>or is there any liberty left for the artist to explore the raga’s aesthetics according to the merits of the instrument ?
That is indeed the crux of the argument. TMK's answer is an unequivocal No. At least he is willing to stick his neck out and say so.
BTW, I do not think TMK is requesting any authority to officially ban anything. He is just using his bully pulpit to raise some discussion topics in the public. I do not see anything wrong with that.
If someone thinks TMK has some personal enmity towards some specific saxaphne artists, that is their problem, I did not sense that while reading his full article. In fact, he goes out of his way to
compliment the artists.
I am not in agreement with TMK's viewpoint here. I think there is a general fuzzy definition of what carnatic aesthetic is. It may not be written down anywhere but it is out there in the cutural context. That aesthetic is a great mixture of gamaka oriented notes and plain notes of varying swarasthanas. If an instrument can produce a subset of that aesthetic, what is wrong with that?. It does not have to be 100% aesthetic bandwidth. But I do not think we want an instrument, due to its limitations, changes that carnatic aesthetic. That is a finer level of nuanced distinction which is indeed important.
I think there is some validity to his argument about keyboard. With respect to the keyboard, with pitch bend, you can create the necessary curves. TMK says that the curves he hears are not correct within the carnatic idiom. That is a valid criticism coming from someone who we can assume has a clear ear for this. Instead of being defensive, practitioners should ask him to explain and see if that can be rectified.
TM Krishna's article in the Hindu - "Between Tradition and E
-
mohan
- Posts: 2808
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 16:52
I don't think it is the fault of the instrument. The modern synthesizers have the technological capability to make curves just like a stringed instrument. It is just that this is a new development and the current practioners are not skilled enough in Carnatic music to bring out the full potential of the instrument. eg. it took the genius of U Shrinivas to unveil the electric mandolin. TNS has dabbled with the keyboard but probably has not access to the latest instruments.vasanthakokilam wrote: I think there is some validity to his argument about keyboard. With respect to the keyboard, with pitch bend, you can create the necessary curves. TMK says that the curves he hears are not correct within the carnatic idiom.
-
uday_shankar
- Posts: 1475
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 08:37
vk, indeed. Here's an example of a feedback I gave to keyboard satya a while back:vasanthakokilam wrote:With respect to the keyboard, with pitch bend, you can create the necessary curves. TMK says that the curves he hears are not correct within the carnatic idiom.
http://rasikas.org/forums/post63733.html#p63733
-
uday_shankar
- Posts: 1475
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 08:37
Finally I have some time to collect my thoughts about this...
It is a mistake to focus on details.
There's an overarching flaw in T M Krishna's article and that is regarding what to "allow" in classical music, who's to "allow" and what constitutes "dilution". That kind of thought process is flawed in such a fundamental way and Shri Shivadasan alone among all posters has made that point crystal clear.
The article also suffers from a lack of understanding of how instrumental techniques have evolved over time.
I too lament that so many youngsters opt to play the keyboard instead of much more versatile CM-oriented instruments like the chitravina, violin and vina. But who is allowed to legislate what is "allowable" ? And would we want to live in an artistic world that legislates such things ? In any free society (and that's the only one that holds any appeal; all others are fascist in some way or another) people do exactly as they please and others have the option to follow that which appeals to them. This naturally gives rise to a spectrum of possibilities according to people's tastes and preferences. There are artists engaged in actively preserving the most classical of traditions, artists engaged in delivering "lighter" versions, artists engaged in experimentation, artists engaged in playing CM on the harmonium and jalatarangam, etc... And they are all necessary for a healthy culture.
Back in the 1930's Palladam Sanjeeva Rao played the flute pretty much like a harmonium...I've been looking for a recording. That was good enough for the stalwarts of the era like ARI, SSI, etc... I've personally been in the presence of SSI when he raved about the flute music of "Sanjeeva Raayar" ! Perhaps if SSI had worn the TMK hat he might have had a "saxophone moment" in the early 1930's by writing a premature obituary for the flute. After all, the Mali and Swaminatha Pillai flute technique revolution hadn't happened yet.
But still, that doesn't address the core problem, which is of tolerance and aesthetic quality that transcends idioms. There's a place for discrete note instruments in Indian music. I would refer everyone to a superb jugalbandi between Hariprasad Chaurasia and Shiv Kumar Sharma with Jhinjhoti and Mishra Piloo from the 80's. The gamaka free santoor provides such a wonderful background, both in color and melody, while the flute explores all the curves. To Hindustani music's credit it has developed instrumental traditions and a tolerance for diversity in the idioms. Thus they have dhrupad, Khyal, thumri, etc...
Today, with electronic amplification Carnatic music is in a confused place as far as identity is concerned. Before the era of amplification there were two clear streams:
1) Indoor chamber music ... like the soft vina music and the modulated voice of the dhanammal kind of music.
2) Outdoor pandal music ... mostly male singers with full-throated unmodulated voices...example Kanchipuram Naina Pillai. Also included in this is the only instrumental stream supported by CM - Nagasvaram.
Now can anybody suggest that a nagasvaram play a padam like Brindamma ? And since it can't, should we banish the nagasvaram because it cannot support the "full spectrum" of possibilities of CM ?
Electronic amplification has really blurred the lines between the two streams and in that sense CM has actually narrowed in terms of diversity of styles. What happened to the distinct MMI, SSI, MVI, Dhanammal, etc...schools ?
Even in vina playing, there's a spectrum of possibilities from Dhanammal to S Balachandar. The pre-electronic era vainikas used a lot of plucking techniques and split finger techniques to sustain karvai, execute gamakams, etc...Even after electronics, Mysore Doreswamy Iyengar did amazingly exquisite things with the vina through a deft use of plucking alone. Today if vina dhanammal played (I urge rasikas to go back and listen to them carefully) some folks might howl that the "idiom" is not perfect! Such is the foolishness of hindsight.
There are amazing things going on in film music and fusion. I was at a presentation by Anil Srinivan, chitravina ravikiran and rajiv menon. Each one gave extremely substantive reasons for the things they do.
The future will always belong to core classical music. But it can also belong to any sincere effort to explore new possibilities. In that sense, the efforts of Anil Srinivasan have a place at least to the same extent that Viriboni as a main piece does. In fact, while the latter seems a whimsical attempt to introduce novelty into a traditional Katcheri, the former is a sincere attempt to explore uncharted territory. It is quite possible that fusion efforts may come and go like Nedunuri sir said somewhere : they are like waves of the ocean...the ocean is the core classical music (I'd say Indian or western). But they are welcome and healthy waves as long as we know that they are explorations by people who know the depth of the ocean. And who knows, they may be much more than mere waves. They may lead to great classical art forms too.
It is a mistake to focus on details.
There's an overarching flaw in T M Krishna's article and that is regarding what to "allow" in classical music, who's to "allow" and what constitutes "dilution". That kind of thought process is flawed in such a fundamental way and Shri Shivadasan alone among all posters has made that point crystal clear.
The article also suffers from a lack of understanding of how instrumental techniques have evolved over time.
I too lament that so many youngsters opt to play the keyboard instead of much more versatile CM-oriented instruments like the chitravina, violin and vina. But who is allowed to legislate what is "allowable" ? And would we want to live in an artistic world that legislates such things ? In any free society (and that's the only one that holds any appeal; all others are fascist in some way or another) people do exactly as they please and others have the option to follow that which appeals to them. This naturally gives rise to a spectrum of possibilities according to people's tastes and preferences. There are artists engaged in actively preserving the most classical of traditions, artists engaged in delivering "lighter" versions, artists engaged in experimentation, artists engaged in playing CM on the harmonium and jalatarangam, etc... And they are all necessary for a healthy culture.
Back in the 1930's Palladam Sanjeeva Rao played the flute pretty much like a harmonium...I've been looking for a recording. That was good enough for the stalwarts of the era like ARI, SSI, etc... I've personally been in the presence of SSI when he raved about the flute music of "Sanjeeva Raayar" ! Perhaps if SSI had worn the TMK hat he might have had a "saxophone moment" in the early 1930's by writing a premature obituary for the flute. After all, the Mali and Swaminatha Pillai flute technique revolution hadn't happened yet.
But still, that doesn't address the core problem, which is of tolerance and aesthetic quality that transcends idioms. There's a place for discrete note instruments in Indian music. I would refer everyone to a superb jugalbandi between Hariprasad Chaurasia and Shiv Kumar Sharma with Jhinjhoti and Mishra Piloo from the 80's. The gamaka free santoor provides such a wonderful background, both in color and melody, while the flute explores all the curves. To Hindustani music's credit it has developed instrumental traditions and a tolerance for diversity in the idioms. Thus they have dhrupad, Khyal, thumri, etc...
Today, with electronic amplification Carnatic music is in a confused place as far as identity is concerned. Before the era of amplification there were two clear streams:
1) Indoor chamber music ... like the soft vina music and the modulated voice of the dhanammal kind of music.
2) Outdoor pandal music ... mostly male singers with full-throated unmodulated voices...example Kanchipuram Naina Pillai. Also included in this is the only instrumental stream supported by CM - Nagasvaram.
Now can anybody suggest that a nagasvaram play a padam like Brindamma ? And since it can't, should we banish the nagasvaram because it cannot support the "full spectrum" of possibilities of CM ?
Electronic amplification has really blurred the lines between the two streams and in that sense CM has actually narrowed in terms of diversity of styles. What happened to the distinct MMI, SSI, MVI, Dhanammal, etc...schools ?
Even in vina playing, there's a spectrum of possibilities from Dhanammal to S Balachandar. The pre-electronic era vainikas used a lot of plucking techniques and split finger techniques to sustain karvai, execute gamakams, etc...Even after electronics, Mysore Doreswamy Iyengar did amazingly exquisite things with the vina through a deft use of plucking alone. Today if vina dhanammal played (I urge rasikas to go back and listen to them carefully) some folks might howl that the "idiom" is not perfect! Such is the foolishness of hindsight.
There are amazing things going on in film music and fusion. I was at a presentation by Anil Srinivan, chitravina ravikiran and rajiv menon. Each one gave extremely substantive reasons for the things they do.
The future will always belong to core classical music. But it can also belong to any sincere effort to explore new possibilities. In that sense, the efforts of Anil Srinivasan have a place at least to the same extent that Viriboni as a main piece does. In fact, while the latter seems a whimsical attempt to introduce novelty into a traditional Katcheri, the former is a sincere attempt to explore uncharted territory. It is quite possible that fusion efforts may come and go like Nedunuri sir said somewhere : they are like waves of the ocean...the ocean is the core classical music (I'd say Indian or western). But they are welcome and healthy waves as long as we know that they are explorations by people who know the depth of the ocean. And who knows, they may be much more than mere waves. They may lead to great classical art forms too.
Last edited by Guest on 26 Dec 2009, 20:58, edited 1 time in total.
-
cmlover
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
I disagree! Uday has not addressed the saxophone issue. Does he agree or diagree with TMK? There is no need to justify the Flute or Chitravina which are not questioned by TMK either. There is no analogy in claiming how instruments get adapted in HM which is gamakam-poor. I like the ocean analogy for CM. But the instruments do not have to appear and decay like the ephemeral waves. There are 'solitons' which have their own independant prolonged existence like the Flute or Clarinet through the genius of folks like Mali/AKC. Nadaswaram is eternal coexisting with CM from time immemorial even befor TNR gave it a boost. And saxophne is a close relative of nadaswram awaiting the arrival of another genius to adapt and explore its potential. Do not throw the baby with the bath water!
-
srikant1987
- Posts: 2246
- Joined: 10 Jun 2007, 12:23
HM is not gamakam-bankrupt. Furthermore, not long ago, there were styles within Carnatic music which also were also gamakam-poor. Harmonium and jalatarangam had a place in CM. TMK observes that that space has diminished, and seems to think it's good they diminished, but Uday thinks perhaps they can be given more space (and similarly, that keyboard and sax also deserve the kind of space harmonium and jalatarangam used to have).There is no analogy in claiming how instruments get adapted in HM which is gamakam-poor.
-
uday_shankar
- Posts: 1475
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 08:37
You old nArada muni of Ottawa!cmlover wrote:I disagree! Uday has not addressed the saxophone issue. Does he agree or diagree with TMK?
We shouldn't reduce this debate to a silly "for" and "against" but yes I disagree with practically anything T M Krishna has to say about instrumental techniques, since he hasn't betrayed much understanding. So here's the spectrum of possibilities:
1) Should the saxophone be banished ?
No! But the question itself is flawed. Who's to banish what ? Are we fascists ?
2) Does the saxophone produce a "full spectrum" of Carnatic music ?
Perhaps, perhaps not. Every instrument (and VOCALIST!) chooses to play the kinds of ragas/kritis that are suitable to itself. I have loved listening to some of vidvan Kadri Gopalnath's recordings whenever it's played, particularly a kharaharapriya (pakkala). I've enjoyed a couple of his katcheris.
3) Can the saxophone evolve into a versatile instrument for CM ?
For creative minds the possibilities are endless.
4) What if not ?
Nothing. Let's enjoy whatever there is.
Beyond disagreeing with T M Krishna, one might say I am pi**ed with him for writing such a gratuitous, uninformed, half-baked article no doubt being able to bulldoze it through the editorial review of the Hindu based on his stature. Where was the much better informed Gowri Ramnarayan ? Why don't they ask me ?
Last edited by Guest on 27 Dec 2009, 07:31, edited 1 time in total.
-
Shivadasan
- Posts: 251
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 07:52
Uday writes "In that sense, the efforts of Anil Srinivasan have a place at least to the same extent that Viriboni as a main piece does. In fact, while the latter seems a whimsical attempt to introduce novelty into a traditional Katcheri, the former is a sincere attempt to explore uncharted territory."
-
rajeshnat
- Posts: 10144
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 08:04
Without getting into details of the article , how is it that when anil publishes a one page reply for the original article , how is that TM Krishna reads that on the same day and replies to the same reply of Anil. Like few movies , taking a very polarized view helps always then being in the middle of the road view. It helps both anil and TMK.Shivadasan wrote: Anil Srinivasan’s reaction and TMK’s rejoinder in Hindu’s Sunday Magazine make interesting reading.
http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/mag/20 ... 110300.htm
http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/mag/20 ... 120300.htm
Last edited by rajeshnat on 27 Dec 2009, 08:41, edited 1 time in total.
-
cmlover
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
Thanks Uday for lighting the tube light
I feel better now!
Why don't you write to Hindu instead of waiting for them to ask you?
You are one step higher than TMK as an Engineer who understands (designs?) instruments and one who is a no mean performer!
Now I have to read Anil and TMK's response..
I wonder why they don't post here at the Forum so that we Rasika Public can respond!
I feel better now!
Why don't you write to Hindu instead of waiting for them to ask you?
You are one step higher than TMK as an Engineer who understands (designs?) instruments and one who is a no mean performer!
Now I have to read Anil and TMK's response..
I wonder why they don't post here at the Forum so that we Rasika Public can respond!
-
Rasika911
- Posts: 521
- Joined: 09 Mar 2009, 06:11
Im liking where this is going 
These sentences from TM Krishna have a lot of meaning:
"Anil has got it wrong, I am not resisting change; I am resisting compromise"
"Let's not create an aesthetic that is born out of inability but create new aesthetics born from complete internalisation and expression of the existing aesthetic."
These sentences from TM Krishna have a lot of meaning:
"Anil has got it wrong, I am not resisting change; I am resisting compromise"
"Let's not create an aesthetic that is born out of inability but create new aesthetics born from complete internalisation and expression of the existing aesthetic."
-
vasanthakokilam
- Posts: 10958
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
ippadAn debate kaLai kattiirukku 
I think Anil's next response should be this. ( I know he did not ask me...) . He needs to challenge TMK's fundamental thesis: "create new aesthetics born from complete internalisation and expression of the existing aesthetic"... TMK is just stating it without defending that position.
The counter point is, though a bit convoluted: Assume there is an instrument ( say violin ) which can produce everything that is required of CM. Let us say a talented instrumentalist extends the aesthetic within the CM groundrules ( which TMK will agree is just fine since he is in favor of change ), but in such a fashion that vocal musicians can not produce it ( either some gamakas, sthayi or multi-line, whatever..details do not matter now ).
Let us say over time it catches on. What do you do then? Abandon the vocals since it has limitations? Obviously not. Do you then stop vocal musicians from extending the aesthetic over time? Obviously not.
A parallel aesthetic, a branch, within the same family evolves, acknowledging the "limitations". ( I think there are already cases of some lakshaNa gitams or varnams from old times that go so high in range that only instrumentalists can play them. )
That is what we can hope for in the case of saxaphone etc., a parallel aesthetic within the CM idiom except they are starting off with known current limitations.
I think Anil's next response should be this. ( I know he did not ask me...) . He needs to challenge TMK's fundamental thesis: "create new aesthetics born from complete internalisation and expression of the existing aesthetic"... TMK is just stating it without defending that position.
The counter point is, though a bit convoluted: Assume there is an instrument ( say violin ) which can produce everything that is required of CM. Let us say a talented instrumentalist extends the aesthetic within the CM groundrules ( which TMK will agree is just fine since he is in favor of change ), but in such a fashion that vocal musicians can not produce it ( either some gamakas, sthayi or multi-line, whatever..details do not matter now ).
Let us say over time it catches on. What do you do then? Abandon the vocals since it has limitations? Obviously not. Do you then stop vocal musicians from extending the aesthetic over time? Obviously not.
A parallel aesthetic, a branch, within the same family evolves, acknowledging the "limitations". ( I think there are already cases of some lakshaNa gitams or varnams from old times that go so high in range that only instrumentalists can play them. )
That is what we can hope for in the case of saxaphone etc., a parallel aesthetic within the CM idiom except they are starting off with known current limitations.
-
Rasika911
- Posts: 521
- Joined: 09 Mar 2009, 06:11
IPPPADAN debate kaLai kattiirukku with the entrance of vasanthakokilam
Hopefully this does not become family feud between TMK and AS
Today also happens to be the day of TMK's academy concert...ill be staying up late to see the song list and i anticipate some surprises
Hopefully this does not become family feud between TMK and AS
Today also happens to be the day of TMK's academy concert...ill be staying up late to see the song list and i anticipate some surprises
Last edited by Rasika911 on 27 Dec 2009, 16:49, edited 1 time in total.
-
Always_Evolving
- Posts: 216
- Joined: 16 Oct 2007, 08:33
As he was the author The Hindu must have approached TMK for his response to the rejoinder so as to publish both together.rajeshnat wrote:
Without getting into details of the article , how is it that when anil publishes a one page reply for the original article , how is that TM Krishna reads that on the same day and replies to the same reply of Anil. Like few movies , taking a very polarized view helps always then being in the middle of the road view. It helps both anil and TMK.
-
lahari
- Posts: 35
- Joined: 15 Nov 2009, 15:16
Anil's response is not good enough. He seems to take refuge in perceptions, sensibilities and labeling of music. Our forum-ites have better technical and pointed responses to the 'inabilities' of instruments to reproduce CM, dwelling deep into instruments and their intonations, place for discrete notes and gamakams etc
Anil says he has performed for the past 30 years......How old is he? 32 or 33 or so? He started when he was 2 or 3? Wow, is he trying to portray himself as a prodigy?
And why does TMK make one feel that he is given the onerous task of preserving CM like Hercules (or is it Atlas?) holding the sky?
I would rather listen to what older people who have been in the system for a long time, listened to concerts/records in a major way, hobnobbed with vocalists and instrumentalists, applied their minds in a detailed way, have to say.
Anil says he has performed for the past 30 years......How old is he? 32 or 33 or so? He started when he was 2 or 3? Wow, is he trying to portray himself as a prodigy?
And why does TMK make one feel that he is given the onerous task of preserving CM like Hercules (or is it Atlas?) holding the sky?
I would rather listen to what older people who have been in the system for a long time, listened to concerts/records in a major way, hobnobbed with vocalists and instrumentalists, applied their minds in a detailed way, have to say.
-
cienu
- Posts: 2392
- Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 11:40
As far as I know Anil has been paying the piano since he was 4 years. Which makes it approximately 30 years of association with the Grand instrument.lahari wrote: Anil says he has performed for the past 30 years......How old is he? 32 or 33 or so? He started when he was 2 or 3? Wow, is he trying to portray himself as a prodigy?
-
cienu
- Posts: 2392
- Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 11:40
I do not think so. It is what you say , rather than age , which is of importance.lahari wrote: And why does TMK make one feel that he is given the onerous task of preserving CM like Hercules (or is it Atlas?) holding the sky?
I would rather listen to what older people who have been in the system for a long time.....
-
vinsim
- Posts: 46
- Joined: 07 Feb 2010, 01:36
TMK should concentrate on his own singing and make sure that he himself does not compromise on the traditional aesthetics that he so harps about. Kadri is a fantastic artist who perhaps surpasses TMK in many respects (manodharma to name one). Condemning the saxophone and other instruments sounds like a case of sour grapes to me. So what if a few ragas can't be played? Exactly how many ragas are there in Carnatic music? And how many can TMK claim to sing well?
When there is a place for Santoor in HM, certainly there can be one for saxophone in CM. I know many friends who got interested in CM because of saxophone. Right now, I am "showing off" Kadri's music to a couple of my jazz-savvy co-workers, who are completely blown off their mind after listening to him.
When there is a place for Santoor in HM, certainly there can be one for saxophone in CM. I know many friends who got interested in CM because of saxophone. Right now, I am "showing off" Kadri's music to a couple of my jazz-savvy co-workers, who are completely blown off their mind after listening to him.
Last edited by vinsim on 27 Dec 2009, 13:44, edited 1 time in total.
-
sundance
- Posts: 19
- Joined: 01 Jul 2009, 21:59
lahari said:
Anil says he has performed for the past 30 years......How old is he? 32 or 33 or so? He started when he was 2 or 3? Wow, is he trying to portray himself as a prodigy?
Anil's first performance was at the age of 3 on national television. It was mentioned in an earlier interview of his in the Hindu. So I think 30 years is right, as cienu states.
Anil says he has performed for the past 30 years......How old is he? 32 or 33 or so? He started when he was 2 or 3? Wow, is he trying to portray himself as a prodigy?
Anil's first performance was at the age of 3 on national television. It was mentioned in an earlier interview of his in the Hindu. So I think 30 years is right, as cienu states.
-
harimau
- Posts: 1819
- Joined: 06 Feb 2007, 21:43
Harimau has the courage of his convictions and is willing to put his views on record.cmlover wrote:
VK
...Most of the Rasikas go by hearsay and are conditioned by what an 'acknowledged expert' says though he/she could be wrong. For that matter a harimau will not be liistened to while a TMK 's views will not be challenged based on his high profile (I am saying just for example and not particularly in this case!)Many times Rasika views are modulated by hero-worship and by what their peers say. There are many who would not even accept 'objective proof' since they blindly follow their hero and his flock.... :sigh
Most poseurs -- I will not call them posters -- on this website pretend to understand Carnatic Music. They have the courage of other people's convictions! Thus you see a mob attacking honest reviews of popular artists.
It took about 5 days before anyone even posted a reference to the T M Krishna article? Why?
Because like a burglar stung by a scorpion in the act of burglarizing (in Tamil, thirudanukku thael kottinappole), they had to stay silent!
-
harimau
- Posts: 1819
- Joined: 06 Feb 2007, 21:43
Given a choice between playing an instrument that cannot properly reproduce the chittaswaram in "Gaja vadana" (Todi, by Kumara Ettandra) and throwing the composition on the garbage heap, what would be your preference?
Taking this further, if a possible future domination of Carnatic music by Saxophones, tubas, trumpets, pianos and keyboards should come about, what do you think would happen to our ragas and the glorious compositions in them?
Taking this further, if a possible future domination of Carnatic music by Saxophones, tubas, trumpets, pianos and keyboards should come about, what do you think would happen to our ragas and the glorious compositions in them?
-
uday_shankar
- Posts: 1475
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 08:37
Harimau, Harimau, Harimau ! You can't be serious?! For an astute person like yourself, that kind of doomsday paranoia is way off the charts and completely unfounded. How many tuba players are there in all of Iindia ?!
Last edited by Guest on 28 Dec 2009, 07:28, edited 1 time in total.
-
kamalamba
- Posts: 348
- Joined: 26 Dec 2007, 18:26
Here is a link to a physicist from Matscience I know (Rahul Siddharthan) on the TMK-AS issue.
It is the second article in the link below.
http://horadecubitus.blogspot.com/
enjoy.
It is the second article in the link below.
http://horadecubitus.blogspot.com/
enjoy.
-
cmlover
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
-
mahakavi
- Posts: 1269
- Joined: 29 Dec 2009, 22:16
>>I cannot resist quoting a mild dig Prof Gross made at the S in the name ICTS. He related the story of a press conference at Princeton after John Nash won the Nobel. Supposedly, a journalist asked Nash: "You have won the Memorial Nobel Prize in Economic Science. Is economics a science?" He replied: "No, any discipline that requires the word "science" to be added to its name is not one." Social scientists, political scientists and creation scientists, take note.<<
The above quote is from Rahul Siddhartan's blog (first article). I concur, if only to take exception to my daughter who majored in "political science" at Boston U. She went on further to take a degree in "legal science" too to boot!
The above quote is from Rahul Siddhartan's blog (first article). I concur, if only to take exception to my daughter who majored in "political science" at Boston U. She went on further to take a degree in "legal science" too to boot!
-
munirao2001
- Posts: 1334
- Joined: 28 Feb 2009, 11:35
Truly, the issue is musician understanding, enjoying, exploring, innovating and aiming to achieve or achieving excellence, uncompromisingly, strictly adhering to the core values of a well established music system; musician understanding, enjoying, exploring, innovating and aiming to achieve or achieving mastery, compromisingly, not strictly adhering to the core values of a well established music system. The first category belongs to the process of becoming self-less, internalizing the unfathomable beauty and sincerely partaking the internalized beauty and bliss with rasikas. The second category applies to those who, with total focus on achieving success in terms of popularity, creating a new style or playing technique, with full of Self-love, partaking their compromised music, with ease of understanding and appeal.
At any time of the history, there will be practitioners belonging to both the categories, within and without the genre, they owe allegiance or promote. Good, bad and ugly co-exist, as it is nature's order!
Experience and enjoyment of the beauty and bliss demands reflection and contemplation, gained out of internalized knowledge, not by hearsay or acquired taste. Waves and mist attract, create awe, hit, change the contours of the borders, draw and take away- caught unaware. Sea/Ocean not at the edges is deep and serene beauty, with unexplored and unfathomable but, with access only to few of those who strive and acquire the true knowledge!
One gets served, what he demands, pays and deserves.
munirao2001
At any time of the history, there will be practitioners belonging to both the categories, within and without the genre, they owe allegiance or promote. Good, bad and ugly co-exist, as it is nature's order!
Experience and enjoyment of the beauty and bliss demands reflection and contemplation, gained out of internalized knowledge, not by hearsay or acquired taste. Waves and mist attract, create awe, hit, change the contours of the borders, draw and take away- caught unaware. Sea/Ocean not at the edges is deep and serene beauty, with unexplored and unfathomable but, with access only to few of those who strive and acquire the true knowledge!
One gets served, what he demands, pays and deserves.
munirao2001
-
bhavarasa
- Posts: 75
- Joined: 11 Nov 2009, 02:57
I agree with some of his comments but not with most of them. He seems to have fallen into the "Current + Prior Generations = Traditional" and "Rest All = Unacceptable" trap.
For e.g., he says that the violin has been successfully accommodated into Carnatic music but then goes on to question the Saxaphone and the Keyboard and declares them unfit for Carnatic music because they cannot represent Carnatic music in all its glory.
I beg to differ. The violin, as pervasive as it might be in CM today, does not and cannot fully represent all the gamakas. In fact, the only instrument that can is the Veena. So does that mean that no other instruments (and I'm not including percussion instruments here) can ever be brought into CM?
According to Krishna, Clarinet is OK but not Saxaphone. Does he really know that OR are his conclusions based on AKC being better at the Clarinet than Kadri at the Saxaphone?
Again, he says Mandolin was OK but not Keyboard. Is that because U Srinivas was an ultra-genius who adapted the instrument to our music but Sathya is not at that level yet? What if the Mandolin had been introduced into CM by a lesser skilled person than US - someone who could not bring out all the different gamakas and modulations? Would TMK's verdict stand?
At the end of the day, I think he was comparing artists, not instruments.
What if the Saxaphone instead of the Clarinet had been introduced by AKC? Imagine the possibilities.
For e.g., he says that the violin has been successfully accommodated into Carnatic music but then goes on to question the Saxaphone and the Keyboard and declares them unfit for Carnatic music because they cannot represent Carnatic music in all its glory.
I beg to differ. The violin, as pervasive as it might be in CM today, does not and cannot fully represent all the gamakas. In fact, the only instrument that can is the Veena. So does that mean that no other instruments (and I'm not including percussion instruments here) can ever be brought into CM?
According to Krishna, Clarinet is OK but not Saxaphone. Does he really know that OR are his conclusions based on AKC being better at the Clarinet than Kadri at the Saxaphone?
Again, he says Mandolin was OK but not Keyboard. Is that because U Srinivas was an ultra-genius who adapted the instrument to our music but Sathya is not at that level yet? What if the Mandolin had been introduced into CM by a lesser skilled person than US - someone who could not bring out all the different gamakas and modulations? Would TMK's verdict stand?
At the end of the day, I think he was comparing artists, not instruments.
What if the Saxaphone instead of the Clarinet had been introduced by AKC? Imagine the possibilities.
-
srutilaya
- Posts: 11
- Joined: 06 Dec 2009, 23:55
Some questions:
Is the article about the evolution of any instrument? On fair reading, it is only about the music that is currently played on (and heard from) some of these instruments; about music, which is only an approximation of carnatic music and not the complete carnatic music. Because it cannot produce some basic and quintessential charateristics of this genre of music; it cannot comply with certain rules (of ragalkshanam), the central melodic ideas of carnatic music. And yes, carnatic music happens to have grammar / codification / aesthetic idioms, and you can't wish them away.
To say this, does one need to be a master of the engineering principles behind the construction of an instrument? Isn[t it enough if one knows the music'coming from it does not capture a raga in its essence? Without gamakas on the right note and of the right amount, the ragas are not simply ragas by definition. And without those ragas, and the heavy krithiis in these ragas, is the resulting output really CM, or only an apology to CM? To many of us, the limitations are huge and fundamental. And the limitation cannot be glorified as innovation or enrichment.
Does AS's response answer the central point made by TMK? Why does it simply duck the issue? Because it is unable to state unequivocally that the instrument can play CM in its full glory? Why talk about artists' rights of survival, and about limiting music that is limitless, classifying music that defies classification etc? Aren't these lines of argument merely emotional? Are these really relevant to a discussion on the fundamental definitions of a a musical form that is indeed classified as classical music? Extend the limitless argument, and cwhere do you get?Can you say it is permissible to play a line of thyagaraja followed by a swinging jackson number, if music knows no limits? Isn't classification and codification a reality that defines today's musical forms? And pray what does it have to do with artists' survival rights? (To me, the artists can definetely survive, and even do much better than survive, playing another genre of music -- may be something of a fusion, combining an approximation of CM and any XM that the instrument capability allows, but not carnatic music that is acceptable to the discerning. )
Is the article about the evolution of any instrument? On fair reading, it is only about the music that is currently played on (and heard from) some of these instruments; about music, which is only an approximation of carnatic music and not the complete carnatic music. Because it cannot produce some basic and quintessential charateristics of this genre of music; it cannot comply with certain rules (of ragalkshanam), the central melodic ideas of carnatic music. And yes, carnatic music happens to have grammar / codification / aesthetic idioms, and you can't wish them away.
To say this, does one need to be a master of the engineering principles behind the construction of an instrument? Isn[t it enough if one knows the music'coming from it does not capture a raga in its essence? Without gamakas on the right note and of the right amount, the ragas are not simply ragas by definition. And without those ragas, and the heavy krithiis in these ragas, is the resulting output really CM, or only an apology to CM? To many of us, the limitations are huge and fundamental. And the limitation cannot be glorified as innovation or enrichment.
Does AS's response answer the central point made by TMK? Why does it simply duck the issue? Because it is unable to state unequivocally that the instrument can play CM in its full glory? Why talk about artists' rights of survival, and about limiting music that is limitless, classifying music that defies classification etc? Aren't these lines of argument merely emotional? Are these really relevant to a discussion on the fundamental definitions of a a musical form that is indeed classified as classical music? Extend the limitless argument, and cwhere do you get?Can you say it is permissible to play a line of thyagaraja followed by a swinging jackson number, if music knows no limits? Isn't classification and codification a reality that defines today's musical forms? And pray what does it have to do with artists' survival rights? (To me, the artists can definetely survive, and even do much better than survive, playing another genre of music -- may be something of a fusion, combining an approximation of CM and any XM that the instrument capability allows, but not carnatic music that is acceptable to the discerning. )
-
kamalamba
- Posts: 348
- Joined: 26 Dec 2007, 18:26
In any form of art (including CM) nothing is a finished article and everyone and their skills are to be treated as "work in progress" and that such "work in progress" sounds very good if the practicioner employs high standards.
If one were to accept this premise, then it is easy to accept that Saxophone and Piano etc are early in their evolution and can "get there" and already have achieved a fair bit which pleases many rasikas (who are no inferior).
What is being portrayed as being appropriate for CM is purely the view of TMK or X or Y and has no relevance to what is REALLY appropriate for CM, since IMHO no one really represents CM and each individual represents their favorite aspect / facet of CM.
BTW, I reaaly enjoy TMK's concerts as I enjoy Kadri, AS etc. They touch different nerves, but enjoyable nevertheless.
If one were to accept this premise, then it is easy to accept that Saxophone and Piano etc are early in their evolution and can "get there" and already have achieved a fair bit which pleases many rasikas (who are no inferior).
What is being portrayed as being appropriate for CM is purely the view of TMK or X or Y and has no relevance to what is REALLY appropriate for CM, since IMHO no one really represents CM and each individual represents their favorite aspect / facet of CM.
BTW, I reaaly enjoy TMK's concerts as I enjoy Kadri, AS etc. They touch different nerves, but enjoyable nevertheless.
Last edited by kamalamba on 04 Jan 2010, 08:37, edited 1 time in total.
-
arasi
- Posts: 16877
- Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30
Kamalamba,
Though my field is 'prattle' science, as a fellow-scientist I applaud your wise words. What you say applies to the sciences, the arts and also to the science (or art) of living too. They are all 'works in progress' by skilled individuals who employ high standards in their search for better and better things...
Though my field is 'prattle' science, as a fellow-scientist
I applaud your wise words. What you say applies to the sciences, the arts and also to the science (or art) of living too. They are all 'works in progress' by skilled individuals who employ high standards in their search for better and better things...
Last edited by arasi on 05 Jan 2010, 12:40, edited 1 time in total.
-
thenpaanan
- Posts: 671
- Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 19:45
Whether an instrument can or cannot reproduce the chittaswaram in "Gaja vadana" faithfully is a strawman. This assumes the implicit arrogance that we of recent generations are singing/playing gajavadana in its fullest glory and have not changed it in any way.harimau wrote:Given a choice between playing an instrument that cannot properly reproduce the chittaswaram in "Gaja vadana" (Todi, by Kumara Ettandra) and throwing the composition on the garbage heap, what would be your preference?
Taking this further, if a possible future domination of Carnatic music by Saxophones, tubas, trumpets, pianos and keyboards should come about, what do you think would happen to our ragas and the glorious compositions in them?
A necessary part of evolution is that in order to learn more and increase scope of an art or practice we also have to forget some things. What we forget or leave behind is not always under anyone's control. If we think that we have improved upon past masters in any way whatsoever then we have to also assume that we have slid backwards in some other ways, that is perhaps impossible to tell because we do not have original recordings.
If there comes a day when Carnatic Music is dominated by tubas and trumpets, which is another strawman, we simply have to assume that it is what CM has naturally evolved to. Nothing less and nothing more.
If the original post was tongue in cheek, I appreciate the humor.
-Then Paanan
Last edited by thenpaanan on 06 Jan 2010, 07:30, edited 1 time in total.