Is this not to be the motto of all singers?

[kvchellappa]

Suryaprakash Ramachandran

Do I sing only for myself ? Yes, when I am singing at home. In concert I live, breathe and sing for my rasikas and make no bones about it.

[KSJaishankar]

Ah yes of course! And then for singers we don't like, we can always say "XYZ / ABC plays to the gallery. If you want REAL music, go listen to MNO / PQR who doesn't care a whit about whether the hall is full or not; s/he cares only about the FEW DISCERNING rasikas who appreciate music as it is supposed to be sung" - and the beauty of it is that EVERY one of us includes ourselves in this supposed minority of rasikas with discernment!

[ram1999]

The quality of the music will be good if he or she sings to himself than pandering to the gallery !!

[Aditto]

In our life, we do things for others, friends, family, relatives, colleagues and stuff. We even work at office for extra hours. Is it because we earn money or is it because we are committed to work. We alone know. We have got this work-life balance concept going in circles now. One cannot lose personal life for work and work for personal life.

In the same, when some one is singing for rasikas, it would be best if the balance is maintained. If one finds happiness in singing what rasikas want, well and good (But care should be taken that the musician will not be discussed as how MS is discussed now in other posts, saying the artist lacks this and that).

We all love MLV's music, did she not sing for rasikas? Did she not exhibit her manodharmam? GNB, Semmangudi. We have a whole lot of musicians who have achieved this balance.

[Nick H]

The quality of the music will be good if he or she sings to himself than pandering to the gallery !!

Singing, performing, to and for the audience is not the same as "playing to the gallery." The gallery means the cheap seats, and playing to the gallery means pandering to the lowest common denominator in the crowd. It is always pejorative in meaning.

No artist who does not care for their audience will bother to step out of their house and travel to a hall to sit on a stage and perform there. If they really and truly don't care, and really and truly sing only for themselves, they will stay at home, and sing to the puja room ---or, even, to the mirror--- and we will never hear of them anyway.

But to care for, and about, one's audience, does not contradict being true to one's self, one's art and one's tradition. Nor does being true to those things mean that an artist may not wish for, and be happy to receive, the pleasure of others.

Performance is a two-way process, not a one-way street.

[arasi]

Nick,
Well said

[kvchellappa]

Nick, it hits the nail on the head. Music is communication as every art is. An artist yearns to communicate and does need audience to further his art.

[Purist]

Performance is a two-way process, not a one-way street.

Nick, you have put it very succinctly. Art lies in striking the right balance so that majority of the rasikas enjoy and relish.

[Nick H]

Thank you all for your kind acknowledgement --- but it seems a simple thing, and I don't know why some people have trouble with the concept, especially in a music form where there may be no song list, but the concert will be an organic on-the-spot choice.

Of course, we never really know, except in advertised thematic concerts, if a concert is 100% planned or 100% impromptu, or (most likely) some balance of the two, but it was always represented to me as being part of the tradition that the audience itself influences the artists' choice. I don't remember the source now, but I recently read that even one rasika can, by their presence, influence the content and delivery of a program.

[kvchellappa]

I am placing here a compendium of my musings over time:
What should one sing? What is the role of audience?

Of the three forms of art, music, dance and drama, the latter two go with a plan. I have not seen anyone send a chit to the play group asking for their choice of play or any piece of choice to a dancer. The issue is only in relation to music.
But, it is not about listeners’ choice, but about the pieces that would be sung. Should a singer plan his performance as to what ragas and numbers he will sing and should he consult his team if any piece was new? What is playing to the gallery?
PMI narrated how ARI was practising one song for a long time, but did not sing it in any concert. PMI asked ARI and he said, ‘I am yet to perfect it.’ Sanjay mentions in the interview that he remembers the wordings because of repeated practice. Of course, we have now almost every artist using some memory aid even for old songs. To me, it appears a distraction and a notch lower in the rendering.
PSN said that SSI used to sing a hundred times better off the stage. Not that he held something in reserve, but thought that he should not experiment on stage.
Is the stage one for experiment? Is the audience there to judge the virtuosity and genius of an artist like an experts panel? Are they not there to enjoy 2-3 hours of music that makes them feel served what they came for?
In a concert, OST stopped after an applause for some nice singing and explained the special thing he did and prefaced it with, ‘I do not know how many of you understood.’ I did not, and my gut feeling is that a majority of listeners sailed in the same boat. In a concert (MMU), a rasika raised the point that though he attends the concerts and enjoys them, he is not able to make out the raga, etc. Vijay Siva said that it was no issue so long he is able to enjoy the music. If it were, there would be near empty hall.
The entire music is not extempore. Can we sit through a CM concert if it has only alapana and swaras? I read a connoisseur write here that a standalone alapana does not go well with his taste.

All through my academic days and official life, it has been dinned into my head how planning is needed for effect. Art is creative, but a singer is not a painter or a sculptor. Classical music has journeyed in a special route and it is not something different you can do every day. That is what purism is about. A singer, to my mind, does not produce on the stage something he is himself experiencing for the first time, but a fresh expression of his experience, something that may be a revelation to himself or even a let-down. But, his purpose cannot be audience-neutral. He cannot afford to ignore the audience once he decides to take the stage.
A relevant question is if an artist has to satisfy an audience, which one in the audience he has to aim at. That is as much an art as music and does come by observation and experience. That cannot come in the way of satisfying an audience overall. Satisfying an audience is the purpose of a performance and is not a dilution of the art.
Sudha said, ‘I will sing to an empty hall, but not lower the standard. Maybe I will sing more number of lighter pieces where the audience may require it.’ It is here, the singer holds her head high and does not play to the gallery.
I will be aghast if someone said that MMI played to the gallery because he sang what the audience wished to hear.

[VK RAMAN]

If pleasing audience is only way to be rich and famous, every artist should survey and get a list so they can practice and present for audience. None of the movie songs will be popular.

[arasi]

Chellappa,
Yes, points to ponder...

Balance:
The very structure of the concert--sketched out before the concert, with a good mixture of items and rAgAs.
On gauging the audience, adjusting it somewhat, and as the concert progresses, more of this. It involves preparation at home and quick thinking on stage(which as a strand goes through to the end) while the musician is wholly involved in the music, of course.

I think the posts so far clarify that playing to the gallery is a totally different thing

[vgovindan]

Suryaprakash Ramachandran

Do I sing only for myself ? Yes, when I am singing at home. In concert I live, breathe and sing for my rasikas and make no bones about it.

The following quote from a write up on Nikhil Banerjee, sitarist - posted under Hindustani Sangeet - is relevant. There are musicians and musicians. We cannot strait-jacket them into one mould.

"...He rarely indulged in fluctuations of 'mood', the overworked apology offered for a less than satisfying recital. Nor did he rely on the audience to inspire him, but rather sat on the stage absorbed in his own reverie, unfolding his music according to his inner timetable...."

[munirao2001]

In art form and its practices, it is experience and explanations. Experience, internalized perception of beauty and pleasure, skillfully or masterly expressions of its externalization; externalization by delivery; vyakthi offering akruthi, individual and the form, in relationship and in unity. Its reverse of externalized akruthi, form, internalized by vyakthi, in delivery of its reproductions or reinterpretations are also a fact.

munirao2001

[munirao2001]

Sriram Parasuram

On stage, there’s a dharma to make the total experience, both for yourself and the listener, seem worthwhile. Most of them don't know what's right or wrong, but they come with the trust that he'll give me the quality I trust him to provide.

Quotation is from the report in The Hindu Dt.26th, Nov,2015, Hyderabad Edition.

munirao2001