SVK is honoured

[rajeshnat]

Our Hindu Critic SVK is honoured. Till last year I did not attach a face with him, now we all can attach a face with SVK.
http://www.hindu.com/fr/2011/02/25/stor ... 110100.htm
Congratulations SV Krishnamurthy Sir, for sure the award is a thyagaraja award and there is a thyagaraja opera following up, for sure SVK will enjoy both.

[venkatakailasam]

Central role of music criticism is to keep art in good health, says N. Ram


http://www.hindu.com/2011/02/28/stories ... 170800.htm


venkatakailasam

[mahavishnu]

Interesting exchange on this topic between TM Krishna and N Ram.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a ... 507049.ece

[Nick H]

I get the feeling that it is N Ram that is being the thin-skinned one there!

[mahavishnu]

I agree, Nick. I actually found the arguments in his rejoinder quite weak (in addition to the defensiveness that you picked up on).

While Ram says that the Hindu has serious guidelines in place for reviewers, it appears that the standards of the paper's reviews have fallen considerably. This is especially true during the december season. To add insult to injury, the published reviews contain several typos, grammatical and factual errors. Sometimes they even get the accompanists wrong!

[Nick H]

The standards of the newspaper as a whole have fallen noticeably in the past year or so. I wonder if they have cut back on editorial and sub-editorial staff, because it looks to me as if they have.

[rajeshnat]

Folks like swaminathan(who is my favourite) indeed write well. Overall reading all the season reviews the reviewers tend to praise bit too much and really play safe. That was not the case with some reviewers like NMN etc who in the past who were doing a far better job.
I heard thru grapevine the pay for these staff who write reviews is abyssmal and perhaps that is the main reason.

[mahavishnu]

Rajesh, I am sure there are many rasikas who will write for free! The Hindu could even maintain a kutcheri season blog like major newspapers like the NYTimes, Guardian etc and maintain contributions from well-qualified members of the general public.

More than the reviews being bland or critical enough, I think the factual inaccuracies are really what get under my skin.
Like Nick says, the whole newspaper is suffering from slipping standards. I dare say that it is true for the entire newspaper industry in India.

[Nick H]

When I make such criticisms, I usually add the comment that one sees far worse from the BBC --- because its true!

[vasanthakokilam]

Ram's response serves one useful purpose, the nonsensical and unconditional defense of his critics notwithstanding. TMK by turning the table against the critics, takes the spot light away from the main issue, namely Carnatic Musicians and Sabhas do not take to criticism well. If the focus of TMK's reply is on the main point of how the artists should deal with criticism, and also educate the audience on how to interpret criticism, with a side mention that there is a responsibility of the critics as well, that would have been much better. But he has taken a strong side swipe on the basic premise itself, there by shielding the artists from this debate. In that sense, Ram's response serves a purpose, in putting the spot light back on the message.

What TMK has done is, while agreeing with the basic premise, he brings down the critics ( fairly so, let us assume ) there by giving credence to what we hear all the time 'What does that idiot know? Who is he to criticize me? Have you performed even a single concert? Have you gone through the tough sAdakam that I have done in the past 30 years'.

Now, for us, the tough thing is to reconcile the two. It is so easy to relate to what TMK says, in terms of the amount of effort the musician has put it in, it is million to one in favor of the musician, so naturally we feel sympathetic to that point of view. In that sense, the role of the critic itself is just grossly unfair, on the face of it. Does it mean there should not be critics? That would not be acceptable either since free expressions of opinion is important for music, no matter who the artist is.

So we are between a rock and a hard place.

But there is a way out of this....

My view is, it is the responsibility of senior musicians like TMK, Sanjay and others to carry the mantle on educating fellow musicians, especially the younger ones, on how to deal with criticism. And more importantly use the opportunity of the space allowed in the newspaper to educate the rasikas on how to interpret the criticism. Mainly, do not shy away from attending someone's next concert just because there was a bad review, the reviews are just about that one instance of a concert and are subjective and should not be career-deciding. Educating the rasikas is important since that in turn will help musicians take the criticism properly as well, since they are all afraid that one single criticism is going to doom their career.

I know the rasika community is not there yet and it may take years. Even in our forum, I see occasional references to some bad review someone wrote couple of years back. Those are the kinds of things that have to improve. Because, if we start quoting past reviews, it is no longer a commentary of that one instance.

May be one thing we can all strive for. Strike out the word 'critic' from usage.. That has a bad connotation. We need a new word that captures 'Subjective opinions of a knowledgeable rasika'. Concert Commentator...?

[Nick H]

I can't help but remember that almost every thing that I have read by TMK for quite a while, I have found fault with, and sometimes vocally on this very forum. This time, I feel that he is saying no more than forumites here have said quite recently: a call for critics to be informed commentators, and to get their facts right. He even goes so far as to say that he has read very positive reviews of his own performances that were factually wrong.

I'm reading a biography, at the moment, by one of my favourite English authors. She claims, as one of her reasons for writing the books, that she wishes the truth to be known, and quotes an instance where she has been placed, by another author, in a situation that never happened with people that she did not know at the time. That commentator's defence is that whilst she may not have got it right, what she said was not a bad thing. My author says that doesn't matter: what matters is that what was said about her, and also involving several other people, was simply wrong.

[ananthapuram]

I feel that newspapers like the Hindu can learn something from this forum as far as educated and informed critiques are concerned. They may even hire some of the knowledgeble reviewers on this forum in addition to taking their help for establishing standards.

[vasanthakokilam]

Those points about critics are well taken. But every time someone raises the issue of Musicians not taking to criticism well, if the issue of the quality and qualification of the critics is raised as a response, when can the main point about the musician be talked about? The world can not wait for super high quality critics to be in place before commentary on the concerts can be written. That is simply not a tenable argument. We all know about how our own reviewers here have been 'talked to' offline by some musicians which caused the reviewers to change the calibration of their ratings. Now a 'good' concert does not mean good any more

[sureshvv]

That was not the case with some reviewers like NMN etc who in the past who were doing a far better job.

Sorry can't agree with you here! I know that speaking ill of the dead is not cool but some of his reviews, whose scope extended well past that day's performance, were more like attacks and throwing verbal acid on performers.

[Nick H]

speaking ill of the dead is not cool

My mother taught me... if they were unpleasant people when they were alive, why should we speak differently about them when they are dead?

Even as one of those rebellious youngsters who always "knew better" than elders, there were some bits of parental wisdom I always recognised the wisdom of. But then... I had eccentric parents!

[sureshvv]

So we are between a rock and a hard place.

But there is a way out of this....

My view is, it is the responsibility of senior musicians like TMK, Sanjay and others to carry the mantle on educating fellow musicians, especially the younger ones, on how to deal with criticism.

Oh Please! Dealing with feedback is something parents teach kids or less desirably could happen in schools. Let's not give Senior musicians the job of raising junior artistes now.

Humans, by nature, don't take criticism well. We just saw how well N.Ram takes criticism.

[vasanthakokilam]

Suresh: All the senior musicians have to do is set an example on how to deal with it, it is as simple as that. They do not need to raise them. At least, set an example for their disciples. TMK's response is not such a good example.

It is no different from how we all learn to provide and receive feedback at work.

I feel bad for coming across as defending the Hindu or its critics. I definitely do not intend to defend them. But I am trying to point out this age old trick commonly deployed in debates!! Look what has happened, TMK has changed the topic from musicians to critics. Good for him and bad for us for falling for that.

[karthikbala]

I don't expect the Hindu music supplement to match up to the best of arts coverage in the world. However they could take a leaf out of their own Literary Review and maintain a somewhat better standard. After all, they could simply cover fewer concerts and avoid spreading themselves thin.

[Nick H]

VK, there is no problem even if you are "defending" The Hindu or its critics. Anyone is entitled to stand up for them, too. We cannot even mention N Ram without remembering what he has done for Music Academy and his enthusiasm for classical arts. Every column inch of a newspaper is expensive to produce: it would be so easy for them to cut all this out.

I don't think, though, that, this time, your analysis is correct. TMK has not turned the topic from music to critics: it began with a critic, it continued with N Ram talking about criticism, and criticism in The Hindu. TMK took up the topic from there. Any person, musician, rasika, whatever, had the right to do that: TMK, being TMK, was perhaps most likely to get his response published, as a column, with a photograph, where others would be lucky to get a letter in print.

[anonymityatlast]

The Hindu asking CM artists to take criticism well is like giving someone a big bunch of dirty, torn, thin plastic covers and asking them to use it well.

[sureshvv]

Look what has happened, TMK has changed the topic from musicians to critics. Good for him and bad for us for falling for that.

Its a much better topic and something needs to and can be done. Asking artistes to "take criticism" is a non-starter

[vasanthakokilam]

anonymityatlast, Great analogy! Let us at least hope that at least sometimes artists are given clean clothes and they wear them well!!!

Nick, I do not understand how the focus has not changed. It is a function about a critic alright, and a valid point was made about musicians and sabhas not taking criticism well. The subsequent responsible discussion should be about that. Instead, TMK fumes 'How the heck Hindu can say that when their own critics are know-nothings'..

That is so childish. He is focusing on who said it rather than the content. And criticisms come from various sources ( and not just the newspapers ) and it is well known that the CM musicians can not deal with it well.

Not taking criticism well is itself a criticism. Had the same remark been made by someone else other than the Hindu, what would he have latched on, instead of dealing with the issue at hand?

[sureshvv]

I think TMK's point is that it is always easy to ask others to change to fit your expectation and it is much harder to look inwards and see how you can improve yourself - and this is true all the way from critics to Sabhas to artistes and to newspaper editors!

[vasanthakokilam]

Suresh: Nice!! If TMK had said that, hats off to him. But he did not and you are. All the credit to you.

At a practical level, one still needs to hear from others what is wrong ...then the inward looking begins.

[ShrutiLaya]

So we are between a rock and a hard place.

I'm neither a musician nor a critic, but with respect, I think it is the musicians who are caught between a rock and a hard place. How exactly can they "take criticism well" if the criticism does not make sense? I don't mean this rhetorically, I mean what action can they take which will indicate to the world that they are taking this criticism well - do they agree with the critic even if he is factually wrong, do they point out the flaws in the argument or cite authorities for their point of view (like that extract from Sowmya's blog that was quoted), or do they just ignore the critics and public opinion and continue to do what they believe is right, assuming people will come around eventually (like most great musicians of the past in most cultures).

- Sreenadh

[vasanthakokilam]

>How exactly can they "take criticism well" if the criticism does not make sense?

Sreenadh: I am with you 100% on that. And the discussion is indeed over IF that is all there is to this issue. It is absolutely not. There is this whole other half of the discussion of bad reaction to good criticism.

There is a third aspect to this, just to be sure. If Ram is referring to Sowmya's response to a Hindu review of her concert as an example of artists not taking criticism well, I do not have any sympathy for Ram, that will be total nonsense. In those cases, what transpired is just about right. To me it illustrated the liveliness and maturity of the CM practice.

[vasanthakokilam]

I have been saying the topic should be about the artists reactions to criticism. On that main topic...

In one sense, many CM musicians over the years seem to react in extremes. On One extreme, they scowl at criticism if they can find a scapegoat to beat up on, the metaphorical 'finding a crack in the wall and driving a truck through it'. There is a long history about this involving prominent musicians and it is reflected in the heat our on line reviewers get. On the other extreme, they are so shattered that they vow to never perform again. There is a long history about this in CM culture from losing in some silly laya games in an RTP, to someone they respected spoke badly of them etc.. Both of these reactions are quite immature in the severity and extreme to which they take it.

As long as criticism is equated with public humiliation, this is what will result. That has to change. For that to happen, the responsibility lies with musicians, rasikas and reviewers.

[sureshvv]

Suresh: Nice!! If TMK had said that, hats off to him. But he did not and you are. All the credit to you.

Wish I could take the credit but that's what he clearly says in the opening salvo. The thrust of the rest of the article is that while he agrees that everyone ought to try to overcome their vanity, checking factual errors in reviews is slightly more easily accomplished and the energies of the chief editor of the Hindu is better spent focusing on matters within his control.

[srikant1987]

Very succinct summary! Bravo, sureshvv!

Apart from other criticisms of Mr N Ram's response, I found his generous use of long words in the first one or two paragraphs really noticeable and irritating. That's so much along the lines of the reviews they publish.

Examples: condescending, polemical, sweeping dismissal of the competence of our music critics ...

It does take a second reading to make sense of these things! :$

[vasanthakokilam]

>Wish I could take the credit but that's what he clearly says in the opening salvo. The thrust of the rest of the article

Well, while your take on it was equally balanced, TMK's thrust was pretty much on bashing the critics. He is factually correct on that, Hindu should definitely implement fixing factual errors and it is much easier to implement. There is no disagreement there. But TMK did not even set out to cover both sides. A cursory sideways ack on one side and a full frontal attack on the other. That tremendous imbalance is what I am pointing out.
Anyway, I am repeating myself. We will leave it at that.