pronounced). CM can exist on its own without any support from any of the other languages since it communicates directly with the 'inner soul' (primitive emotions/moods and feelings). For example one can enjoy CM intrinsically without knowing any language in which lyrics are composed. In fact we can throw away all the compositions of the Trinity (which is the current mainstay of the performing CM) (not that we should (God Forbid!) and yet CM will be totally viable on its individual merits. The checks and balances that are part of the 'CM grammar' tell us what it is and also warn us when it is violated. No doubt the Trinity have made a Himalayan contribution by showing examples of the use of the grammar by fashioning kritis. By their nature 'bhakti' has become an overriding theme of these kritis and hence CM has come to be predominantly identified with 'bhakti'. Let me digress here to cite an example. Vedic sanskrit had a strict grammar and intonation and topics which could not be used for regular or scholarly communications. Panini logically codified the language refining it (samskrita) which led to the classical Sanskrit which became a versatile medium of scholarly communication. Similarly CM is capable of conveying any ideas or associations in any language if handled by an expert appropriately. Unfortunately the pattern (including the muusical templates) of the Trinity have been fossilized by their shishyas who could not think independantly (or even would not think differently due to Guru Bhakti). From time to time sparkling glimpses of other 'musical' aspects of CM have been independantly demonstarated by genius like Mali, LGJ, BMK but on the whole the performing groups have not amply capitalized on those ideas! Some worthwhile ideas have been dismissed as just fads!

Secular development of CM need not necessarily be language oriented. RTP is a fine example of CM which is language free and an expert performer can drive the Rasikas into ecstasy through effective and novel prayaogas based strictly on his imagination. Similarly an inspired tani can standout uniquely at the hands of a laya expert. No doubt these require expert knowledge for the performer as well as on the part of the Rasikas to appreciate. Most of the Rasikas learn to appreciate CM only through the kritis and are brainwashed into identifying CM with the 'language' and the associated themes. We need to train a new breed of 'Teachers' of CM who can communicate the grammar and fundamentals 'away' from the geethams and kirtanas. More emphasis has to be given to raga aalaapana and the ability to use imagination and manodharma. Most of all more research is needed to scientifically investigate ragas, new gamaka patterns, tala structures, adapting new instruments as well as harnessing the power of computer oriented structures etc., and also fundamental research directed specifially at CM psycho-acoustics. We are lucky that some of our bright youngsters are taking an interest in CM and we can hope that combined with their technical skills, independent thinking and freedom from prejudice they will be able to chalk out new directions in CM in the 21st century so that CM may break out of the shackles forged in the 19th century which have gotten rusted in the name of orthodoxy during the 20th century.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

vasanthakokilam wrote:No thread closing ...

( my flights of fancy ) Music Academy passing a resolution that those who pertake in such 'nonsense' would be banned from singing at the Academy ;)
....or be subject to "thread-removal" :P sorry just could not resist that one.

SR
Last edited by Sangeet Rasik on 07 Feb 2008, 01:17, edited 1 time in total.

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

:lol: SR.. It took me a few seconds to get that..

kkumar29
Posts: 46
Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 20:26

Post by kkumar29 »

CML has, in my opinion, expressed what CM is really all about. Unfortunately when someone raises these points like SR did, people somehow feel threatened and assume such voices are against bhakthi and are going to pollute/dilute CM. They seem to be harbouring this fear that the new CM (with secular compositions) is so blasphemous, that all compositions of Trinities will somehow vanish. From the responses I have seen so far to questions raised by SR, I have only seen emotional responses but no logical well thought out reasons as to why compositions with secular themes can not be sung in concerts. I have not read a single post from him that derides the compositions of Trinity but all he has been saying is to include compositions of secular themes. I do not see why a song by Subramania Bharathi like "sindhu nadiyin misai nilavinile" in sindhubhairavi is somehow less musical than any other composition in Sindhubhairavi.

However this thread does provide an insight into why people haven't succeeded in introducing secular or other themes into carnatic music :)

K. Kumar

hsuvarna
Posts: 138
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 06:47

Post by hsuvarna »

===================
SR: Are you OK or in an excited state ? Is anyone "taking away" your favorite compositions or themes ?
=====================

I am OK. How about you? You are getting mixed up in threads.
I am honestly not sure about the future of my fav compositions once the new age starts.
======================
SR:
Nobody asked you to accept it. This is not a poll or election, nor a thread asking for your decision on the subject. However, every society has a small number of people who are willing to try new things, a small number of people who are very much against doing so, and a large number of fence-sitters. As for your "thread-closure" request, I will be extremely surprised if mods close this thread.
==============================================

Nobody asked me to deny or write or read. Just the same way as multiple members here.

kjrao
Posts: 49
Joined: 15 May 2007, 08:01

Post by kjrao »

The secular themes mentioned by Uday are very important indeed. In principle, there is no reason why they should not be in CM sahitya. However, other mediums may be more suited to spread such message. CM Rasikas are exposed to other mediums as well !!! and not having such themes in CM will not be a handicap. The CM Music courses in Universities can encourage students to compose in such themes and try out. We can only speculate its effect and lasting appeal !

sbala
Posts: 629
Joined: 30 Jul 2006, 08:56

Post by sbala »

hsuvarna - I wanted to clarify that my stance has always been that we should be open to new themes as long as there is a process to ensure quality. I believed there was a general agreement on that front. I also did not agree with what I believed were alarmist views on assured death of CM if it purely stuck with bhakti. Again, I could have misinterpreted those arguments. Apart from that, I do not have any other views on this subject.

I too was diverted and disappointed by SR's compositions(only the 2 or 3 compositions mentioned in this thread) and lost my cool a bit (blame it on high expectations and also on a couple of sleepless nights of Lisp programming) but like he said, his compositions are not the subject of this debate. That was purely an error of judgment from my side and thats why I wanted to withdraw that post if SR found it offensive.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

sbala wrote:hsuvarna - I wanted to clarify that my stance has always been that we should be open to new themes as long as there is a process to ensure quality.
Thanks for the clarification. The main problem I have had in our exchange is that you did not define what makes for "high quality". This is still a valid topic for the thread. When new themes come in, how does one judge "quality" ?

Please note I do not mean to say that "quality standards" do not exist and that we need to develop "new quality standards". The standards exist as defined by Indian musicologists (and their views are very broad unlike the narrowmindedness and obscurantism I see in some of the "bhakti"-based CM enthusiasts and self-proclaimed traditionalists), and these standards are quite timeless as far as I can see.
I too was diverted and disappointed by SR's compositions(only the 2 or 3 compositions mentioned in this thread) and lost my cool a bit (blame it on high expectations and also on a couple of sleepless nights of Lisp programming)
At the risk of diverting the thread topic, let me mention that:

1. No composer ever has had "universal popularity" with all compositions. I have posted a number of pieces on various subjects. Some may appeal more to a "conservative" audience, others to a more "liberal" audience, others to all, and yet others to none.

2. Art takes time to be "digested" and fully understood. Contemporary composers will be better judged by future generations, just as past ones are evaluated by us today. I am yet to come across a "super-critic" who can critique a CM composition without even hearing it rendered, or for that matter without defining what "quality" is, hence I suspect some of the comments are based on a very limited understanding of what a vaggeyakara is.

I will rest my views on "my compositions" here, since it is not becoming to comment on my own work unless goaded/provoked. I want to avoid the possibility of comments that are based upon incomplete information and knee-jerk responses biasing future readers coming across this thread.

SR
Last edited by Sangeet Rasik on 07 Feb 2008, 09:01, edited 1 time in total.

sbala
Posts: 629
Joined: 30 Jul 2006, 08:56

Post by sbala »

SR,
I agree with you that it was a response based on instinct rather than any thorough research or analysis or a complete understanding of what a vaggeyakara is. And there is no doubt that there might be a lot of merit in those compositions that I did not see at that moment. And that is precisely why I take back those statements.

As far as what I mean by quality, I'm looking more at the processes that need be in place rather than coming up with properties that a composition should satisfy. Do we just rely on a free market mechanism where an artiste decides to sing what he/she wants and let the rasikas be the judge of what is good or what is not? Or do we have a body of eminent scholars that lays down a set of standards of what is acceptable and what is not taking into account history, tradition and the progress that we wish to make? I believe it has to be a combination of both. I don't know if such an approach exists now or even if it is workable in art.

hsuvarna
Posts: 138
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 06:47

Post by hsuvarna »

sbala, thanks for your clarifications and reply. I am glad to know that car/cdr is still alive.

When SR says he preaches and by examples, SR1, SR2, SR3 all get influenced. So I can very well expect a barrage of songs on people whom they believe are great contemporaries or subjects. Sri Lalu Yadav will definitely be followed by Ms. Phulan or Ms. Mayavati or Sri Mulayam or Sri Sharukh. Then come Tatas and Birlas who have sponsor power and just like a Othukkad Kavi's day or Diskhitar Day, you will have eprson X's compositions theme.

If not that extreme or pessimistic, on a music season day, artist A will sing a song supporting a theme, In the next slot artist B will sing condemning the views in that. Universality can mean common agreement to some extent. We don't have the problem with current day subjects like Rama. How many fence sitters have the problem?

New things are welcome. I mentioned some subjects which are common to everyone, someone else may mention some other non-controversial subjects. We can have good songs and concerts.
SR and his/her compositions/tastes are not the cynosure here but they are very much an indication of new stuff to come.

While we are at it on the thread, gender problem came. In the other thread on SR's compositions caste thing was mentioned somewhere. NRIs, RIs so many bifurcations may come. There is no discussion on what could be the new stuff , yeah we must try new ideas, CM is static, This is what some members say.

How much Ghazal sangeet contributed to HM classical. A few ghazal singers became rich. That is about it.
Let there be N derivatives out of the base. Why to shake the base with grand new stuff?

coolkarni
Posts: 1729
Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 06:42

Post by coolkarni »

How much Ghazal sangeet contributed to HM classical. A few ghazal singers became rich. That is about it.
An illformed opinion I must say.
Unless we are talking of the kind of Ghazal Delivery that Hariharan excels in.

BGAK once wailed in an interview that his music was targetted as that coming from a Thumri Singer and so will always have the light influence
http://rapidshare.com/files/89791675/BGAK.mp3.html
Here is a beauty of a Phase where he traces childhood Memories feeding on the impulses of Ustads as they mature into Classical Mode.

If you still hold on to that view , I threaten to upload the full interview !!

:D
Last edited by coolkarni on 07 Feb 2008, 09:59, edited 1 time in total.

vijay
Posts: 2522
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 16:06

Post by vijay »

Wow this thread has really grown many charanams! Keep it going folks....Uday's articulate post best represents my own position...

arasi
Posts: 16774
Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30

Post by arasi »

CML,
Started wondering if you were well, not hearing from you for the past few days when this thread was being spun with 'spark'ling colors! It was just your computer, thank goodness! By the way, speedy recovery, computer...
I suppose Suvarna realizes that our ages put together can take us back to a century or two considering this century is still very young :)
VK,
'The removal of the thread also reminded me of the opposite ceremony--of Bharati initiating one for whatever his name!

nathikan
Posts: 27
Joined: 08 Oct 2007, 01:40

Post by nathikan »

hsuvarna wrote:Universality can mean common agreement to some extent. We don't have the problem with current day subjects like Rama.
Is it agreement when people who dissent have no voice? I mean, plenty of people think of Rama as contemptible but at present they only have a choice of not listening to CM or not paying attention to the lyrics.

What I find interesting is that there are plenty of well-regarded present day vocalists like Bombay Jayashree who are atheists, I wonder if they provide impetus or support for secular or (why not?) militantly atheist compositions...

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

nathikan, I have respect for those atheists who respect the believers even if they disagree. But why should atheism be militant and why should there be compositions that reflect militant atheism? I think that is a huge leap from secular themes which is the topic of this thread.

sbala
Posts: 629
Joined: 30 Jul 2006, 08:56

Post by sbala »

hsuvarna wrote:I am glad to know that car/cdr is still alive.
Count on me to support rare artforms! Yes, I consider Lisp a work of art.

Anyway, I don't want to get drawn into specific composer's work or even a specific composition. I made a mistake and I do not want to bring in a composer's work even for illustrative purposes. What I was always interested in is how do you maintain quality as you allow new changes. We cannot just let our fears of the future cajole us into inaction. Instead of arguing further, let me suggest this approach. This itself could ruffle a few people.

1. Introduce a rating agency that employs eminent scholars who rate every composition that is submitted to them. Please observe that it is optional for a composer to go through this process. Obviously, the agency will have some standards to judge the compositions. What those standards are, is possibly the next step and I would leave it to knowledgeable people to discuss them

2. Some might argue if the Trinity did not have to go through this process, why should the modern composers be subjected to it. That is why I said step 1 is optional. If you do not want to get your work certified/rated, you are free to take your composition to market without that rating. The assumption here is the rating agency will become credible over a period of time and their rating would give a reasonable indicator of the composition and could lead to easier path in popularising it eg recording companies might start giving more weightage.

My justification for the process is
1. If films can go through this, why not CM?
2. If artistes can get certified by AIR, why not compositions?

Ofcourse, I don't know if such an arrangement is already in place

nathikan
Posts: 27
Joined: 08 Oct 2007, 01:40

Post by nathikan »

vasanthakokilam wrote:why should there be compositions that reflect militant atheism?
FOR THE SHEER, REFRESHING PLEASURE OF IT.

As for respect.... I think it's more that these artists know which side their bread is buttered. I could even posit that singing lyrics more in tune with their actual views might provide for richer bhavam? It would be exciting to find out.

kaapi
Posts: 146
Joined: 05 Jun 2005, 14:32

Post by kaapi »

It has been argued in this thread that instead of bhakti being the only subject other themes and contemporary themes should be adopted, which will raise the listener interest and hence bring in a larger audience. This line of arguments supposes that the lyrics are the most dominant experience providers in a CM concert. Lyrics possibly contributed to 30 % of the experience that even a lay listener.

The dominant position that the Trinity have enjoyed over a period time has contributed to notion that the bhakti orientation is because of them and there is a “strong “and “invisibleâ€

coolkarni
Posts: 1729
Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 06:42

Post by coolkarni »

http://www.uykucu.org/watch_video/kls42 ... RADHAR{dot}

My favourite Vaggeyakara of OUR Times- Ashok Chakradhar
A Mind boggling Poet.
A Mind boggling Performer.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

[quote]But they shun the nAmasamkIrtans as these are too participatory or because of the discomfort of sitting cross legged on the floor. This is the “Bhakti Brigadeâ€

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

Tyagaraja used the "direct" approach because he went out into the street to do "bhajan",
SR
Thyagaraja used 'direct' approach because he was speaking to the Lord through the Kritis. If only you had the patience to go through the kritis, you will realise that Thyagarja was communicating directly with the Lord.
But when I say this, there are many who will say 'blind faith'. In Indian philosophy and Yoga systems there are words like 'sAmIpyam', 'sAlOkyam', 'sArUpyaM', sAyujyaM'. Those who care to make an effort to understand the significance of these words, would understand what it means to 'talk directly to the Lord'.

sbala
Posts: 629
Joined: 30 Jul 2006, 08:56

Post by sbala »

kkumar29 wrote:I have only seen emotional responses but no logical well thought out reasons K. Kumar
There are two ideals, Beauty and Truth. These are two different worlds, each standing on its own. People living in the world of Truth look for objectivity. People living in the world of Beauty look at a concept mainly from that perspective and express their thoughts emotionally. That doesn't necessarily mean one world is superior to the other. It follows that there might be beautiful things that are false and true things that are not beautiful. The person living in the world of Truth wil shun those thoughts that he knows is false. Similarly, a person living in the world of Beauty will shun all arguments that take away the beauty that he had seen. It is not required for these two worlds to meet all the time and that is one reason for the sparks. But, to assume that the logical world is superior to the emotional/beautiful world isn't good.

kkumar29
Posts: 46
Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 20:26

Post by kkumar29 »

sbala,

I agree with what you say. However the two ideal worlds are not mutually exclusive. The person seeking the truth can also appreciate the beauty and the person appreciating and immersing in the beauty can do so knowing fully that the beauty they are immersing in is not the complete truth.

I for one enjoy the current form of carnatic music immensely with its bhakthi soaked lyrics in any language. I also enjoy music of other forms where there are no lyrics. I just fail to understand why there is such an emotional outburst against somebody raising a question as to why we can not enjoy music that has non-bhakthi related compositions. As claimed by some of the responders the trinity and bhakthi oriented compositions have withstood the test of time. If the so called secular themes are of good quality they will also withstand the test of time and become accepted in the CM scene. At least give it a chance.

In conclusion all I can say is that there is always resistance to change. In any change process there are seven stages (Five if you follow a different school of thought) and first one is always denial. I guess most of the responders are currently in this stage. Slowly and surely they will progress through the other stages and will ultimately reach the internalization stage.

K. Kumar.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

kaapi wrote:It has been argued in this thread that instead of bhakti being the only subject other themes and contemporary themes should be adopted, which will raise the listener interest and hence bring in a larger audience. This line of arguments supposes that the lyrics are the most dominant experience providers in a CM concert. Lyrics possibly contributed to 30 % of the experience that even a lay listener.
Hold on, I said that introducing secular themes in the lyrics is one essential part of many things that need to be done to make CM a strong art form capable of withstanding extreme social changes which are already occurring. I am simply going to ignore the "extreme conservatives" because they are in a very small minority and do not add much value to the discussion except to give occasionally useful reminders of what past composers focused on. In one of the very first discussions in which I participated on this forum (back in 2006), I gave essentially a rundown of suggested "things to do", more secularization of themes was one of them.
When we talk of contemporary themes we should also talk the contemporaenity of the composer also. Normally as any composer passes away his compositions become less common and slowly the compositions of the next generation takes over. Thus it is wrong to think that the trinity obliterated the earlier composers. It was a natural process. But it is the trinity who has proved contrary to this rule. More than the other two it is Saint Thyagaraja’s whose legacy simply refuses to go away.
Usually, the mistake is in how the legacy is defined. If one defines "legacy" as the corpus of kritis of a composer, then I believe all legacies will eventually fade. Even among the Trinity, the number of kritis which are frequently sung and developed is shrinking (whether Tyagaraja or MD or Shastri). As a matter of fact, Swati kritis are the only one (among "major" 18th-19th century composers) enjoying an expansion of interest.

I believe the "legacy" should be defined truly in a much broader sense than popular appeal. It is defined more in the sense of intellectual and artistic influence on the future composers. I will disagree that Tyagaraja's legacy should be considered "greater" than MDs. I believe both T and MD have influenced many composers after them. Papanasam Sivan may have had his own views on Tyagaraja, but they should not be taken as eternal truth. While T's forte is in a very direct form of spirituality and bhakti, MD was a far better cultural integrator - such people only come by once in hundreds of years. As I mentioned in my preface to my composition on MD, he was able to combine many of the very best elements of Indian civilization into his work. Some people who think that his compositions are a mass of doxological compound words have entirely missed the point. Saints and bhaktas are also good, but they tend to appear much more frequently.

The impact of MD on our music must not be underestimated, and given a supply of discerning and reflective composers and musicologists, it should "by rights" far exceed any other vaggeyakara. MD's biggest disadvantage was his relatively weak shishya parampara. That made the crucial difference, not any "super-quality" of Tyagaraja's compositions. MD shared many qualities with another great cultural integrator, Adi Sankara - his firm grounding in Advaita, practise of "catholic" bhakti as a jivanmukta without the fetters of Dvaita and other theological nonsense that idealizes starvation and a hard life, and peripatetic nature (being willing to travel far and wide and learn many new things). But one thing he did not learn was the importance of preserving his own legacy. Unlike Sankara who toured India "harvesting disciples" from the heretics and adherents of other darshanas whom he defeated in debate, and who thereafter established various "mathas" with these disciples in charge to propagate his legacy, MD did not do much to preserve his legacy. We do not know why, but if he had done so then I bet the same guys who are now upholding Tyagaraja would have been singing MD's tune.

With Shastri and Swati, the shishya-parampara was even weaker or non-existent. With Swati, at least the royal lineage and financial resources of his descendents keeps his legacy strong at least in Kerala. I am not sure about Shastri, it is unfortunate that his legacy is not appreciated as much as it should be except in meaningless words and not real deeds.

The more one contemplates deeply about these things, the more one realizes that it is not obscurantist beliefs of "super-sprituality" - making Tyagaraja to be some kind of "super-composer" - that constitute the real reasons for CM being what it is today. It seems that it is extremely difficult to get across the idea that people who examine past composers from an impartial and thoughtful point of view, are not stupid nor less spiritual in nature nor incapable of understanding the lives of saints and bhakts. That is the brick wall which truly frustrates advancement in our classical music, not the imagined "brick wall" of Tyagarajan "super-compositions" that remain unsurmountable.

I do entirely agree with you (as I stated in a previous post) that many post-18th century composers have tried to "imitate" MD or Tyagaraja without imbibing the essence of their composition. I can relate personally to this in the context of MD. Fathoming the depth of his contributions remains a lifelong challenge for me. Success or failure is for the future rasiks to judge, but one thing became clear to me (and which I have stated before) - that being a "modern-day imitator" of MD (or any other composer) is not what modern composers should be doing.
In my opinion what is happening in the Chennai music scene is something like this. There are a good number of people who want something to keep them going spiritually but do not know where to get it. Bhakti thru CM is the most easily accessible straw to which they clutch. They can actually participate in nAmasamkirtanas where the music is very good with emphasis on sAhitya, lot of Bhakti etc. But they shun the nAmasamkIrtans as these are too participatory or because of the discomfort of sitting cross legged on the floor. This is the “Bhakti Brigadeâ€

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

vgvindan wrote:Thyagaraja used 'direct' approach because he was speaking to the Lord through the Kritis. If only you had the patience to go through the kritis, you will realise that Thyagarja was communicating directly with the Lord.
Well, VGV, I don't claim to be able to "plug into" Tyagaraja's "direct communications with the Lord". What I have done over the years is to learn a number of his kritis - along with those of other composers - and try to reflect upon them in a thoughtful way as relevant to the art of CM. I am not really interested in getting into the realm of superstition, non-verifiability, and obscurantism. "Bhakti" is a very personal thing and not to be bandied around lightly or with full confidence that person X has a "direct connection" but person Y "lacks patience".

Other composer Z (feel free to insert other composer name) also is in "direct communications with the Lord" and if you have patience to go through his/her kritis, you will realize that he/she too is in "direct communication" with the Lord. If you cannot see it, the problem is that you have not had enough patience. :)

SR
Last edited by Sangeet Rasik on 08 Feb 2008, 01:06, edited 1 time in total.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

SR,
There cannot be a greater scorn on Thyagaraja - what else can we expect from those name people as "bhajeham' and 'brovavamma'?
Last edited by vgvindan on 08 Feb 2008, 01:11, edited 1 time in total.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

A "decoupling" of CM from the "bhakti-brigade" and viewing it as an art form which has to be appreciated slowly and thoughtfully, not just gobbled down, will be very welcome. This does not mean that bhakti has no place in CM or that compositions of T "on bhakti" and MD "on deities" should not be sung any more.
First Commandment has come - let the other nine also come.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

vgvindan wrote:SR,
There cannot be a greater scorn on Thyagaraja - what else can we expect from those name people as "bhajeham' and 'brovavamma'?
Let me complete the list - why stop at Tyagaraja ? Since I named MD as "Mr. Bhajeham" 15 years ago, I am therefore also heaping scorn on him, and since I called Shastri as "Mr. Nannubrova", I have even greater scorn for him. Swati, a.k.a. "Mr. Pahimam"...not even worth a mention.
:)

vidya
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 23:26

Post by vidya »

Sangeet Rasik wrote:but one thing became clear to me (and which I have stated before) - that being a "modern-day imitator" of MD (or any other composer) is not what modern composers should be doing.
SR
This was my entire point in questioning templates.That MD had his reasons to create and use a certain form or for example choosing to do away multiple charanas with same music. A great many people have repeated what Dr.Raghavan and others have said about a not-so active shishya parampara but that is only a fractional part of the story.

- The much hailed kutcheri paddhati with emphasis on fast-paced songs, assumptions on variations in eduppu and scope for quick tempo swara singing has taken from listeners the ability to fathom the depth of a raga.This is the same reason why multiple ragas in RTPs rule over in-depth treatment of a single raga.
- MD's compositions in their elephantine mode did not fit the needs of the some concert goers. Which also explains the popularity of Patnam subramanya Iyer's compositions in their peppy edginess.Its kind of like fast food and we can't do much about it.
- Also the ability to improvise and stretch seems to be an issue with MD's compositions. To fathom an MD composition in its depth you need to sing it with the
structure intact.
- Another reason is that MD in his compositions decided to take a janus-faced approach so it did not help a seeker of new ragas like Kharaharapriya or
or Kunthalavarali , or did not aid the compositional approach of the next generation of composers like Patnam Subramanya Iyer and Harikesanallur Muthaiah Bhagavatar .
- I would also add that had the Tanjore quartet chosen to live in Chennai or Tanjore and propogate their own compositions and their gurus MD would have seen much more light.
Their decision to move to Travancore meant that a large number of their compostions ended up in this doubtful heap 'who composed this' category.
Sangeet Rasik wrote:The impact of MD on our music must not be underestimated, and given a supply of discerning and reflective composers and musicologists, it should "by rights" far exceed any other vaggeyakara. MD's biggest disadvantage was his relatively weak shishya parampara. That made the crucial difference, not any "super-quality" of Tyagaraja's compositions. MD shared many qualities with another great cultural integrator, Adi Sankara - his firm grounding in Advaita, practise of "catholic" bhakti as a jivanmukta without the fetters of Dvaita and other theological nonsense that idealizes starvation and a hard life, and peripatetic nature (being willing to travel far and wide and learn many new things). But one thing he did not learn was the importance of preserving his own legacy. Unlike Sankara who toured India "harvesting disciples" from the heretics and adherents of other darshanas whom he defeated in debate, and who thereafter established various "mathas" with these disciples in charge to propagate his legacy, MD did not do much to preserve his legacy. We do not know why, but if he had done so then I bet the same guys who are now upholding Tyagaraja would have been singing MD's tune
SR
It is here that I disagree . I consider the legacy of MD and his catholicity of outlook largely to be a result of his shakta traditions. A tradition known for a liberal outlook in terms of caste and gender. Infact contradictory to what you say, Sankara's advaita idealizes a hard life (and when it was initially established none of the mathas had any householder adherents, it was a mere monastic order which later became a social institution). As for Dikshitar it is the core of the shakta and the shakta tradition that he followed and that which rejects the negative approach and the nEti nEti model and celebrates life affirmation and a balanced outlook that we see in his compositions. Anyone who understands Dikshitar will know that he never pooh-poohed any theological stream as nonsense. I find a lot of his compositions seamlessly integrate Agamic Saivism, Kashmiri Saivism, Tantric Saivism, references to left handed paths derailed as heretics and also to philosophical streams such as advaita and dvaita. Also today very few people believe in the historicity of a monolithic Sankara as a cultural integrator. I for one do not believe that the the author of the brahma SUtra bhAshyas was the same as the shanmata sthApaka. This is an assumption born out of faith not out of historicity.

I personally think the quality of both these composer's compositions were truly super-quality and may be we should take a leaf out of Dikshitar and eschew this parochialism?
Tyagaraja was more popular only because his approach to music and ragas also happened to be the way the future of carnatic music headed and the emotional appeal.
Last edited by vidya on 08 Feb 2008, 02:45, edited 1 time in total.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Sbala,
sbala wrote:What I was always interested in is how do you maintain quality as you allow new changes. We cannot just let our fears of the future cajole us into inaction. Instead of arguing further, let me suggest this approach. This itself could ruffle a few people.
Thanks. I think this is definitely a worthwhile topic within this thread.
2. Some might argue if the Trinity did not have to go through this process, why should the modern composers be subjected to it.
Trinity went through the process and came out with flying colors overall.
1. Introduce a rating agency that employs eminent scholars who rate every composition that is submitted to them. Please observe that it is optional for a composer to go through this process. Obviously, the agency will have some standards to judge the compositions. What those standards are, is possibly the next step and I would leave it to knowledgeable people to discuss them.
Sharangadeva, in the third chapter of his "Sangita Ratnakara" has enumerated the characteristics of an ideal vaggeyakara. Rajan Parrikar has paraphrased these from Shringy and Sharma (vol 2, chapter 3). I am cutting and pasting directly from the following link:

http://www.sawf.org/newedit/edit05012000/musicarts.asp
a thorough knowledge of grammar (indicative of the ability of the appropriate use of words)
proficiency in lexicography
knowledge of prosody (differentiating among the various meters)
proficieny in the use of figures of speech
comprehension of aesthetic delight (rasa) as related to different emotive states of being (bhAva)
intelligent familiarity with local custom (necessary to grasp the intonation (kAku) peculiar to particular regions
knowledge of many languages
proficiency in the scientific theories of fine arts
expert knowledge of the three musical arts (vocal music, instrumental music and dancing)
a lovely tone quality
good knowledge of laya (tempo), tAla (musical time) and kAla.
discrimination of different intonations
acquaintance with regional (desi) rAgas
a sense of propriety in expression and new melodic forms
knowledge of another's mind
maturity in the understanding of different prabandhas
ability to compose songs at short notice
expert knowledge of composing different verbal structures for different melodic forms
maturity in producing gamakas pervading the three registers
proficiency in presentation of different AlApa
SR

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

vidya wrote:It is here that I disagree . I consider the legacy of MD and his catholicity of outlook largely to be a result of his shakta traditions. A tradition known for a liberal outlook in terms of caste and gender. Infact contradictory to what you say, Sankara's advaita idealizes a hard life (and when it was initially established none of the mathas had any householder adherents, it was a mere monastic order which later became a social institution).
I did not say that Advaita has no place for the monastic order. Of course I know that even modern Advaitins like Vivekananda and Chinmayananda led a monastic life. But it is a far stretch to say that this is an "idealization" of monasticism. In Advaita the idealization is of the "jivanmukta", who can be a householder or not. Gaudapada's "mandukya karika" explicitly says that the Advaitic path leads to a "natural peace" and does not require undue hardship, ascetism, penance/tapas or other deprivations. The tradition of "sanyasa" is common to many branches of Indian philosophy and spiritualism, and is a path taken by individuals through their own choice. It should never be confused as an "idealization" of the best adherent of Advaita.
As for Dikshitar it is the core of the shakta and the shakta tradition that he followed and that which rejects the negative approach and the nEti nEti model and celebrates life affirmation and a balanced outlook that we see in his compositions. Anyone who understands Dikshitar will know that he never pooh-poohed any theological stream as nonsense.
First of all, I have never suggested that he "pooh-poohed" any theology as having no merit at all. I am saying exactly that he never subscribed to theological nonsense as in claiming that one god is better than other or that certain sectarian beliefs are better than others or in denying the ultimate non-dual truth in favor of dualist (maya-promoted) semi-truths. Neither did Sankara reject theology as such, and considered himself a "bhakta". Secondly, I strongly disagree that an Advaitin has to reject the "neti neti model" in order to celebrate life affirmation and have a balanced outlook. This is based upon an incorrect interpretation of the Upanishad and has been argued by many scholars over the centuries. Very briefly, "neti neti" only indicates what is *not* the end-all and be-all of the universe; by no means does it say that one must reject all of this in order to be Advaitic. The notion of "paramarthika" and "vyavaharika" truth is of importance in understanding this.

Again, I am not saying that shaktism has no influence in Dikshitar's life, but at the root his approach is Advaitic and it is the fundamental foundation of Dikshitar and his music and his life. He considered shaktism as one path/window into the Advaitic ideal. His catholicism is ultimately inspired by Advaita, although it may be seen most frequently through his tantric and Saiva practices. The fundamental nature of Advaita is non-sectarianism.
I find a lot of his compositions seamlessly integrate Agamic Saivism, Kashmiri Saivism, Tantric Saivism, references to left handed paths derailed as heretics and also to philosophical streams such as advaita and dvaita.
I am very well aware of this. In my composition "muttusvaminam" which is posted on this forum, I highlight repeatedly this very integration of advaita, saivism, agamic tantra, and advaita. In my other composition "vaggeyasamrajam" (not posted yet) I continue to highlight this integration, also including his command of other shastras.
Also today very few people believe in the historicity of a monolithic Sankara as a cultural integrator. I for one do not believe that the the author of the brahma SUtra bhAshyas was the same as the shanmata sthApaka. This is an assumption born out of faith not out of historicity.
I do not agree with this interpretation at all. As far as I know, Sankara is most certainly the author of the brahmasutra bhashyas and that the four "authentic" dashanami mathas are founded by him or members of his very early shishya parampara. Some disputants may have existed but these assertions have been debunked and disclaimed. But this is probably not a subject for detailed discussions on this thread.
I personally think the quality of both these composer's compositions were truly super-quality and may be we should take a leaf out of Dikshitar and eschew this parochialism?Tyagaraja was more popular only because his approach to music and ragas also happened to be the way the future of carnatic music headed and the emotional appeal.
I partially agree with your first statement, but entirely disagree with the second. Forum members will note that my support of MD as the "greater" vaggeyakara has only in the sense of according him a rightful place and refuting the "Tyagaraja-is-the ultimate" assertions that many who follow CM are brought up to believe.

SR
Last edited by Sangeet Rasik on 08 Feb 2008, 03:34, edited 1 time in total.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

vidya wrote:- The much hailed kutcheri paddhati with emphasis on fast-paced songs, assumptions on variations in eduppu and scope for quick tempo swara singing has taken from listeners the ability to fathom the depth of a raga.This is the same reason why multiple ragas in RTPs rule over in-depth treatment of a single raga.
- MD's compositions in their elephantine mode did not fit the needs of the some concert goers. Which also explains the popularity of Patnam subramanya Iyer's compositions in their peppy edginess.Its kind of like fast food and we can't do much about it.
- Also the ability to improvise and stretch seems to be an issue with MD's compositions. To fathom an MD composition in its depth you need to sing it with the
structure intact.
- Another reason is that MD in his compositions decided to take a janus-faced approach so it did not help a seeker of new ragas like Kharaharapriya or
or Kunthalavarali , or did not aid the compositional approach of the next generation of composers like Patnam Subramanya Iyer and Harikesanallur Muthaiah Bhagavatar .
- I would also add that had the Tanjore quartet chosen to live in Chennai or Tanjore and propogate their own compositions and their gurus MD would have seen much more light.
While your factual points are well taken, I think one has to be careful to distinguish cause from effect. The root cause of these issues is the fact that MD's shishya parampara was not strong enough to influence decisions and directions. The modern "kacheri paddhati" followed in Chennai was introduced by Ariyakudi from Tyagaraja's parampara. If MD's parampara had been strong enough his disciples would have composed more palatable compositions, or speeded up the rendition (which works fine in many of his compositions), in keeping with the times (unfortunately most of them were "gurave namah" types with little initiative - or were perhaps just overwhelmed by Tyagaraja-centrism created by a large and well-oiled shishya parampara).

I totally disagree that improvisation is more difficult in MD compositions. In many compositions, he has taken care to introduce points for neraval and other elaboration. I do agree that the "sangati" approach of Tyagaraja's tradition is attractive to many (it is not clear to me whether he himself composed the sangatis or whether his disciples introduced them later). As for "new ragas", MD has done a great service in defining a multitude of "Hindustani" ragas which did not exist in the CM practice of his day. There is outstanding seed material for composers wishing guidance to compose in monumental Hindustani ragas, rather than compose in ragas of limited scope whose novelty stems essentially from their rare use. Why is it that there are still no weighty CM compositions in great Hindustani ragas ? Answer: because few have bothered to study how Dikshitar internalized Hindustani ragas and defined the basics of CM composition in these ragas.

SR

vidya
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 23:26

Post by vidya »

Yes, advaitin as used by a layperson and a believer is very different from the term advaitin as used by a philosopher.
There are a million variations between the advaitins even among gaUDapada, sankara, sureshvara and so on.
Which is why a lot of philosophers qualify advaita as shAkta advaita, sankara advaita and why there saivite theologicians who called
themselves advaitins but rejected the sivasamavAda. Dikshitar's advaita was the shAkta advaita which people like bhAskara rAya followed.
In terms of the technical tenets from what I have gathered Dikshitar's advaita closely follows the ShAkta advaita beliefs.

As for the paramArthika vyavahArika system that sadly seems to be a trump card used to justify practices that defy logic. As for the monolithic sankara (ie author of the BSB being different from the author of the stotras) I am not sure what constitutes historical debunking that you refer. Any historical references to this would be appreciated , and I do have a lot of them of my own. but its a big digression and I don't want to get into this here.

uday_shankar
Posts: 1467
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 08:37

Post by uday_shankar »

vidya,

Shankara provides a broad target for labeling, given the extensive scholarly, philosophical/polemical works.

For Dikshitar all we have is a few lines of musical sAhitya and some sketchy biographical details (correct me if I am grossly wrong !!).

At a layperson level, there's no dearth non-intellectuals who can seamlessly integrate not merely different flavors of a single religious tradition but entirely non-overlapping religions such as Hindu and Semitic traditions. After all they are not in the business to split theological hairs but to get something useful from it all.

Based on what you know (since I don't know much about anything!), can you attribute extensive advaitic scholarship and/or rigorous intellectualism to MD ? If not, his "catholicity" stems from the intuitive inclusiveness that most people feel rather than any careful theological analysis, no ? Therefore it is unfair to pit him as an inclusive life-affirmer against the neti neti Shankara the life-denier ?

Again, it is conceivable that the Shankara of the bhashyas works is entirely different from the Shankara of real life (even granting the stotras are not his).

knandago2001
Posts: 645
Joined: 05 Sep 2006, 10:09

Post by knandago2001 »

If I were to “walk in the shoesâ€

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

What I have done over the years is to learn a number of his kritis - along with those of other composers - and try to reflect upon them in a thoughtful way as relevant to the art of CM. I am not really interested in getting into the realm of superstition, non-verifiability, and obscurantism. "Bhakti" is a very personal thing and not to be bandied around lightly or with full confidence that person X has a "direct connection" but person Y "lacks patience".
This amounts to telling telling 'I enjoy reading about so and so author - I appreciate his poetry - but don't ask me about the contents. The fact is that it is the passion behind the contents which emerges as poetry. You cannot delink passion behind the contents from the poetry-per-se. This is what called learning by rote.

The depth of Thyagaraja's music derives from his Bhakti. These 'bhakti-brigade-bashing' people are doing greatest disservice to the cause of music by considering music to be only an art form, freely use the name of Thyagaraja and also throw scorn over his bhakti as 'obscurantism'.

Music is a language of bhAva - emotions. Particularly, the kritis of Thyagaraja is steeped in such a deep bhakti that it is not possible to fathom it unless one has inclination and commitment.

These people who say that they love the kritis of Thyagaraja and at the same time throw scorn over his bhakti are indeed the pretenders of highest order promoting one's own wares, telling cock and bull stories to cheat the gullible public.

Admin,
I feel ashamed to be in the midst these 'go-mukha vyAghras'. Please remove my name from the forum.
Good Bye
Last edited by vgvindan on 08 Feb 2008, 09:30, edited 1 time in total.

vidya
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 23:26

Post by vidya »

Should we say Shankara of 'unreal' life philosophically speaking ? :)

I am not pitting anyone against anyone but was trying to point out our own internal disparities - when it comes to music we want an intellectual approach,
when it comes to philosophy, social norms and culture a lot of people prefer a faith-based approach. Intellectual rigour can be applied in all dimensions and not when it suits us.
Yes, drawing conclusions from kRtis can be a unreliable, and my conclusions of Dikshitar's philosophical tenets and outlook are largely based on whatever little I have collected such as:

1.Published biographies 2.Additional field data collected from informal interviews with Shishya parampara folks, local traditions in and around the place he grew up.
3.The kind of textual tradition, terminologies used in kRtis. References to graded liberation, various contextual ways in which
he uses terms like avidyA, mAya ,jnAna jnAtru jnEye etc, technical term dropping without opinionation etc give us a pointer.
4.Again It could be possible that it had more to with an individual than a theology BUT wherever there occurs a reference to left-handed path it is always qualified
as 'one among the many methods of worship'. This is largely a legacy of his theology, in these upasakas terms like 'cleansing' and supplanting are never used.
And in that limited sense there really is definitely a greater degree of catholicity. Also because even though there is a succession of guru parampara(s) these upasakas do not believe
in institutionalization.It was in this context that I thought the comparison was not accurate.

We are talking about history that is hardly 200 years old. and a lot of these people have strong oral traditions even if you discount the miracles.
Anyway I have nothing more productive to add to this discussion and will exit now . Thanks to SR for providing some fodder to this discussion.I wish you well in your composing endeavors.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

KNG,

[quote="knandago2001"]If I were to “walk in the shoesâ€

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Vidya,
vidya wrote:when it comes to music we want an intellectual approach,
when it comes to philosophy, social norms and culture a lot of people prefer a faith-based approach. Intellectual rigour can be applied in all dimensions and not when it suits us.
A lot of the Advaitic debate (especially with the Buddhist "logicians") is regarding the true value of "logic" as a tool to see the ultimate reality. Advaita is a FAR more intellectual and "logical" philosophy than some give it credit for. Certainly better than the Buddhist "logicians" who brilliantly conclude that the Universe is in fact a Void. Advaitic approaches enable a person to apply "intellectual" approaches in all walks of life while having a clear understanding of the limits of logic itself.

As an aside, the Standard Model (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model) is probably the last "logical" bastion of modern physics. Beyond that, you can judge for yourself how "logical" the hypotheses and claims of String Theory and "Theory of Everything" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything) are. Is this science or philosophy ? Logic or faith ? Paramarthika or vyavaharika ?

I have great interest in knowing more about Dikshitar through your direct interactions with his shishya parampara and those close to his personality. When/if your collected data is published, I hope you will let me/us know where it can be found. Even if it is not published, I hope there is a way it can be shared.

Best Wishes,
SR
Last edited by Sangeet Rasik on 08 Feb 2008, 10:02, edited 1 time in total.

hsuvarna
Posts: 138
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 06:47

Post by hsuvarna »

=========I partially agree with your first statement, but entirely disagree with the second. Forum members will note that my support of MD as the "greater" vaggeyakara has only in the sense of according him a rightful place and refuting the "Tyagaraja-is-the ultimate" assertions that many who follow CM are brought up to believe.

SR

=========================================

I really dont get you at all. To raise the stature of MD you refute Tyagaraja. Tomorrow to refute another composer, you raise the stature of Tyagarja. You can write about the philosphics and advaita content of MD. You can list some lines instead of MD where in you feel really good about him.

Coolcarni-ji,
Thumri-Ghazal-HM: I consider thumri as part of HM unlike ghazal. I have not heard a ghazal in any HM concert nor I heard. You are welcome to reform this ill-form with more uploads of threats :-). Prior to this I read BGAK interviews where in he mentioned about the thumris and how he sang in his concerts. I consider ghazal as more of a derivative. Especially when sung by Mallika-e-Ghazal BA or ustad GA or MH than by HH or JS-C. We very well know thumris at the end of HM concert and I have seen GA starting the concert with a thumri. I always had problem buying ticket for GA or MH ghazal concert. never a problem for HM consert. What I was thinking was whether Ghazal influenced the HM patronship. The movie shankarabharanam in telugu definitely contributed to CM learning by more children/adults in Andhra. But we can discuss this in another thread.

nathikan:
I realized that there are some people like you who are totally outside. You have evry right to expect the concerts to your liking. I hope artists like BJ or some other artist cater to your needs of special refreshment. There cannot be a commonality here. Both have to be different circles. I was rasising objections to SR because something of this sort (anti-rama or no-rama) is very well expected.

Now I am geting a feeling that forum admins are thinking about what to do.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

VGV,
vgvindan wrote:Music is a language of bhAva - emotions. Particularly, the kritis of Thyagaraja is steeped in such a deep bhakti that it is not possible to fathom it unless one has inclination and commitment.

I feel ashamed to be in the midst these 'go-mukha vyAghras'. Please remove my name from the forum.

Good Bye
upacAramu jEsEvArunnArani maravaku rA
kRpa kAvalenani nE nI kIrtini balkucunuNDaga
vAkiTanE padilamuga vAtAtmajuDunnaDani
SrIkarulagu nI tammulu cEriyunnArani
EkAntamunanu jAnakiyErpaDiyunnadani
SrI kAnta parulElani SrI tyAgarAja vinuta

SR

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Sir,
hsuvarna wrote:I really dont get you at all. To raise the stature of MD you refute Tyagaraja. Tomorrow to refute another composer, you raise the stature of Tyagarja. You can write about the philosphics and advaita content of MD. You can list some lines instead of MD where in you feel really good about him.
Perhaps in order to "get" me, you might have to consider that my purpose here is not to "refute" or to "insult" any composer. CM is not a "zero-sum game" in which one has to be raised in order to insult the other.

SR

Post Reply