The idea of aesthetics as propounded by TMK

[Ranganayaki]

From Vnism's exchange with TMk, it appears that there are two words that make up the topic of this discussion which we are considering as just one. When I read it the misunderstanding seems so clear that to me it is like the screen switch we see on our phones these days.

Vnism wonders what this notion of aesthetics is and explains in good detail a lot about the kind of things one would find appealing or not. TMK disagrees and says that there are objective aesthetic principles that determine what is musical which is not dependent on audience reaction. He says that the common use of the word aesthetics is the wrong usage.

If you notice the two of them are talking at two different levels and using the same word.

The two words that we need to use here instead of just one are "Aesthetics" and "Aesthetic", the latter being the "common" meaning. So it seems TMK is mixed up when he says the common use of the word aesthetics is wrong. It is as though he were mixing up "acoustics" with "acoustic".

[sureshvv]

I searched Vinism's responses, and did not find such an idea..

May I recommend that you go back and read his original post and check if there is some resonance with what I said? Which is, group subjectivism could be considered an objective measure.

I found that the discussion like the other one about the senior generation goes off in several directions. I was only trying to interpret TMK's words about aesthetics that have been quoted in this thread and offer my ideas to answer vnism's original question.

I think vinsim has some good ideas but he is fixated on TMK's ideas rather than developing his own with the help of the group here

In his words, I do not see the idea that average audience subjectivity contributes to the notion of aesthetics that he is concerned with.

You are right as the "he" indicates TMK. But that stands in contrast to vinsim's idea, IIUC. Rather than considering "aesthetics" as some kind of technical term with a definition, I think we should go with the general meaning and intent of the word.

[munirao2001]

Ranganayaki,
You opine that "I find the idea of objective aesthetics outside of what one finds beautiful rather absurd." When the state of mind is conditioned on the sense of aesthetic and beauty can not happen. The state of mind is full of demand for conformism and recall experience of what is perceived as aesthetic and beauty. One is physically present in listening but mentally in the time of the experiences in the past, constantly comparing and judging. Image, Idolatry, authority created acting as a barrier to witness the beauty. The sense of mind in freedom, in observation, in sensitivity, has the highest potentiality to sense, witness and realize the beauty. This process removes the barriers of subjectivity and enables the objectivity. If the moments of 'aha' mostly related with subjectivity, the moments of 'ah' is related with objectivity in absence of conditioning of the mind moments.
Due to pressing engagement, I am ending now. Join you later to discuss other details.

munirao2001

[Nick H]

Art, the technicalities of art, the philosophy of art --- they are all different things.

The artist must study the technicalities/techniques, or they will not be able to perform. They may study the philosophy as well. To the simple listener, all and everything other than the subject act of listening and the inner, personal, responses that it invokes are absolutely optional. The choice not to take the unwanted options is absolutely valid, but it doesn't render those options invalid.

[sureshvv]

@sankark:

Another good exercise is to work T's pallavi lines into everyday conversation. Say you are sitting in Raga Sudha & your next seat neighbor's phone goes off, you glare at him for a bit & then say, "ente nerchina ente jucina"

[arasi]

Suresh,
You said it!
In making tamizh folks know the words in a Tyagaraja or Purandara DAsara kruti, I just sing the words in tamizh, and how they lend themselves to it! Their direct approach to rAmA or hari is simple and yet gains meaning. They address their isTA deivams directly and effectively.

Yes, their songs are as simple as every day conversation and yet are profoundly meaningful...

[Ranganayaki]

So well-said, Nick.. would you please connect that to TMK's views..

My feeling on that is that TMK has certain expectations of the audience (I could be wrong).. like Arasi said, an ideal listener. We cannot all be his ideal, that's what I meant when I said that he has to work with our subjectivity, not that he has to come down to our level.

But I think those are a couple of the quirks.. but he is a true thinker, truly questioning himself and trying to be a better artist and even a better person as an artist. It's wonderful to have a thinking member rather than be part of the whole other crowd who milks carnatic music.

Apart from that, to talk about your words, Nick, do you think artists HAVE to study technique? Can't their art (in whatever field) be a simple harmonious outpouring which then later turns out to be technically sound, or brilliant?

Arasi and Suresh, are you just talking about great lyrics and their role in our lives, or are you saying that TMK is wrong? Can you elaborate a bit, so I know what to make of it?

[Nick H]

Apart from that, to talk about your words, Nick, do you think artists HAVE to study technique? Can't their art (in whatever field) be a simple harmonious outpouring which then later turns out to be technically sound, or brilliant?

Well, yes... or we could all get up there and do it!

But, on the other hand, when it comes to vocal, rather than instrumental, music, it seems that many do not recognise the need to learn to sing.

[sureshvv]

are you just talking about great lyrics and their role in our lives, or are you saying that TMK is wrong? Can you elaborate a bit, so I know what to make of it?

I think CM is the eternal golden braid of bhakthi, sahitya and sangeetam. To try to split hairs is a fool's errand.

Any innovation that goes in the direction of binding these elements even stronger will probably stick (like using "hari" during the alapana). Any innovation that goes in the other direction will hopefully bite the dust

[arasi]

Yes, the three strands of CM. Bhakthi though embraces not merely hymns on specific gods but respect and awe for all things wise and wonderful that god has created...

[Ranganayaki]

I think CM is the eternal golden braid of bhakthi, sahitya and sangeetam. To try to split hairs is a fool's errand.

Any innovation that goes in the direction of binding these elements even stronger will probably stick (like using "hari" during the alapana). Any innovation that goes in the other direction will hopefully bite the dust

Sounds as though any splitting would be at the level of the three strands and not at the level of the hairs in the braid. So it may not be the fool's errand that you are thinking of. Splitting and rearranging may be a necessary activity for the health of the braid.

How can the use of "Hari" be an innovation? I don't think the first great artist who did that meant to innovate. Others who have taken it up are just imitating him. That does not rise to the level of an innovation.

I am making myself a little more familiar with TMK's ideas. Saying that he denounces Sahitya is a misrepresentation (of coursenot by you, Suresh). Saying he is not a purist also is a point of view that can be argued with. That he is oriented away from Bhakti also seems to be false. I feel sorry to read some of the judgements. I've been meaning to share some links, will do that shortly.

[sureshvv]

Sounds as though any splitting would be at the level of the three strands and not at the level of the hairs in the braid. So it may not be the fool's errand that you are thinking of. Splitting and rearranging may be a necessary activity for the health of the braid.

I was mixing metaphors. No need to take it further literally. But it looks like you feel it is ok to neglect or play down one of the components of the golden braid. I don't.

How can the use of "Hari" be an innovation? I don't think the first great artist who did that meant to innovate. Others who have taken it up are just imitating him. That does not rise to the level of an innovation.

Sounds innovative to me. It is the use of words during the alapana phase. Innovation is anything new and different as far as I am concerned. Your threshold must be somewhere else.

Saying that he denounces Sahitya is a misrepresentation (of coursenot by you, Suresh).

I don't know who said that. What seems apparent is that he feels that it is not necessary.
Now you may argue that it is not apparent since he sings some sahitya for some items.
But I feel not singing it for every item is an indication that supports my contention.

Anyway I feel like I am splitting hairs now

[Ranganayaki]

I was mixing metaphors. No need to take it further literally. But it looks like you feel it is ok to neglect or play down one of the components of the golden braid. I don't.

Mine was also a metaphor.. I am not concerned here with literal haircare.
Neglect - no, not ok. But not to include is ok with me.

[sureshvv]

Mine was also a metaphor.. I am not concerned here with literal haircare.

I hope so. You carried the metaphor a bit far with the splitting, separating and rearranging of the braid

Neglect - no, not ok. But not to include is ok with me.

Pot-aah-to... pot-ay-to...

[Ranganayaki]

I hope so. You carried the metaphor a bit far with the splitting, separating and rearranging of the braid

Well I gave a pretty concise response in the same vein as yours (I thought that was nice, btw ) and stopped quickly enough. Did you lose track?

Pot-aah-to... pot-ay-to...

If you don't see the difference between neglecting sahitya and not including a kriti well then it's potaahto and potayto for you.

[vinsim]

I came back after a few days and was pleasantly surprised that so many people have pitched in to this discussion. I have learnt something from each of you - so thank you. :namaste:

If I go back to TMK's definition of aesthetic, as posted by munirao, I still see some inconsistencies in his thinking, which I want to comment upon.

I am now posting the portion of TMK's writing on the aesthetics, from his book:
Aesthetics is primarily abut the senses. But it is not about your sense, but how to sense. It is a body of empirically arrived ideas, that is, through serious observation and experiences.

Therefore, aesthetics is a body of philosophy that tries to understand the aspects of an art form that give it its identity and content. Aesthetics in arts is about the understanding of art. It would include an understanding of intent, structure, form, changes, development and history, thereby also examining why an art form is what it Aesthetics does not judge art on the basis of taste.
If we look at music in terms of aesthetics and see it as a combination of sounds that gives us aesthetic experience, we have a completely different understanding of music. At a personal level, it gives us pleasure through our senses, but from an objective point of view, it is a combination of sounds that have been given a certain form, content and organization.
One must develop the capacity to criticize music on the basis of the aesthetics that define it, rather than one's own personal liking for an aspect of something-music for instance-and yet understand that what is liked is aesthetically destroying the essence of a specific aspect of music. This is aesthetics as an objective rather than a subjective ideas. One needs to strive to observe with higher sensitivity from this impersonal, objective stand, not one's own personal predisposition, instincts or sensibilities.

munirao2001

It appears to me that on one hand he is talking about the commonly understood word "aesthetic" - which is a collective acceptance of what is beautiful, based on repeated experiments of observing (listening in this case) and contemplation. It is the sum total of all the subjective experiences of the individuals which can be used to predict whether certain music is pleasant or not for an audience of a certain cultural background. If this is deemed to be objective/impersonal appreciation, then so be it. It is just semantics.

On the other hand, he talks about "aesthetics" as the study of art, as distinguished from "aesthetic" which is the perception of beauty. But, isn't there another word for "aesthetics" in music - musicology? Why talk about it as if it is a new concept and confuse everyone?

I prefer if he does "aesthetics" study at home and concentrate on providing "aesthetic" music on the concert platform (which is what the sabha and rasikas pay to listen). He has gotten the two mixed up in his own mind and is resorting to sophistry in the face of criticism.

[Ranganayaki]

May I recommend that you go back and read his original post and check if there is some resonance with what I said? Which is, group subjectivism could be considered an objective measure.

I did. The only thing I found that vnism says about a group anything is this:

The idea of aesthetics comes from PEOPLE, not from anywhere. It is the collective consciousness that accepts some sound as pleasing and rejects some other sound as awful.

I did not get the impression that this was what you were referring to. I understood this collective consciousness to be a cultural phenomenon that is learned, not a consensus that is arrived by compromise as you seem to suggest.

I think vinsim has some good ideas but he is fixated on TMK's ideas rather than developing his own with the help of the group here

What is the problem with his being "fixated" on TMK's ideas here? The topic: tmk'S views on aesthetics.
[/quote]

You are right as the "he" indicates TMK. But that stands in contrast to vinsim's idea, IIUC. Rather than considering "aesthetics" as some kind of technical term with a definition, I think we should go with the general meaning and intent of the word.

If we are trying to develop our own ideas here, then each one of us can say whatever we want . If we are trying to understand TMK's views of aesthetics (topic of this thread), we have to use his terms and try to understand them. He explicitly distinguishes his sense of aesthetics from what one may consider aesthetic or beautiful.

[Ponbhairavi]

During Vinayaka Chathurthi season,in every street you can find doll makers.They all make Ganesha idol with clay. every doll maker has his mould and he stuffs it tightly, with wet clay then takes it out, gives some final touches.his process of creation ends there and he goes to the next, with half baked ,no,unbaked product leaving to the devout customer to complete it with “vastrartham,aabharanaartham akshadam smarpayami” which alone confers upon the cla y a divine sanctity. The doll is as good as the mould he got from his ancestors and also as good as the clay ,which depend upon the soil(this is a nature’s gift as a musician’s voice.
There are others who care for public opinion in marketing;they consider this as an imperfect job: they bake the icon, put a coat of paint,apply different colours for the veshti, angavastram, borders, and gold paint for the crown,ornaments.. All those basic structures were already there in the raw clay shape. But after painting it looks fascinating. The clay basic is raga. the painting is the kirthanam,
Various mannequins adorn the facade of textile shops. one day they are dressed with pattu pudavai and corresponding traditional attire,;next day they are made to wear kurtha pyjama,thuppatta in north indian flavour,The mannequin is only a pretext for the dresses.It is the raga and the dresses are the sahithyas.The standalone mannequin is not that beautiful but looks charming after dressing up.
In temples the utsavar vigraham is beatifully made by an alloy of five (seven ?) metals. The abhishegam reveals it bare with the beauty of its features the harmony of proportion, expression in the eyes, angle of inclination of the hands and legs. When it comes in the street processions decorated with pattuvastrams, glittering jewelleries. loads of colourful flower garlands, the same icon looks bewitchlingly beautiful and attracts all eyes including those of atheists, but with a sense of aesthetics.The same icon dons various alankarams on different days.No gurukkal even in Thirupathi is a diploma holder in aesthetics.

My friend keeps in his drawing room a beautiful bronze statue of Nataraja.graceful Parvathi,kalinga narthana krishna. They have been meticulously carved by anonymous traditional craftsmen of Swamimalai.There is also against the wall, a painting, probably bought at Montmartre, where one can decipher 2 human noses,a single eye, a wrist watch spring, and an acute angle all soaked in bizarre blood red patches, a product of unshackled freedom of artistic expression by a famous painter in a lunatic asylum.They are the owners’s pride and for their own satisfaction. If a visitor says “very nice “ they feel proud of their and their visitor’s aesthetic sense( but they never think of the Swamimalai craftsman ) They do not care if some one does not praise or even notice them .It is an index of bad aesthetic sense or the absence of it,
In modern society,beauty parlours have sprung up in thousands even in semi urban villages ( an index of fast growing aesthetic sense ? ). On the wedding day the bride skips the old Nalangu and spends several hours before making a late appearance for the reception. Her appearance stuns even her parents. who cares if a majority of guests feel that she was looking much better in the morning muhurtham.?Some parlour owner’s visiting cards proclaim them as “Herbal estheticienne” (where french is for cosmetic purposes) to win over her business rival who is a Verbal aesthetician!

[arasi]

Ponbhairavi,


vinsom,
I'm glad you are back

[vasanthakokilam]

If we are trying to develop our own ideas here, then each one of us can say whatever we want . If we are trying to understand TMK's views of aesthetics (topic of this thread), we have to use his terms and try to understand them.

Yep, exactly. I am not sure if we are there yet! Vinsim seems to think he understands what TMK means. While I wish Vinsim did not provide advice to TMK or attribute motives to TMK's statements, he is trying to make sense out of it all. Is vinsim' s understanding directionally correct?

[venkatakailasam]

I doubt very much whether TMK would have realized so many different meanings to his statement....

[ramamantra]

yeah, I too doubt the same; #:-s

[munirao2001]

TMK is clear on his understanding and belief. Perception of beauty and appreciation of beauty are important in aesthetic experience of individual and collective. Appreciation of beauty can be arisen out of both the individual and collective conscious. In collective conscious, the authority, form, content, organization and history all influence the individual, who prefers the ease and comfort of collective. Collective conscious does not guarantee beauty in the individual conscious, who is not influenced by the collective conscious.
TMK is with set belief that the realized principles and the internalized beauty, both as an artist with the benefit of knowledge of his extensive study, research and practice, is best served with deep devotion to the art works-compositions and all the other aspects of manodharma sangita- of great merits, each with high potential with its own creative strength and potential. TMK desires artistic movement of realization and treatment of aesthetics with its nuances, in freedom for the original creativity with unconditioned mind getting the urge and inspiration, shedding the ease and comfort of the conformism of re creativity, with deep devotion to the art form of Carnatic music. This devotion raises inquiry and results in his understanding that to conform to the system and the process established in the delivery or performance, the sacredness and greatness of the original creativity of the vaggeyakara, suffers with less than serious attention to the aesthetic aspects. This deep felt desire of artistic movement also creating the sense of beauty perception in the unconditioned minds of the rasikas and the artists and rasikas, together in relationship enjoying the nuances of aesthetic of immense merits in Carnatic Music. The underlying phenomena of observer becoming observed, in unity.
Art of listening is in being in the present lively and happening moment(s), not in the states of past, not in comparison, not in expectation of getting served what is desired, not in critical judgment but with total attention with sensitivity, observation and realization of the beauty, as it is being created and unraveled. Let there be clarity that Classical Music is well developed art form serving the intellect, the ultimate but not only the budhi-sense of analytic and discursive; ahamkara-sense of individuation;manas-sense of both the internal and external. In art form, the primacy is for naadanubhuti, giving movement to the static akshara/word when put to use or when not put to use. Religion, devotion and social and cultural aspects do influence the composer and the composition. The saahithya bhaavam is primacy for all the the other forms of music other than classical, sangita taking the supporting role with bhaava auchityatva/aptness and correctness. In art music the composer's creativity is not in the lyric but in the sangita with the beauty of abstraction, with high potential for artistic creativity and re creativity. Artist has no freedom for apa sabda when rendering the lyrical content in a composition. Saahithya bhaava inspires resulting in higher creativity of raaga bhaavam. But it is very sookshma or subtle in classical music. No room for theatrics and exaggeration.
Ultimately the excellence and experiential beauty in the art form of classical music is the litmus test and the result.

munirao2001

[sureshvv]

What is the problem with his being "fixated" on TMK's ideas here? The topic: tmk'S views on aesthetics.

1. Since TMK is not here, we will just be speculating and it is not fair to him or the topic under discussion.

2. I don't pay too much attention to the topic. Typically the discussion veers off quite a bit in directions not related to the original topic.

[kvchellappa]

Some points seem to suggest that TMK's is the last word on the subject. An average rasika also has an aesthetic sense and follows it. All artists will have aesthetic sense and some will be able to innovate and the proof of the pudding is in the eating. It must have a reasonable and appreciative audience. I can't imagine art in public domain without an audience and subjective appreciation of it. To say that aesthetic is irrespective of what the audience feels does not make sense to me.

[Ranganayaki]

I doubt very much whether TMK would have realized so many different meanings to his statement....

1. If there are many ACCEPTABLE meanings and levels of understanding, they may or may not have been intended by tmk.

2. The large number of opinions here are not all consistent with TMK's words. They are different meanings, but do not necessarily throw light on TMK's views.

[Ranganayaki]

\ I am not sure if we are there yet..
Is vinsim' s understanding directionally correct?

Regarding Vinsim's (sorry I"ve been mis-spelling his handle all along.. it is just like that phenomenon where kids read "To Let" signs as "ToiLet".. as a kid you never notice that you've made a mistake and only feel perplexed at its meaning.. it seems to be fairly common)...

Vinsim's analysis just mentions the problem of the distinction between "aesthetics" and "aesthetic". There is more confusion as again he uses the word "aesthetic" to describe "aesthetics".. He dismisses it all saying

I prefer if he does "aesthetics" study at home and concentrate on providing "aesthetic" music on the concert platform (which is what the sabha and rasikas pay to listen). He has gotten the two mixed up in his own mind and is resorting to sophistry in the face of criticism

VK, my impression is that we are not there yet. Personally, I am trying.

[Ranganayaki]

1. Since TMK is not here, we will just be speculating and it is not fair to him or the topic under discussion.

2. I don't pay too much attention to the topic. Typically the discussion veers off quite a bit in directions not related to the original topic.

1. Unfair?? That is a strange thing to say. He is here through his words and we are here to interpret them. When I write about Pantula Rama's choice of tone in Bhupala (putting it as well as I can), I am certainly speculating. PR is not here to confirm it. Is that kind of speculation ok? Is that fair? Only because I'm saying nice things? I believe it is acceptable because
i) It is not hurtful but respectful
ii) It is not wild speculation, but well-considered, and consistent with the realities of Bhupalam and of
the kriti.

What is unfair about making disciplined and thoughtful "speculation" (discussion )about his views which he has put forth in books, interviews and in this email? So much has already been said in this forum about TMK, so many personal insults, ugly characterizations, so many questions to his integrity.. Not one person among us spoke about "unfairness" then.

2. You surprise and disappoint me, Suresh. You would join the unmindful massess who veer off the purpose?

[Ranganayaki]

TMK is clear on his understanding and belief.
munirao2001

Yes, I agree. He is very consistent. I think I was wrong in saying that he seems confused. Since then, I have been considering his own words and I think (as I said somewhere earlier) he is very thoughtful, sincere and open. I am starting to think (as I learn in this discussion) that he is right.. the layman's use of "AESTHETICS" is certainly wrong usage. It is the layman who confuses "aesthetics" and "aesthetic", not he. And that confused use of the word "aesthetics" by the layman is definitely the wrong use of the word. He is quite right. I experienced that in this thread.

[venkatakailasam]

ranganayaki madam..

I am one with you to make things understand by short and crisp postings..

But, to get a Phd ,you require lengthy project reports..

I made an uncared for link which I thought was relevant....

" Interesting thread...here:

http://www.rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic. ... es#p225471



Any way, Shri TMk had further elaborated in walk the talk with Sheakar gupta

which I read to day..

This may be available here..

http://search.yahoo.com/search?rewrite= ... =onesearch


This can further carry the thread forward..

[sureshvv]

What is unfair about making disciplined and thoughtful "speculation" (discussion )about his views which he has put forth in books, interviews and in this email? So much has already been said in this forum about TMK, so many personal insults, ugly characterizations, so many questions to his integrity.. Not one person among us spoke about "unfairness" then.

Looks like you have taken the "unfair" remark personally. I did not intend to say that you were unfair. The unfairness is on my part (and others who may fit the same description). The unfairness is because I am uninformed. To properly discuss his theory of aesthetics, instead of relying on vinsim's email report, I should make the effort to read his book and other writings on the topic. I am really not inclined to dedicate the time for this.

2. You surprise and disappoint me, Suresh. You would join the unmindful massess who veer off the purpose?

Oh please... Guess you have not been here long enough.

[Ranganayaki]

Looks like you have taken the "unfair" remark personally. I did not intend to say that you were unfair. The unfairness is on my part (and others who may fit the same description). The unfairness is because I am uninformed. To properly discuss his theory of aesthetics, instead of relying on vinsim's email report, I should make the effort to read his book and other writings on the topic. I am really not inclined to dedicate the time for this.

Oh, no.. I didn't take it personally, I was just surprised as your answer didn't make sense. Because talk about artists is all we do. I just used myself as an example. But this is very nice.. I get it. Exactly what I have been thinking, because this thread has said he has to speak to us, give us his whole theory, explain things to us.. But why should he discuss with us when he has already said a lot? I have just started reading his book and been looking at videos of him talking and I think he is a serious thinker with serious ideas. He is rare.

Oh please... Guess you have not been here long enough.

- I was all of 80% serious .. Kaalai vaari vitten .. But your response brought me a good 2 minutes of mirth.

[Ranganayaki]

ranganayaki madam..

I am one with you to make things understand by short and crisp postings..

But, to get a Phd ,you require lengthy project reports..

I made an uncared for link which I thought was relevant....

" Interesting thread...here:

http://www.rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic. ... es#p225471


Any way, Shri TMk had further elaborated in walk the talk with Sheakar gupta

which I read to day..

This may be available here..

http://search.yahoo.com/search?rewrite= ... =onesearch


This can further carry the thread forward..

Sri VK,

So nice of you to call me madam, but everyone addresses me here as Ranganayaki. Please feel free to.

I did look at that link a few days ago, and I'm sorry I didn't mention it. Within that post you linked to, there is another link to the article about unusual pallavi sahitya, or pallavi sahitya in the old days, which I found really interesting and feel a little regretful that we have lost that fun attitude. Singing about the katharikkai kari or the neighbor or the uppuma.

But even more interesting than that, it made me remember that my grandmother, when she was in a good mood, would sing out, "Kathaarikkai koode konda dee" I wonder if it had something to do with this. My mother would sing,"Uppumaavai kinda solladee" and I don't remember much else.. singing it now, both sound like Khamas ragam to me, but I wouldn't know. I wonder if it is all connected. Were they fascinated by Tiger and those fun lyrics ? I never paid attention to it, I just thought they were speaking in song about themselves.

May be Tiger was just having fun with words and in life, turning random sentences or thoughts or activities into music. He probably didn't have a stuffy attitude to music? I wonder what it was like to attend concerts then.

I will look at your new link. I have been watching a couple of tmk (talking) videos a day too. Thank you so much.

[Ranganayaki]

I saw a few videos of tmk's and delayed giving you links because I wanted to choose one that really sums it up. I found this one.. Listening to this, I was moved, I had the same emotion at the end of the second question's answer that I would have at a beautiful concert.

The relevant section of this video starts about 1 minute into the video when the lady in the yellow dupatta asks a question. This is followed by question from a young guy in a brown kurta, and that answer was what moved me. I daresay that the questioner was moved too. Both answers are relevant to our topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfesHOVdTYE

[mkal]

Thanks for the link. It is a fascinating Q&A session. I had to binge watch the whole thing!

[venkatakailasam]

Madam..

I was about to provide links for the above ...nearly 12 clips are there....

Walk the talk is here..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx0JW13y ... e=youtu.be

Lot of ammunition to continue the thread ...

[munirao2001]

KVChellappa Sir,

You opine " I can't imagine art in public domain without an audience and subjective appreciation of it. To say that aesthetic is irrespective of what the audience feels does not make sense to me." Audience, truly, should be listening with heightened interest in the intent, content and delivery of the artist. In this happening, the beauty is objective. When the listener with the conditioned mind; sense of mind in the past, not in the present happening moments; awaiting anticipated and expected; restlessly looking for the one's own desire for the recall experience; being with sense of mind in analytic, discursive and judgmental are all the very common characteristics in the subjective appreciation. Listening misses the beauty, quality suffers, enjoyment also suffers resulting in either rejection or serious doubt about the quality in music being creatively or re creatively being presented or delivered. When the quality in aesthetics or beauty has been missed by the listener(s) due to the defective listening, it makes sense. Is not the experience of premeditated and command performance and delivery result in the exhibition of appreciation, mechanically and routinely even if aesthetic or beauty is absent, very common? It was resorted to in the past also but in the present, this is centrality in the performances. What is sense of mind(s) in this state?

Many artists have experienced this amiss and felt disappointed for the lack of attentive listening, understanding and appreciation ( it includes critics).
Ideal in art form of Classical Carnatic music is both the artists and the listeners in relationship, together, experiencing both the objective and subjective aesthetic qualities being unraveled, creatively.
With access to the knowledge and appreciation of this greatest art form, we rasikas should seek and obtain the knowledge and become discerning listeners. Lot of efforts and actions are being taken by artists and the event managers, supported by the patrons-lecture-demonstrations;work shops;seminars;panel discussions; thematic presentations;interactive sessions. To meet the goal and objectives, rasikas have to become pro active and committed. Exciting and Excellent times, are ahead!

munirao2001

[sureshvv]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfesHOVdTYE

Lot of words saying little. I can see why you like this
That was for the 1st question.

I liked the TMK who cared about the audience applause.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45IzUv_ ... re=channel

Hope he gets bored of his current phase soon and is able to find some enjoyment in the applause (rather than be ashamed of it) and lead the same audience to an appreciation of "better" (by his criteria) music.

Think KAP will like that too

[Ranganayaki]

It is not shame. To him audience applause is irrelevant.

This phase is not a whim or a mood.. It is not a random attitude that he puts on. He is introspective and he questions his relationship to performance, his audience and the music. He has grown in his relationship to music and to his profession. It is unlikely that he will want to reverse his growth.

[arasi]

Introspection on the part of an artiste is an asset (even an essential ingredient?). Kudos to TMK for emphasizing that. Wish more artistes have the time and inclination to do that!

Sureshvv,
I only wish, as you seem to see it, that TMK uses it as his diving board to engage himself and us in a concert which naturally becomes an experience which both he and his audience share without getting into deep introspection or distraction on stage (interruptions, where our focus on the musical experience is diverted?).

Let's say, if he continues in this mode, we may even get used to it, and go along with him in his style of presentation. Then comes the next question. If he 'inspires' enough young artistes to do the same, which territory are we going to be in, as listeners? Then, though very different, we end up with lec dems on the one hand and TMK's style of singing on the other? So, whither (may be not perfect) a tightly knit presentation of a concert?

Whether it's an experimental film or a classical one, don't we expect to see some form (I don't mean trite format) which engages us without taking us out of the context?

TMK is right. I am also getting tired of the food analogies as he is--thayir sAdam before sAmbAr sAdam and so on. I understand myself to be someone who isn't taken aback by new elements introduced in a performance. I call it performance because the music comes from an ensemble of musicians on stage, all created equal or not, it IS a performance--yes, with all the restraints it can impose--but that's the beauty of it. It has that tight rope walker's concentration part, which is needed to do it right. Then again, it isn't a conscious effort. It can be inspired and be inspiring and fresh, spontaneous--because all the introspection along with guarding and nourishing one's gift off stage results in non-deliberating expressions on stage. The audience relish it, forgetting formats and strictures a standard concert format seemingly imposes on a performer.

I did'nt mean to write this much on it, but we all seem to have got into a habit of doing that of late

[ramamantra]

RN, looks like you're doing a PhD on TMK...

[sureshvv]

I did'nt mean to write this much on it, but we all seem to have got into a habit of doing that of late

Yep. I would much prefer to discuss the idea of aesthetics (irrespective of who conceived/promotes it) but keep getting pulled into discussing the persona. Shall try harder

[venkatakailasam]

thayir sAdam before sAmbAr sAdam ...

My uncle,( my father's elder brother ) has his own way of eating habits..some 60/70 years back..

He will start with parupu sadam mixed with famous Rasipurm ghee and soaked with hard curd..

and pickles..next will be milagu rasam with rice and Appalam and finally Sambhar with rice and vegetable..

None will dare criticize...

TMK has not found anything new now..tastes vary...

[Ranganayaki]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GkgU0ywAuI

The relevant part starts at 10 25 or so.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phn0CuReM74

the relevant part ends at 4 30


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phn0CuReM74

The question being answered is:

"What is the responsibility of the artist, the gurus, the students and rasikas in helping Carnatic Music as an art to flourish?"

His views from the beginning to 3 30.

But please listen to 3 45 - about 4 15. That section could be (as I feel him) TMK's response to the view Suresh has presented by posting the video he prefers. Suresh's video, in my view is all about TMK, not about the music at all.

The new attitude is more important for an important reason: it puts Carnatic Music ahead. It is more humble.

(I did find TMK a little arrogant in our temple concert recently. That is still my impression. I haven't reverted from it. But that is not about music, that is about his relationship with us, the audience.)

[Ranganayaki]

Sri VK, were you really contributing to the discussion by describing your uncle's eating habits? There was no reason to create a persona for me either. How useful was it to say that I was on my way to a PhD on TMK? ("Ph D" appeared twice ) Those were snide, unproductive remarks. I am not personally offended, that would be silly of me, but I am frustrated because I was trying to discuss something that is interesting and important.

Yep. I would much prefer to discuss the idea of aesthetics (irrespective of who conceived/promotes it) but keep getting pulled into discussing the persona. Shall try harder

Yes most people pay no attention to the ideas this person brings forth and only discuss the persona (not even the person). If you read my words throughout the thread you will see that I was consistently drawing attention to his actual words where those ideas are contained. I did NOT pull anyone into discussing persona.

I don't think we will get anywhere unless we discuss the ideas of tmk (and NOT our own ideas). There is no use in continuing this discussion. As long as we are dismissive we will learn nothing, and never have any valid reasons for rejecting the ideas, though we can certainly continue the rejection. So with this post, I think I am done in this thread, unless someone has something interesting to say.

Thanks so much, glad to have entered the discussion, and I tried.

[venkatakailasam]

Smt.Ranganayaki..

You have missed what I have said about Phd., This was not attributed to you..I said that I am one with you for short and crisp posting..

I used it in the context of lengthy posts..I used it only once..

Regarding Curd rice, TMK used it in his speeches..the latest being his walk the talk...about which
reference was made...what I meant by quoting about my uncle is that this not a new invention but some people were doing it even years back..

My view about him had always been that whatever it may be we should ignore and concentrate his brilliant concerts..I have posted his latest in the concert review thread..

Please see your mail..

[ramamantra]

How useful was it to say that I was on my way to a PhD on TMK? ("Ph D" appeared twice ) Those were snide, unproductive remarks. I am not personally offended, that would be silly of me, but I am frustrated because I was trying to discuss something that is interesting and important.

I'm not sure if it was a snide remark. I'd put it as a harmless tease, that's about it. Is it weaning you away from the interesting and imp discussion? I wldnt think so.

C'mon, lets have some humor woven into discussions too. That shld not dissipate your intensity, I'm sure.

[sureshvv]

On the topic of flawed analogies, the one to painting goes only half way. The kuchery is more akin to actually painting before a live audience & incorporating the feedback into the painting. Not sure if that has been implemented in the domain of painting. Admiring an already completed painting could be considered analogous to listening to a CD.

[arasi]

I see what you mean about the analogy.

I have seen amateur painters work in fairs and parks, but not a Picasso or Mondrian So, can't quite grasp the idea.

Anyhow, when a rAgA gets explored in its various dimensions in a concert--the same gets explored differently in a new concert by the same musician. The expositions are dependent on the artiste's musical mood, and certainly the musical experience he/she has gained over the years. Let's not confuse them with some masterly concerts which after a time become less absorbing because of their predictability.

In traditional but imaginative concerts, the artiste paints a series of pictures in different hues, sometimes different accompanists making them happen even more.

[vasanthakokilam]

I'm not sure if it was a snide remark. I'd put it as a harmless tease, that's about it. Is it weaning you away from the interesting and imp discussion? I wldnt think so.

C'mon, lets have some humor woven into discussions too. That shld not dissipate your intensity, I'm sure.

True, humor definitely helps and this thread and the subject matter can use a good dose of that. But it is not easy to pull that off with a short remark like yours without it sounding like a ridicule unless you have a reputation for witty and clever one-liners.