Season's summary - The best and the worst

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 30 Jan 2008, 12:43

Vidya, your points are, as always, extremely erudite and thought provoking. I guess the lesson for all of us is that raga structures are loosely defined notions and we need to be a little more catholic about "unusual" phrases...

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 30 Jan 2008, 13:34

Vidya,
I have been wondering about some of the Thyagaraja Krits - which are very rich in emotional content - bhAva - but the rendition is so insipid that it left me wondering whether Thyagaraja would have sung it that way. The issues raised in papers referred by you indeed answers partially my doubt.

I was under the impression that only lyrics (of Thyagaraja) have been changed - in some cases even tampered with; I thought this could be due to the musicians not understanding the contents or in case of tampering, it could be due the personal prejudices.

However, it now seems to me that the variation in lyrics could have come about due the musicians choosing wrong rAgas themselves - as Thyagaraja has not mentioned the name of rAga in any kRti unlike MD - and tailoring the words to suit the rAga.

My request is that you should not simply ask the people 'to get down from bandwagon'. You should publicise the papers - let the merits of the contents be discussed. May be people are sitting over them because of vested interests. Please revive the subject.

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 30 Jan 2008, 15:37

Oh there are certainly many examples of Thyagaraja krithis where the ragas have been modified. Chetulara is a famous example where no knows really knows whether it was originally in Kharaharapriya, Bhairavi or Natabhairavi. In other cases like Nagumomu, the character of the raga itself has been altered!

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 30 Jan 2008, 20:35

Hallo Fello Forumites,
There are certain other kritis too which require scruitiny .
Gnanamosaga radha-Poorvi kalyani- But originally it was in nShadvidamargini
SANGEETHA SASTHRA GNANAMU-mukhari- originally it was in SAALAKA BHARAVI.
Inthe case of Abheri, it is a long drawn conteroversy, since the deployment of chaturshruti Deivatham. It maY perhaps due to the adoption of Bhimplas which hss the Rakthi swaram -ch-Deivatam that would have captured the minds CM aspirants and would have come to stay.We can not focus any particular reason for such evolutionary changes.
Film Music too has added to the confusion.
Dorakuna iTuvanTi sEva-BHILARI has been changed to Yamuna kalyani
Mari mari ninnE -Kambodhi to Saaramatjhi like this there are ever so many .
Even Arunachala kavi Rayar's YAARO IVAR YAARO- POPULARLY KNOWN TO BE SUNG IN bHAIRAVI - IS SUNG IN SAAVERI BY R.VEDAVALLI. EVEN NOW.The reason offered by most of the vidwans is PAATAANTARAM.
Similarly, NINNU VINA MARIGALADA (-SS)-RITIGOWLAI has not escaped the roost and is sung by mudikondan school students in the raga Natabhairavi !!! aknd no one knows for certain as to whose PAATAANTHARAM IS AUTHEBTIC , AND OIUR CARNATIC MUSIC IS MIRACULOUSLY SURVIVING ALL SUCH VAGOURIES !!!

Ramaraj .

vainika · Post by **vainika** » 31 Jan 2008, 03:15

Thanks for the articles, oh sharp-clawed one! They put a whole new perspective on the current Hindustani/Carnatic and Tyagaraja/MD debates. Don't you think, though, that there are indisputable differences between the composers in some rAgas at least? How would you explain them?

On a different, umm... note, KVR's article contains more evidence of mangaLakaishiki being less bland than the currently popular version.

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 31 Jan 2008, 07:12

vidya wrote:.

1.The so-called AkaLanka
http://www.ibiblio.org/guruguha/article ... alanka.pdf

2.Venkatakamakhin
http://www.ibiblio.org/guruguha/article ... ghavan.pdf

3.A series of articles by shri.KV Ramachandran that appeared in the Music Academy.
http://www.ibiblio.org/guruguha/articles/KVR1.pdf
http://www.ibiblio.org/guruguha/articles/KVR2.pdf

Vidya,

Thanks a lot for these PDFs. Seems lot of things were discussed in this thread while I was away!

-Ramakriya

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 31 Jan 2008, 07:18

And BTW, is an edited and translated version of "so called Govinda's" Sangraha Choodamani available in a current publication?

If not, may be it is a good project for Panini to take up.

-Ramakriya

saveri · Post by **saveri** » 31 Jan 2008, 12:12

In answer to vageyakara's observation:

1) Yaro ivar yaaro is sung in Saveri by both the R Vedavalli and T N Seshagopalan school in Saveri. I have heard in the musical presentation of TNS this year @ Tamizh Isai Sangam, 1.1.08, when TNS made a musical presentation of Arunachala Kavi's kritis, wherein he mentioned that initially this was in Saveri , till the time of Poochi Iyengar. Only Ariyakudi changed it into Bhairavi.

TO QUOTE :

He said that PROBABLY, (to note that word), Iyengar, must have changed it into Bhairavi, so that every body could sing it with bhaavam, Saveri to bring the right output, he may have thought was difficult for the masses. Hence the Bhairavi, with the same varna mettu of Viriboni ( Sa Ri Ni Dha ......Aaro , Ni Sa Ri Ga Sa Ri...Ivar aaro ...) !

RV also follows the Saveri as she has been taught the Poochi way perhaps.! Incidentally it should be pronounced as AAro and not Yaro, as Tamizh does not have it as Yaaro, this was corroborated by RV in her lec dem on Rama Nataka Kritis in Krishna Gana Sabha in 2006.

2) The Kriti Ninnu Vina is in ABHERI ( with Suddha Dhaivatam), and not Natabhairavi.

Vidya Sankar mami in her presentation in the MA in 2007 said that originally this was in Abheri (SD) by Shyama Sastry but now popularly presented in Reetigowla. In the ga ri sa ni dha pa, ma, prayoga, this is very akin to Reetigowla and some where there must have been a slip into Chatusruti dhaivata and the wrong must have become right ! ! !.

Suddha Dhaivata is difficult to produce than Chatusruti Dhaivata and hence many changes have occurred with these two notes.

Even in Bhairavi, half the singing population do not produce the suddha dhaivata in place and hence there is always a slip into Manji. !

Manji today has lost its flavour , as TNS in lectures has said many times that Manjikku oru moonji undu, ippo kaanama poyiduthu !!

Also many rasikas think, Reetigowla is more pleasing as a raga than Abheri ! ! ! Hence the establishment of the same perhaps ! ! !

Hence the issue of paatantharam is holy for thy school and hence needs to be protected , if you belong to the given school., as then who will do the same?

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 31 Jan 2008, 15:39

deleted.erroneously repeated

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 31 Jan 2008, 20:53

Sorry a tangent

RV also follows the Saveri as she has been taught the Poochi way perhaps.! Incidentally it should be pronounced as AAro and not Yaro, as Tamizh does not have it as Yaaro, this was corroborated by RV in her lec dem on Rama Nataka Kritis in Krishna Gana Sabha in 2006.

If this is based on ya being iDayinam and hence cannot start a word, I think there are some old "very tamizh" words that clearly defy this - yAzh being primary example (note: it cannot be Azh - that means something else). Other examples I can think of yAm, yAdum, yAvar , yAppu these are all literary words, not colloquial. Do we have to now deem these are corrupt? I am sorry - it just doesnt seem to hold water.

If I were to guess Ar is a colloquial (brahmin) form - as you find it as Arenna sonnAlum (OVK) also (although people do sing it as yArenna sonnAlum). It is also quite possible that Arunacala Kavirayar used Ar rather than yAr But I am not sure one can claim there is no yAr in tamizh when there seems plenty of evidence to the contrary! If any, most would argue that yAr is more formal than Ar

!

But I will admit that I cannot vouch for Ar being only colloquial - it could be that Ar is older form and then became yAr (although yAr seems more common in works). Note that the same argument I do not think applies for yAzh - nor would it apply for yAm, yAdu, yAvar etc.

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 31 Jan 2008, 22:15

Arun-not yarun

I agree with you. I would also say that rAma nAdagak kIrtanaigaL are more folksy (colloquial) than literary. They spoke directly to the simple folk who came to see a musical play about rAmA. While Ar is quaint (?), yAr is a more familiar word.
By the way, here is something you may think about. While yAr is fine once, if you were to repeat the word, as in ArAr ASippaDAr, yAr YAr SOUNDS a bit odd!

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 31 Jan 2008, 22:51

Taking a parallel from kannaDa:

The equivalent words for yAr and Ar in kannaDa are yAru, and Aru. While both mean the same, the former is almost exclusively in speech and found in poetry as well, the second form, when used, is used mostly in poetry.

To give some well known examples from purandara dAsa:

kShIrAbdi kannike Sri mahAlakShmi Arige vadhuvAguve - yArige would not be wrong
Aru badukidarayya harininna nambi
Aru hitavaru ninage I mUvaroLage.

However, we can also find yAru in Purandara's compositions:

yArE rangana yArE kRShNana kareyabandavaru
yAru baruvaru ninna hinde

Could some such inferences made iin Tamizh too?

-Ramakriya

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 31 Jan 2008, 23:05

Perhaps - this and last 3 posts should move to Languages section

in tamil Ar - is common colloquially. I do not know how common it is in poetry.

arasi - regarding oddity of yAr yAr etc. - perhaps it is subjective?I say subjective, as if the words are pronounced separately - it seems fine (atleast to me

).

If you run them "together" i.e. combine the two words, then perhaps it sounds odd because t introduces ryA combo (yAryAr) which is uncommon (or not there naturally?) in tamizh?? Just a guess.

Arun

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 31 Jan 2008, 23:54

Who says Tamil does not have words beginning 'ya'? Shall I list out atleast a hundred words from the Dictionary? I have a recording of DKP of 'yArO ivar yArO' - It is very clearly pronounced as 'yArO'.

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 31 Jan 2008, 23:59

There is a parallel in telugu as well
Evaru, evarikai- Yevaru and Yevarikai. The later is colloquial I guess.

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 01 Feb 2008, 00:25

suji,
As per Telugu Dictionary, there is no word 'yevaru' - it is only when 'evaru' is prefixed by some other word - particularly ending with 'i', - 'y' is added - mari + evaru = mariyevaru; sari + evaru - sariyevaru &c

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 01 Feb 2008, 08:50

Even the tamil deity's abhayaraksha Mantramis
YAAMIRUKKA BHAYAMEN ?
tHEN COMES THIRUKURAL
EPPORUL YAAR YAAR VAAI KETPINUM
APPORUL MEIPPOURUL KAANBADARIVU"
Then Bharathiyar: YAAMARINDA MOZHIGALILE THAMIZH MOZHI POL INIDAAVADENGUM KAANOM"
I am sure the examples will suffice to put a full stop for the "YAAR" episode
Ramaraj

V_ANNASAMY · Post by **V_ANNASAMY** » 01 Feb 2008, 11:20

Can we sum up that 'aar' would commence the sentence like 'aaarukkutAn teriyum' and 'yaar' would come in between as in 'epporuL yaar yaar vOi kEtpinum'.

uyirinDRI nilaikkAdu meytAnE.
uyirkku uyirooTuvadum meytAnE.
uyirmeyyAi viLanguvadum meytanE.(means truth)
uyirmeyyO? uyar meyyO? (means truth).

(uyir ezhuthu - vowels; uyirmey ezhuthu - consonants).

Coming on to GKB' kriti 'aarukkutAn(this is onlycorrect as per founder secretary Mr. Venkataraman of Venkataraman of GKB Festival, AanathAndavapuram), GKB had already become 'nandanAr' and he wanted to use 'simply spoken language'.

Unlike 'aar (substitute of and) 'yaar', aam and yaam does not give the same meaning. Hence, Bharathi starts the kavithai with 'yaamarinda mozhigaLilE'.

-va-

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 01 Feb 2008, 11:42

Can we sum up that 'aar' would commence the sentence like 'aaarukkutAn teriyum' and 'yaar' would come in between as in 'epporuL yaar yaar vOi kEtpinum'.

Language usages are not what You and I decide it should be.
Please refer to the following words. Is it your contention that these words cannot occur at the beginning of sentences?
யாக்கை, யாங்கணம், யாங்கு, யாது, யாப்பு, யாம், யாவும், யாழ் .... I can go on
yAkkai, yAngaNam, yAngu, yAdu, yAppu, yAm, yAvum, yAzh

It is a different matter whether a composer has used in his composition otherwise - but that cannot become the rule.

Karnaticfan · Post by **Karnaticfan** » 01 Feb 2008, 12:02

யாக்கை, யாங்கணம், யாங்கு, யாது, யாப்பு, யாம், யாவும், யாழ் ..
(yAkkai, yAngaNam, yAngu, yAdu, yAppu, yAm, yAvum, yAzh)

Out of these, 2nd 3rd 4th, 7th words are substitutes/parellel meaning of eng~Nam, en~gu, edu,ellAmum(interogative sentences) which may mean 'uyir ezhuthu' (vowels) starts the sentence in place of their substitutes.

யாக்கை(yAkkai), யாப்பு(yAppu), யாம்(yAm,), யாழ்(yAzh) are nouns and the type of these words are not interogative.

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 01 Feb 2008, 12:11

karnaticfan,
pray tell me how does that justify the statement of Annasamy that words starting with 'ya' cannot come at the beginning of the sentence?

I may add here that there 10 couplets in Tirukkural starting with words 'ya' - five of these are interrogative - 127, 341, 397, 895, 1314,

prashant · Post by **prashant** » 01 Feb 2008, 12:23

Sri Govindan - Could you kindly use English script also so that those of us who cannot read Tamizh well can follow the discussions? Thank you.

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 01 Feb 2008, 12:26

prashant, I have since updated my post.

Moderator Note: Thanks VGV. Copied your transliteration to Karnaticfan's post as well.

rangahome · Post by **rangahome** » 01 Feb 2008, 20:36

yAdum is another common term (meaning 'all' / 'everything') that has been used to begin songs..

example:
yAdumAgi nindRAi kALi... (bharathi?)
yAdum oore yAvarum kELir.. (kaniyan poongundranar)

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 01 Feb 2008, 23:03

With grammarians around, I have nothing to voice now except to say that I was speaking about how ArAr SOUNDS better when you hear it SUNG when it is at the beginning of a line. YAr yAr anywhere else in the line is fine by me!
Arun, try singing the words as the first words in a line and then--as occurring elsewhere in the line. Tell me what you think.
Yes, as you say, it may be a personal thing, after all...

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 02 Feb 2008, 07:48

arasi wrote:Arun try singing the words as the first words in a line and then--as occurring elsewhere in the line. Tell me what you think.
Yes, as you say, it may be a personal thing, after all...

I cannot make up any sentence

(but then I am not the one who is the composer in this conversation

!).

But just singing yAr yArO sounds ok to me, and so does ArArO. However, I think it would perhaps depend on the tune and how the syllables are mapped to it. I mean the particular tune I picked - it seemed fine. But maybe the one you are imagining, it doesnt sound so? For example,
(..... => means stretch it out)
Both yA....r yA....rO and A..... rA.... rO are ok. The one I picked is this.

But say the first "A" is not stretched to much. Here ArA....rO - ok, but yAryA....rO would be "congested".

So perhaps yAr yArO requires a (slightly) different musical structure.

Arun

V_ANNASAMY · Post by **V_ANNASAMY** » 02 Feb 2008, 10:18

VGV Sir,

With reference to your

" the statement of Annasamy that words starting with 'ya' cannot come at the beginning of the sentence?"

I have only asked " Can we sum up that 'aar' would commence the sentence like 'aaarukkutAn teriyum' and 'yaar' would come in between as in 'epporuL yaar yaar vOi kEtpinum'.

I have not given any conclusion. We can further analyze.

Further, my observation was that 'aar' is a substitute of 'yaar' (there is no doubt).

While further analysing the two songs, there seems to be some theme:

1) aarukkutAn teriyum avar mahimai
ambalavaaNar aadiya perumai

This two lines of pallavi - aarukku & ambala , both the first alphas are vowels and are almost matching. As I said earlier, 'nandanAr' effect is there.

Moreso, these two lines have got words starting with vowels (4) such as aarukku, avar, ambala, aadiya. .

2) aarO ivar yaarO,
enna pERO ariyEn

Taking above into consideration, here too the first two lines start with vowels. While 'Yaro' & 'Yenna" can also be fitted, using the consonants, 'yenna' does not sound good, when writing.

In this kriti also, more words with vowels (aarO, ivar, enna, ariyEn) are seen.

In this song too, both rAma and sitA were in teens and the situation seems to be like telling only to hearts(not seems to be open descriptions, unlike this era) and when a person is left to him/her self, the language is different, may not be gramatically correct.

On to VGV and 0ther great scholars...

-va-

sindhu · Post by **sindhu** » 02 Feb 2008, 14:50

deleted

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 02 Feb 2008, 16:52

Annasamy,
I have nothing to say about a particular kriti - if the composer has composed it as 'ArO', why should I say that it is wrong. The problem comes only when we try to make a rule out of such compositions. The composer himself might not have set such a rule for all his compositions.
Let us leave it at that.

V_ANNASAMY · Post by **V_ANNASAMY** » 02 Feb 2008, 17:10

VGV Sir,

There is one more kriti by GKB which starts with 'aarukku ponnambalan krupai irrukkudO' in Bhairavi. Then the famous ragamalika 'aarabhi mAnam vaithAdarippArennai' is also there.

These are,only for analysis and making them as a rule is ruled out.

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 02 Feb 2008, 21:40

I n aTANA "Yar undasnaipol Adarippavar ARumugatharasE" is the one in Sri valli film of yester years.
Yaarukkuthan theriyum - in dEva manohari- composer not known
Another film song -Yarai nambi nAn porandEn pongaDa ponga -Sivaji acted in this film. I think it s uyarnda manidhan
Yaar tharuvAr inda ariyAsanam - Saraswathy sabhadam-Shivaji
Yaar inda nilavu-Film name not known
YaarO yaarODi ennODa purashan -do-

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 03 Feb 2008, 10:54

Arun,
VGV is right. We have our own reasons, or may be not, to pick Ar over yAr!
Ramaraj as a composer would concur, I suppose.
As for Ar Ar ASaippaDAr, it is the AsaippaDAr which follows that makes me choose ArAr.

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 03 Feb 2008, 16:24

Hallo Arasi, I have to concur with you.As a composer yourself, you too must definitely be knowing the fact that there are certain liberties allowed to poets, composers, and lyricists., for the simple reason that the conceptual meanings, musical affablity, and expressional convenience certain rules are relaxed.
For instance, The TAMIL LULLABHI SONG A'arAaro ArirArO
AraDicha kaNNIrO" in nilAmbhari is a universal/ and unique Lullabhi
song which has a serene cascading effect, can make any baby(why, even elderly babies like myself and our beloved CML ) fall asleep within notime ! .Whether it is the DIVINE carressing of our mothers or whomsoever you care for !!!Or as I usually attribute it to the" DIVINE CM" which rules SUPREME !!! There need not be any second opinion about it.
AND I HOPE , YOURSELF, GOBILALITHA, AND SEVERAL OTHERS WOULDn't MIND JOINING THIS CLUB OF ELDERLY BABS! !!!!!
Ramaraj

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 03 Feb 2008, 17:53

kuzhandaip paruvam tirumbum, kuvalaya vAzhvu muDiyum taruNam
vizhunda kuzhandaiyait tETRum tAi pOL guNam Seyum inniSaiyum
tAlATTum Agum Or nIlambariyum--aiyyan pADalenil, iniyum inbam kUTTum...

A child's life returns when the time comes to leave this earth
As a mother would a bruised child, good music heals
A lullaby in nIlAmbari, that too on our Lord--more bliss!

You know how it is when we have the grandkids around!

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 03 Feb 2008, 19:08

arasi wrote:Arun,
VGV is right. We have our own reasons, or may be not, to pick Ar over yAr!

I certainly agree and in fact I said so in my very first post on this subject! Ar is certainly part of the language (although IMO colloquial compared to yAr).

My only point was that the reasoning that the composer picked so because "there is no yAr in tamiaz" or "yAr at the front a word/sentence etc. is not allowed" etc. do not have validity in light of evidence.

Arun

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 03 Feb 2008, 19:10

Hallo Arasi , What an amazing kavithai !!!

akshara lakshampeRum arasiyin kavi maDal !l
ishvAhu kula sArvabhaumanin sol nayampOl !!l
akshadai kumkumam Asikku lakshaNam !!!
ekshaNamum vENDiDum innisai kuzhandai nAn !!!!

Each word of Arasi's verse is worth a lakh(monetorily)
Just like the poetic,( guarded)words that emerge from Rama , the ikshvahu kula sarbhauma
Akshada ( the the turmeric smeared rice and Kumkumam(Sfron) symbolize materials used for blessing
and I , the child of melody, am seeking that divine blessings for ever

Manipravalam is deliberately deployed for enrichment of the verse .
Ramaraj

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 03 Feb 2008, 20:32

kuzhandaip paruvam tirumbum, kuvalaya vAzhvu muDinda pinbum - it is for certain

Ragjay · Post by **Ragjay** » 09 Feb 2008, 17:50

Hi I had met critic SVK recently and sought his views on the debate on the review of V.S. He refrained from commenting on this issue but stated that this is precisely the reason he refrains from commenting on technical aspects and his reviews keep in mind the layman reader and hence refrains from including such issues. There is a general view that he is not competent or sound in theory.but this is far from the correct position. Many may not be aware that he is a Aplus grade artist for the AIR I also do not endorse all his reviews,but I thought it it would be proper to post this .He is also aware of all the remarks that have been made about his reviews and when asked to react he simply said that every aspect of music could be perceived from different angles and levels and he was of the views that each is entitled to his or her view. He also said that he has been respected by all musicians and has never been approached or influenced by any one to doctor reviews and that he has been true to his work for the past five decades. I do not hold any brief for him I just have given a gist of my personal interaction with him thats all..... Bye Ragjay

rbsiyer · Post by **rbsiyer** » 09 Feb 2008, 18:55

Ragjay wrote:...There is a general view that he is not competent or sound in theory.but this is far from the correct position...

mr.svk's competence or lack of it in my opinion is somewhat beside the point as precious little finds its way into the review. his reviews could easily be written without attending the concert in question as they are full of meaningless vague bombastic adjecxtives. v.subramanian is to be appreciated for sticking neck out and writing frank detailed reviews. far better to air contentious views and stir up debate than fill up space with acid attacks on nityasree, jaysree and other quality singers and eulogising mediocrities.

pritsubramanian · Post by **pritsubramanian** » 13 Feb 2008, 11:20

Hi I had met critic SVK recently and sought his views on the debate on the review of V.S. He refrained from commenting on this issue but stated that this is precisely the reason he refrains from commenting on technical aspects and his reviews keep in mind the layman reader and hence refrains from including such issues. There is a general view that he is not competent or sound in theory.but this is far from the correct position. Many may not be aware that he is a Aplus grade artist for the AIR I also do not endorse all his reviews,but I thought it it would be proper to post this .He is also aware of all the remarks that have been made about his reviews and when asked to react he simply said that every aspect of music could be perceived from different angles and levels and he was of the views that each is entitled to his or her view. He also said that he has been respected by all musicians and has never been approached or influenced by any one to doctor reviews and that he has been true to his work for the past five decades. I do not hold any brief for him I just have given a gist of my personal interaction with him thats all..... Bye Ragjay

I am a little stumped - are we referring to the same SVK who passed away on Feb 15 2007?

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 13 Feb 2008, 12:22

This confusion has sprung up many times on this forum - the SVk who passed away was SV Krishnan, who used to run Raga Sudha hall. SV Krishnamurhty is the critic and is fortunately still with us!

Ragjay thanks for the clarification. I am aware that SVK has performed at the Academy (not sure about A+(?) grade but I concede I don't know) but you seem to suggest that he does not delve in technical aspects to avoid retribution from artistes...surely that cannot be the right approach towards criticism...

pritsubramanian · Post by **pritsubramanian** » 13 Feb 2008, 18:03

Thanks Vijay for the clarification

Ragjay · Post by **Ragjay** » 13 Feb 2008, 20:54

Hi Vijay The point he tried to make was that the review was to cater to a larger readership that are not technically in to music and it was not to make the review a technical treatise on music. Hence his reviews are not technical.You may recollect that sometime back the famous critic Subbudu had written reviews in one of the daily newspapers and it was observed that the circulation of that paper went up and it was found that a lot of laymen who have no knowledge of music enjoyed his reviews which contained no high flown technical stuff. This aspect must be borne in mind Some comment has also been made on use of high flown english language It must be understood that he was a subeditor of the paper and incidentally was a music critic .Certainly all those who are very sound in the various aspect of music may not like his reviews but that does not imply that he is not competent .I once again reiterate that i hold no brief for SVK and that I also do not always agree with what he has to say in his reviews. I am just presenting facts.... Bye Ragjay

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 13 Feb 2008, 21:34

I used to read the TV Review column in the Guardian, when it was written by Nancy Banks Smith. Her biting wit was always a joy, even though I had little interest in TV or criticism.

Her knowledge of the entire world of entertainment was confounding, and her writing always a joy.

A great critic can be worth reading in their own right.

Can be.