Ganesh Kumaresh at Indian Fine Arts, San Diego

[mahavishnu]

Just started following this thread. Very interesting.

While I am certainly a carnatic purist and would love to see every aspect of this musical form preserved, some aspects of change are welcome (if done appropriately). I agree with Sindhuja and Ranganayaki here. Perhaps I am expressing some of S Kumar's sentiments here also, although I am less certain about this.

Perhaps it is time for Carnatic music to consider styles that are not composition-oriented. The paradigm of composition-oriented sangeetham has inherently limited the repertoire of instrumentalists to the vocal tradition. The most respected instrumentalists in the Carnatic tradition are praised for their strict adherence to sahitya-bhavam. For example, violinists or flautists that explore music that is beyond the human vocal range are frowned upon (examples of very talented individuals in this club include Chitti Babu, Kunnakkudi, L Shankar/Subramaniam etc).

In other forms of classical music, we have music that is specifically written for instruments (piano/violin concertos for e.g).In jazz, for example, people often say that the instrument should be its own voice. John Coltrane was appreciated for his ability to create sounds that didn't even exist on the saxophone. Neither has threatened the vocal forms in these genres; I don't see anything detracted from jazz vocals or opera because of this.

Hindustani music has created a separate voice for instruments. The grammar of performances is not constrained by what the voice can do; let alone how sahityam is expressed vocally. A good example is someone like Ustad Amjad Ali Khan, whose album "My inspirations: http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/my-ins ... d213789112" shows how he has successfully adapted the vocal styles of several past HM masters into his music, that is strictly interpreted for the sarod.

However, we have to be very careful where we tread, or the new form of music will cease to be "Carnatic". Our music, over the last 300 years has been chiselled to reflect the human voice and even its limitations. The structure, the pedagogical system and rasikas are conditioned to expect music that has sahitya bhavam. We have to facilitate a paradigm shift without toppling this apple cart and the system that it embodies. We cannot deny the amazing melodies possible on the Indian violin, only because Baluswamy Dikshitar was able to adapt it to follow the human voice.

Ganesh-Kumaresh have shown one way in which this paradigm shift can happen from within. I was not at this concert, but I can get a feel for what they did from their recent Jaya TV performance. Taking multiple desAdi kritis of Tyagaraja that have the same structure to form a medley is not the way to go. It is not particularly sensitive to the composer's intentions and this kind of paradigm shift is not welcome. The context in which "mA jAnaki" was composed is very different from "mAkelarA", so it is insulting to mix and match them in the name of innovation.

However, I have no problems if they use generic raga phrases and impose the said syntax on them and do a multi-raga medley/pravAham. Whether this passes the "Carnatic Turing test" is an empirical question. Eventually, the rasikas will decide if this step is fit enough to survive.

@Sindhuja: Just went to your website (from the link here). You are very talented! I really liked your tillana. Do you work with the Churchlands at UCSD?

[Sindhuja]

@Mahavishnu: couldn't agree more. The Thyagaraja Deshadi medley did make me a little uncomfortable too (I attended a live performance where they did that). I have been telling myself though, not to look at them as renditions of (parts of) the krithis themselves, but rather as instrumental adaptations of them; but I'm not convinced myself, I should admit And yes, ragapravaham is a different game altogether.

Thanks for the compliments. Glad you liked the thillana. I had the fortune of taking a course with Paul Churchland for one quarter (and tailored my work to fit my theoretical interests in music and music cognition) but they both retired after that.

[randomrasika]

It is saddening to say the least that an organizer is blaming the artists for the delay. Sound check is not for the artists alone but mainly for the audience. I remember being disappointed with the sound in so many concerts (and I'm not alone) and if anything, the artists should be commended for taking care to get the sound right. Nothing can be more disappointing to them and us than the concert not sounding good just because of the sound not being good. Yes, cutting corners in the sound check is indeed one way of starting a concert early. But there are plenty of other ways to start early, which might be less crucial. How about cutting short the overall number of programs in a day for instance? Instead of packing a day with 4 or more performances (which also makes the organizers puff and pant, for it somehow seems tremendously difficult to stick to schedule) how about reducing it to a more manageable no. of concerts per day so there is more breathing time?

[mahavishnu]

@Sindhuja. You are indeed quite fortunate. To train with Lalgudi Rajalakshmi and take a class with Paul Churchland! Not many people can say that about themselves

Do you ever make it out to the NSI in San Diego? I know a couple of really good people doing music cognition work there. Do you interact with anyone in CogSci @ UCSD? Enough questions. There are some interesting threads elsewhere on this forum, that could use your input Perhaps you could tell us about what you do in more detail in that thread.

Talking about paradigm breaking concepts in Carnatic music, I heard a wonderful program with Jayanthi Kumaresh, Abhishek Raghuram, Anantha Krishnan and MD Pallavi (from BLR) at Krishna Gana Sabha last year. It was a theatrical narration of a story with music, but didn't have a dance-drama/opera feel. I felt that it had all the ingredients for a non-kutcheri way of presenting very classical music. Although the manodharma was rather limited because of the format.

[Priya Ravi]

Randomrasika echoes my views too...

[Ranganayaki]

I am confused. I quote from your earlier post: "But there is nothing that prevents Carnatic music from going beyond that: transcending lyrics, language, region and religion and just presenting itself as pure music." From this and other things you said, I got the impression that Ragapravahams were going beyond the limitations of lyrics and represent "pure music" giving me the impression that they were beyond / better than krithis. I didn't see the Ragapravahams doing that. That was my point. Now, you are saying they are just another new composition. Not sure which one you think it really is. I am confused....

I think the problem here is the value judgement apparently associated with the word "pure" for some among us. I believe to them "pure" signifies all that is good in Carnatic music as presented by the Saintly Trinity, and by older artists like GNB, MMI, SSI, MSS, DKP, etc. To them, it is music as it should be, immutable and fixed. But Uscasdrs, if Sindhuja had said "transcending lyrics, language, region and religion and just presenting itself as simple, plain music" would that have been more acceptable, and less pretentious on the part of the G-K brothers?

I really don't think they were proposing "Ragapravaham" in a spirit of one-upmanship. I think they were inspired by the ragas, something I imagine traditionalist or a conservative rasika would appreciate.

All this said, it was not very clear to me how they transcended the voice, except for the fact that there were no lyrics to sing. I would have appreciated an indication or two on where they transcended the voice. I agree though that in the absence of lyrics, you are forced to pay attention to the swarams. Lyrics have a way of making themselves heard a priori when you know the song. I have to shut my mind to the lyrics to listen to the swarams, a problem I don't have when I have no idea of the lyrics. But I didn't get the impression that their aim was limited to that.

Regarding sahityabhavam, I still don't think it is separate from ragabhavam. But I think of Lalgudi playing Teeratha Vilayattu Pillai. When it comes to "pinnalai pinnindizhuppan" he specifically introduces bhavam associated with the sahitya by playing intertwined notes to represent the "pinnal" and then in the next sangati, manages to evoke the quick jerking of a long pinnal by a firm hand. These are to me, two instances not only of sahityabhava being highlighted, but also of instrumental sangatis transcending the voice. Somehow, the focus on ragabhava seems to me to take a back seat throughout that song. My feeling is that these sangatis won't be particularly beautiful when sung (unless any of you have heard a vocalist perform it well - please do contradict me in that case) - but it needed the poetry of a Bharatiyar to inspire that, not the staid bhakti oriented compositions of the Trinity.

@Mahavishnu: I wish you and other reasonable people would stop referring to "insult" with regard to attempts at innovation even when it involves the Trinity and their compositions. Who exactly gets insulted here? I would simply call it ignorant, or insensitive, but I cannot imagine G-K allowing themselves to "insult". If the Trinity were truly saintly, they would be unlikely to take umbrage if they were to hear any of it. The brothers try to innovate, and if it is not appropriate, as you said, audience reaction will let them know. I don't think we need to get all uptight about it.

[Ranganayaki]

Did G or K start singing in the middle of the concert? Nothing is more unsettling than when they attempt to sing an original composition (and not just for the purposes of demonstrating a pallavi which I always welcome) after being so vocally defensive about the scope of "pure" instrumental music.

They did sing in the DC area concert. But I don't think it was an original composition, but it was REALLY nice and the over all presentation of that song was great - to my ear. I wish I could remember which piece it was. I'm sorry. I seem to have a sieve for a brain.

Again, "pure".. I think the two sides of this debate are miscommunicating here with that word. The word is much more (almost emotionally) charged for one side. I don't think they defend instrumental music, as much as they have new hopes for it.

[Sindhuja]

Thanks much, mahavishnu. I was only flirting with cog. sci for a short time- I do more mainstream philosophy now. So no serious associations with anyone in the field other than a brief interaction with Anirudh Patel. It doesn't hurt to make contacts though, and I need to do that. And I indeed intend to be more active in other threads too now on, time permitting. I did hear about Jayanthiji's program. Unfortunately couldn't attend.

Sorry others, for the digression.

@Ranganayaki: enjoyed your post very much. You nailed it when you said we tend to associate a value judgement with "pure". That was exactly my point too in one of my earlier posts: I clarified that I used the word "pure" in the sense of "purely musical" rather than as an opposite of "impure".

On "transcending the voice": I'm not sure if anyone here said that. The point has been that ragapravahams transcend vocal-oriented compositions, not the voice. Voice and the sound of an instrument are just two different things that can't be effectively compared in my opinion. In fact I keep saying that G-K (and me, and others here I suppose) are not against vocal music (if it helps, I'm a vocalist myself who cannot play a single instrument for nuts).

On Lalgudi's theeradha vilayaattu pillai e.g.: Sure, sahithyabhavam is brought out wonderfully in the sangathi you describe. Jayanthiji did something similar in a live concert: neraval in the line "nardanamuralidharam" in Santhanagopalam in various nadais to reflect the "nardanam". It was beautiful. It is just that the instrument alone is not doing the job. It needs the mental input (of the lyrics) of the listener too. My earlier response to sureshvv pretty much summarizes everything I have to say in this regard.

And yes, I haven't heard them sing original compositions either, but thukkadas (bhajans etc) which have nice lyrics.

[sureshvv]

Kumar... Good stuff with an anti-climactic end.

[Ranganayaki]

You make great points. That is, when you are not making sweeping generalizations (even if only to combat other sweeping generalizations made by others) or attacking non-existent strawman positions.

Not sure how true that is (mainly because at this point, I am lost in the maze of generalizations all around and I don't know if Sindhuja made any) but I like your line!

If Ayn Rand were your Guru, you could argue that "egoism/ egotism/ egocentrism" were all good! Of course we know better

This is just a quick aside, so please excuse me! Suresh, I think you are misinterpreting the advocacy of the rights of the individual for that of "egocentrism"... I don't remember my Rand too well but I'm positive she did not promote egoism/egotism/egocentrism in the sense in which you have used the words. This is just like the problem with the word "pure".

I

[sureshvv]

And yes, I haven't heard them sing original compositions either, but thukkadas (bhajans etc) which have nice lyrics.

I may have been mistaken... May be their interpretation was sufficiently novel that it sounded "original" to me... |(

[sureshvv]

I don't remember my Rand too well but I'm positive she did not promote egoism/egotism/egocentrism in the sense in which you have used the words. This is just like the problem with the word "pure".

"The virtue of selfishness" is one of her defining works. But you would probably argue that "selfishness" is not used in the exact sense in which we understand it. Hard to argue with Humpty Dumpty.

[sureshvv]

It is saddening to say the least that an organizer is blaming the artists for the delay. Sound check is not for the artists alone but mainly for the audience.

I don't think anybody was "blaming" them... Only accounting for the time spent that evening... And looks like you have not had to suffer through extended tuning/adjusting sessions by self-indulgent artistes to get that last 1% of settings perfect when it is already apparent to 99% of the audience that they will never get there.

[Ranganayaki]

"The virtue of selfishness" is one of her defining works. But you would probably argue that "selfishness" is not used in the exact sense in which we understand it. Hard to argue with Humpty Dumpty.

Oh, ok.. I don't know that work.. I am thinking of "Atlas Shrugged" and "Fountainhead".. it's been so long.. So I will just have to take back my words, as I am unlikely to go back to Rand any time soon.

But hey, Humpty Dumpty??? You're trying to score an easy point! I am not the one who decided what "pure" should mean!!!!

[sureshvv]

Not sure how true that is (mainly because at this point, I am lost in the maze of generalizations all around and I don't know if Sindhuja made any) but I like your line!

In that case, it is best if you take my word for it... It is true!

[mahavishnu]

Ranganayaki: Sorry, I have to disagree with you here.

"Insult" is not determined uniquely by the intentions of the "insulter" It is not just about the saintliness of the composers or violation of something sacrosanct. I think chopping up a composition out of one context and pasting it into another, especially without the express permission of the composer, is an insult to the composition itself. If the act of doing so upsets some people, it is not the fault of the people that got upset

I am all for innovation, let them just do it with their own compositions. Like I said earlier, I think the idea of ragapravaham is quite creative.

[sureshvv]

But hey, Humpty Dumpty??? You're trying to score an easy point! I am not the one who decided what "pure" should mean!!!!

ain't no points here at rasikas, kid! at least not in the sense that you mean it

[Ranganayaki]

On "transcending the voice": I'm not sure if anyone here said that. The point has been that ragapravahams transcend vocal-oriented compositions, not the voice. Voice and the sound of an instrument are just two different things that can't be effectively compared in my opinion. In fact I keep saying that G-K (and me, and others here I suppose) are not against vocal music (if it helps, I'm a vocalist myself who cannot play a single instrument for nuts).

Thanks for your nice remark about my post. "Transcend" did occur somewhere, but I was the one who chose to use it with "voice". Yes, I agree it was not quite appropriate for what the brothers intended. It is completely clear to me that they are not against vocal music, nor are they competing with it. My point is that if according to them, the tradidtional way of playing keertanas along with or without manodharma elements is part of the vocal (or voice-oriented) tradition, then in a large measure, their ragapravaham was too. The alapanas they played are vocalizable and continue in the vocal tradition as before, and their kriti resembled vocal keertanas. So while I am open to their idea and to all kinds of innovation, I am having trouble putting my finger on where exactly the innovation lay. Is "ragapravaham" limited to the kriti they played (by kriti, I mean their kriti, their composition)?

[Ranganayaki]

Ranganayaki: Sorry, I have to disagree with you here.

"Insult" is not determined uniquely by the intentions of the "insulter" It is not just about the saintliness of the composers or violation of something sacrosanct. I think chopping up a composition out of one context and pasting it into another, especially without the express permission of the composer, is an insult to the composition itself. If the act of doing so upsets some people, it is not the fault of the people that got upset .

Vishnu, I'm having to disagree with you too.. unless some copyright laws are violated, it hardly matters. Chopping up a composition out of one context and pasting it on to another is a very common thing. Just take this last part of these exchanges.. Sureshvv used Humpty Dumpty from Alice and pasted it on to me. I found it very annoying to sacrosanct Ranganayaki , but it was a very enjoyable exchange! He didn't need the permission of Lewis Carroll. It's what made the exchange rich.

I agree that some people might get upset, and it's not their fault, and if you are one of them, it's not your fault, I am just asking for a less emotionally charged dialog. Artists need this freedom, and mistakes should be allowed to happen.

[Ranganayaki]

ain't no points here at rasikas, kid!

What!!!!!! puh-leeese! yet another easy point!! It's SOO transparent!

[Sindhuja]

@Ranganayaki: your post made me revisit many of my assumptions and think quite hard- thanks for that. Here are some responses:

1. The "transcending" that I felt Ragapravahams do is *not* in terms of what a voice CAN do, objectively. It is in terms of the vocal *tradition*. Although ragapravahams may be vocalizable; traditionally, vocal music = krithi renditions. So, ragapravahams transcend this tradition. If vocalists started replacing krithis with ragapravahams too (in addition to alapanai, RTP etc), then they would be transcending the vocal tradition too. Only, as I said earlier, we would be underutilizing the mouth/voice/linguistic creativity by doing so.
2. Importantly, Ragapravahams also transcend language, region, religion etc.: they have a wider reach. Music is more universal than language, so a person who doesn't know Telugu/ Thamizh/ Kannada/ Sanskrit can enjoy instrumental music better. The natural question here would be, "For a person who doesn't know these languages, whatever they play is anyway going to be received only for the music part of it. So why not play krithis? Those who know the words can appreciate them, those who don't can just appreciate the music" To this, my response is, even for those who know the languages/ words; they don't follow all the words for every krithi- in many cases all we know is the pallavi of a song, but we still enjoy the whole song- for its *music*. In fact, in many cases it happens that we don't know an entire krithi but we still enjoy it merely on recognizing the "structure" of the krithi. So ignorance of words doesn't come in the way of enjoying the music; so why have words at all? Seems redundant.
3.

and their kriti resembled vocal keertanas

I assume you're talking about their "krithi darpanam" here (refer to my original post). They did this to illustrate my last point above (that all we seem to care for is the "structure" of a krithi.

If I talk any more, my head will explode.

[Ranganayaki]

Thank you for that response, Sindhuja!

You sound tired, do go to bed! good night, sleep well! (I assume you are somewhere in the US)

[sureshvv]

So ignorance of words doesn't come in the way of enjoying the music...

It does in the sense that it limits its enjoyment. Sadly one remains blissfully ignorant of that. As Ranganayaki alluded, it is like listening to LGJ playing "pinnalai pinnidruzhuppaan" without knowing those words. You don't even know what you are missing.
May be with Ragapravahams you can rest easy that there is nothing back there to miss.

[sureshvv]

Playing vocal based music on violin is like using a powerful computer for just word processing. When a computer is capable of many more actions, why limit its use to just word processing? In the similar way when a powerful instrument like violin is capable of producing much more music than vocal based ones, why should not a violinist explore all the possibilities? By making a violinist play only the vocal based compositions, we underestimate and underutilize violin's scope.

Just because one can do something, it is not a good enough reason to be doing it.

[mojolang]

I don't know how much I can add here, but I'm probably in one of the more unique places as a western guitarist who studies carnatic music from banis that are about as classical as you can get (thanjavur gayaki).

I think it's fair to define music as intentionally constructed organization of sound. It's fair to say that USUALLY that sound is pitches with some sort of pulse.

So here we have carnatic music, which has a very defined sense of melody and rhythm (raga and tala). In an absolute sense, that's what this music is. The sahithyam is secondary as with any music. There is a great discussion of this in Peter Kivy's "Philosophy of Music."

Absolute music is music that stands by itself. Program music is music that has a context; that is to say that it relies on or is accompanied by a semantic medium (rather than a simply emotional one). Words are semantic.

So this new concept still adheres to the total classicism of tradition while innovating within the confines. I don't see how this is really an abandonment of tradition. Isn't this pretty similar to what a swarajathi is?

Just because you like the way the traditional kirtana is constructed, does that mean that there should be no scope for innovation? You can say it's non-carnatic, but you are just drawing attention again to the idea that what is and what is not a specific genre or medium is simply an agreed upon convention between greater or lesser numbers of people.

The problem with drawing these lines of tradition too strongly is that tradition is constantly evolving, we just don't see it. The aba swara of today is the necessary prayoga of tomorrow. Santhatis etc. evolve and belong to specific banis, I'm not sure that any other composer was doing madhya makala before dikshitar, and I'm sure there are plenty of other people who can point changes that my gora hide doesn't know about.

The english note comes to mind, as well as instruments like mandolin, guitar, and even sax for doing carnatic music. Totally non traditional, but adhering to most of the elements of classicism (notice I didn't mention keyboard).

As far as I'm concerned, carnatic music is going through a period of stagnation. I've talked to great composers who just have this idea that they cannot compose because they cannot approach the alter of the masters...Surely if the trinity and others took this approach we wouldn't have the compositions we have now...

In fact, I don't like GK as much as a more classical duo like the mysore bros, but I do admire their experimentation, even if sometimes it doesn't end up too hip.

[mojolang]

It does in the sense that it limits its enjoyment. Sadly one remains blissfully ignorant of that. As Ranganayaki alluded, it is like listening to LGJ playing "pinnalai pinnidruzhuppaan" without knowing those words. You don't even know what you are missing.
May be with Ragapravahams you can rest easy that there is nothing back there to miss.

That's a joke. There are plenty of people who just wouldn't care and just love the playing. Even if you told them the meaning it wouldn't enhance the enjoyment. In fact, for some it might lessen it.

[sureshvv]

Which is the joke? All of it?

[srikant1987]

I am tempted to dare someone to tell, in concrete musical terms (with a demonstration), what can be played an a rAgam-and-tALam-adhering rAgapravAham, but cannot be played in an RTP-with-neraval-swaram in the same rAga and tALa or in an RTNS krti in the same rAga and tALa.

[mojolang]

Which is the joke? All of it?

Yeah, basically.

I am tempted to dare someone to tell, in concrete musical terms (with a demonstration), what can be played an a rAgam-and-tALam-adhering rAgapravAham, but cannot be played in an RTP-with-neraval-swaram in the same rAga and tALa or in an RTNS krti in the same rAga and tALa.

A pallavi, to the best of my understanding, does not include a charanam and anupallavi.

And that GK are talking about is a new song with a new melody and structure. What's difficult to understand here?

Further still, there is a constraining aspect to kalpana swara; namely that phrases have to continually attach back to the phrase in question in the song. This is a fine device, but it cannot be denied it is limiting. It's my understanding that madrai mani deviated from this at times, and more power to him.

I'm not saying don't ever do this (that would be extreme), but it would be cool if within the confines of the tala a player is able to simply improvise without a device of needing to connect the phrase to an already composed sahithyam theme.

[srikant1987]

And that GK are talking about is a new song with a new melody and structure. What's difficult to understand here?

Mojolang, you are hereby accused of heresy! New "song"?

Now, see, a macroscopic structure is not going to make a song especially suited for (let alone "only possible on") a particular instrument.

If there is a devil, it must be in the details.

Further still, there is a constraining aspect to kalpana swara; namely that phrases have to continually attach back to the phrase in question in the song. This is a fine device, but it cannot be denied it is limiting. It's my understanding that madrai mani deviated from this at times, and more power to him.

Singing to different eDuppus in the same line (and I think even different lines) is something done by many singers -- including Vidushi R Vedavalli. But note that in "long" swara passages, this is hardly constraining. Landing to an eduppu in the composition is a way to show you have kept tala all along.

Thanks for the explanation.

[mojolang]

Landing to an eduppu in the composition is a way to show you have kept tala all along.

I don't care if you keep the tala or not if it sounds cool. I once told Purbayan Chatterjee that I lost the tala when he was playing (I was just listening and at the time I didn't know how to listen for the thali and kali). He said, "We lose it too! That's the fun; finding the way back!"