The idea of aesthetics as propounded by TMK

[vinsim]

I was intrigued by constant references to "aesthetics" by TMK in defense of his experimentation with concert format in various articles, interviews, etc. So, I decided to send him an email and asked him why, for example, he thought alapana was a complete piece by itself, without any composition to follow. To which, he replied..

"I don't think you see what an alapana is... These Are serious aesthetic questions where the meaning and the idea of aesthetics transcends what you like or find pleasing. Only then will you understand why an alapana can be an complete aesthetic unit."

...to which, I replied...

" I can understand a raga can transcend what an individual finds pleasing, but the idea of aesthetics itself can not do that. Maybe, we are talking about the same thing and disagreeing due to limitations of the language. 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. There has been some scientific research which correlates the musical intervals with human emotions and hence, which sounds are pleasing/awful. For e.g the big swara jump in Kathakuthoohalam maps to the feeling of surprise/excitement and the subtle movement from S to R1 in Saveri maps to a feeling of sadness. When you analyze music this way, it is easy to see that the idea of aesthetics is not some mystical, intangible or spiritual entity, but very much tied to how humans have evolved. On another planet, aliens might feel Subhapantuvarali is joyful.

I can build on above argument and say this is exactly the reason why only a few hundred raga are popular out of the thousands of possible ragas. You can definitely take up a random mela, say #47 Suvarnangi, for RTP, but the chances of it being extraordinarily melodious is quite low. Yes, we are victims of conditioning, but there is no other way to be. You can't de-evolve from what makes you human, what sounds move your heart and what sounds make you cringe. It is all in-built to our genes and we can't escape that. "

...to which, he replied, rather abruptly..

"Dear Sir,

I am sorry but this is not the idea. Aesthetics is a much more an objective complex idea, of course by people but not based on collective consciousness of awful vs pleasing. There is enough work been done in this space. I cannot explain this to you because you are looking at aesthetics in the commonly used way which is actually the wrong usage of the word.
You theory on why ragas are common in use is also incorrect as there is a serious historical and musicological reason for that.
I don't think you really understand where I am coming from. I think i know what a lay listener thinks and the engagement i speak about is for all if they want to really experience the music.
Thank you for your emails, i have nothing more to say.
I leave you to your own ideas.
Warm Regards"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, what is this mysterious "aesthetics" that TMK keeps referring to? Is it some profound philosophical idea only known to a learned few? Is it something more than what the audience collectively perceives as being pleasant?

[kvchellappa]

That is typical TMK. He cuts you off with a judgement. I asked him pointedly to explain how the format came in the way of one's musical development. He never explained, not only to me, not in any forum as far as I can see. I was following anything about him keenly and I do not know if I have missed his explanation somewhere. 'Rebel without a cause' was a nice description. He also said that the meaning has nothing to do with the music, it is only the swaras that matter. My having read how the composers have tried to align the swara combinations to the meaning jarred with this idea of his, but 'Krishna Uvacha' has to be right. The interpreters have to find the reason. In his views on non-musical matters also, there is these unexplained stances, like, for instance, anyone who votes for Modi has to be communal. He has a market and he can afford not to be reasonable.

[VK RAMAN]

Yes he has a market not strictly matching your market which analyses to death every word pronounced without enjoying the melody.

[sureshvv]

There is enough work been done in this space

May be you can call him and ask for a link

[arasi]

vinsim,
This is very interesting. I thought star performers did not have the time or interest in communicating with listeners. I read your post with interest, being surprised by TMK sparing his time in corresponding with you, but as I read it to the end, I got the feeling that it really doesn't help, if you don't take what he says as gospel truth.

Even sounds as if he looks upon CM's aesthetic experience as something exclusive. Elitist? I was keen on listening to him, but wonder if I am a worthy listener. Munirao says in one of his posts something which to me came across as: you have to be a worthy rasikA? Correct me if I am wrong, Munirao and explain it again so that I can understand it better.

Chellappa,
I do recollect your going with an open mind while approaching TMK and his music--to have a clear idea about it, of course.
Where does all this lead to? I am still as puzzled about 'his aesthetics' as you folks are.

sAhityA is almost dead without rAga bhAvA. Agreed. Yet, how much a rAgA gains by being accompanied by stirring words! Even those who lack bhakthi are moved by music and by the words too, if the quality of the words and the presentation of them are of a high standard.Or, any meaningful words sung with feeling.

Appreciation of CM doesn't need rifts of the kind which carry it way out of reach of just ordinary rasikAs (who easily outnumber the seasoned ones). Historically too, chamber music has been for the wealthy, not the common man anywhere in the world.

It is good that CM is still intertwined--the concert formula being the prime mode--bhajans, harikathAs and dance coexisting, catering to different tastes and levels of understanding among the people...


For a half-baked rasikA, I'm very fond of an RTP (all three as a unit). That is plenty for me in a concert (a tightly knit one). It satisfies my desire to listen to this single component of a concert for a lengthy time. I am not a great end-of-the concert items fan either, but if the compositions are not the overly popular ones and if the compositions are fine ones, I do relish them. At the beginning, give me a judicial mix of serious rAgAs and songs, interspersed with lively short pieces, and I am happy. If the name for it is concert formula, so be it.

And, I see I have gone through the list topsty turvy! Well, what do you know

When ages ago I ended up in a commune for an evening (of what else, music), even the celebrated musician, in spite of a beautiful concert, made me feel uneasy because he was singing in the setting of a cult, and in the presence of the spiritual head. It put a strain on us--what do they call us, heathens

Attitudes--either emanating from the stage or from the audience isn't ideal for enjoying music...

[kvchellappa]

TMK has abundant energy and enthusiasm to engage with anyone who corresponds with him. He replies not caring for the status of the counterparty. He has a sharp mind, ready wit and is well read on what he talks or writes on. He is no doubt a genius. As RSachi has listed he has done immense work to take CM forward. All this does not prevent one from stating what appears ununderstandable. ( For the moment, I do not have the inclination to read his book to cull out the answers).
As for melody, if it is not in free flow, I am not tuned to imbibe it. I am an average rasika and have no capacity to appreciate the nuances with such insight as many forumites do, nor to dissect the 'words' to death. I do enjoy music most of the time without understanding the meaning, but to make an over-riding statement that meaning has no bearing at all on music seemed to contradict what many (LGJ e.g.) have said about the compositions. (Even Bharathiyar points out how Thyagaraja's composition mesh in raga, meaning, bhava, etc. beautifully). I am only presenting the contradiction in my understanding on the subject.

[harimau]

When ages ago I ended up in a commune for an evening (of what else, music), even the celebrated musician, in spite of a beautiful concert, made me feel uneasy because he was singing in the setting of a cult, and in the presence of the spiritual head. It put a strain on us--what do they call us, heathens

Attitudes--either emanating from the stage or from the audience isn't ideal for enjoying music...

I have had long discussions with knowledgeable persons about the difference between heathens and pagans.

I have decided I would rather be a pagan than a heathen; it seems they have better orgies. )

As to attitude, how can one mine concerts for sociological insights if one doesn't have an attitude? :p

[sureshvv]

Where does all this lead to? I am still as puzzled about 'his aesthetics' as you folks are.

sAhityA is almost dead without rAga bhAvA. Agreed. Yet, how much a rAgA gains by being accompanied by stirring words! Even those who lack bhakthi are moved by music and by the words too, if the quality of the words and the presentation of them are of a high standard.Or, any meaningful words sung with feeling.

I think one of the takeaways for this incarnation of aesthetics is that lyrics are to be avoided as they get in the way of appreciating the real music. Which is why an alapana can be a complete aesthetic unit. So that is the first major barrier to cross.

and the subtle movement from S to R1 in Saveri maps to a feeling of sadness

Now why does the subtle movement from N3 to S do the same? Think there is more to it.

For e.g the big swara jump in Kathakuthoohalam maps to the feeling of surprise/excitement

A similar jump in megharanjani does not. It is more of a foreboding mood in the raga.

http://mio.to/show/Raagam/Megaranjani

We used to have an "aesthetics" guru around here but haven't seen him round lately. Check the archives, esp. in Technical Discussions.

[Nick H]

In Hindustani music, the alap can be extended to be almost a whole concert, with the composition tagged on the end, seeming like an afterthought. What would the HM people say if it was removed altogether? Would they say that they cannot have just raga with no words?

This a serious question, from the standpoint of not knowing. I don't think I would miss the composition in HM. I have not attended enough of TMK's concerts to know how carnatic raga without song works for me. I wonder if TMK would do a single-raga single-alapana concert? I would be interested to experience that.

The present carnatic-concert format has conditioned our expectations both in macro and in micro. We know where we are, with the song and with the concert as a whole. Like turning the pages of a book, we know very well when we are at the beginning, the middle and when the end is coming. It is a comfortable feeling and we are at home with it. The cry against avant-garde literature and drama used to be, "Where is the story? There is no beginning, no middle and no end!"

I have nothing against comfort. I like comfort. But it is not the only way for every time, for every book, every film, every play, every concert.

[ganesh_mourthy]

NICK, at the end you are meaning that stretching a bit out of comfort is fine to try? I don't get that - especially what you started again after a full stop.

[vinsim]

I am ok with him experimenting with format and not conforming to the normal order...even standalone alapana or tanams. But my question remains unanswered. What does he mean by aesthetics? He speaks of it in absolute terms, while it is widely understood that appreciation of any art is highly subjective.

Anyway, it was not hard to get some material on the web. There seems to be whole branch of philosophy dealing with it, not to mention a valid scientific theory in "Evolutionary aesthetics". I have somewhat satisfied myself that there is nothing mysterious about it - TMK is either being an elitist or perhaps just trying to impress with half-baked knowledge. Like Rahul Gandhi shouting "women empowerment" for every question, TMK seems to shout "aesthetics, aesthetics" for everything.

It will be a while before I can start to enjoy his music...his personality will come in the way !

[kvchellappa]

My reading between the lines is that he wants to offer 'secular' CM and wants to distance himself from the bhakti-infested lyrics. See: His comments that when he sings 'kshira' it is just two syllables that mean nothing to him and that only the swaras matter; that he can produce bhava in a song on coco cola; his thematic concert in one MMU concert where he invited the audience to give a title to it and he revealed that he would like to call it Bhakti; his mentioning in one concert that srngara was as important for him (that was never in question anyway, javalis and padams have been there and been sung by the most orthodox); his attack on Brahmin hogging of CM (which is a fact); his general stance elsewhere. He is struggling to find an expression to his solid music outside the conventional garb of bhakti which pervades CM.

[munirao2001]

Inquiry of Aesthetics
I am posting a relevant part of my article "Aesthetics, soul of art music", as given below:
Grammarians made it known, as it is emotion. Aesthetic experience, is the changes happening in sense of mind from experiences of bliss(divine), pleasure and sorrow; amongst them independent and most important emotions as fixed emotions; rest of the very minor emotions as drifting emotions. Aesthetics are eight or nine kinds. They are, love, laughter, compassion, anger, violent, fear, fright, wonder and peace. In music with such clarity of appearance, like the clarity of appearance like in literature, meaning poetry of these nine emotions, except few, do not appear. Important ‘sound’ also for these aesthetics to appear, plays major part in literature. But the role of this sound is very least in music. We can say not at all being there. Owing to this, these should not be expected in music. Ratio of aesthetic is limited and pointless, in music. Besides for the development of these aesthetics pure music sans lyric help, meaning many aesthetics unclear in melody delineation and in instrumental music. Experience- its recognition- and reflection, all happening together, begets aesthetic experience, becomes one’s own.
“ Nadena vyajyate varnah padam , varnath pada dvajah |vachaso vyavaharogyamnaadadheenamato jagat”. Embedded in sounds, is this world because colors from sounds, words from colors, speech from words, manifestation of all the worldly matters from words. 1. Pleasure born out of outward sense. 2. Inward pleasure and happiness 3. Spiritual pleasure and happiness are the three determined types. Music is dependent on sound of music and rhythm bearing pitch – note- ragas, becoming a composition in relationship with beats and time measurements; they are most important part s in building the emotions in such of those compositions. Art must be with two visions. As the art is a form of expression of the artists, only on such art has to be based only on his point of view, meaning first consideration is with a view to understand his emotion. Second view of the enjoyer-meaning the enjoyment out of expectation or his vision of a discerning lover of art is, a special relationship between an artist-his medium, expressions of art and a discerning lover of art.
It is very difficult to describe the art experience. Similarly, it is not possible to describe all the characteristics and impact of art. Owing to this, artist expresses what is not possible with words to withheld, through the medium of art (Artist envisions, beyond the vision of a poet). Excellence in art and inspiration is internalized by human’s discursive mind and the power of the intellect. Outer form of this internalization is known as art. Thousands of experiences beyond the experiences of a commoner influencing an artist and yielding to rare inspiration can enhance the wealth of living. Art experience is connoisseur’s emotional and aesthetic results In comparison with all the arts, in classical music, one has to learn mentally, first. Digesting the mentally learnt, efforts to advancing further in the path of meditating on the beauty, all the essential parts of art for aesthetic enjoyment, do occur. Verily, the sound is the body, rhythm is life, and emotion is its heart. Art does not give its message directly. Meaning, it is not the work of art to communicate. But the true art, desires to convey its intent, subtly. Skills in artist, logical principle do not remain guiding principles. They develop as truths of experiences. Mind sense becomes sensitive with aesthetic experience, mental stability occurs.

munirao2001

[Nick H]

NICK, at the end you are meaning that stretching a bit out of comfort is fine to try? I don't get that - especially what you started again after a full stop.

Exactly.

Thanks: I have done away with that full stop

[vgovindan]

"We tend to leave music in the hands of experts....."
Please watch - http://www.quickmeme.com/news/?p=5365

[rshankar]

So, what is this mysterious "aesthetics" that TMK keeps referring to?

I am not sure I have understood anything at all from this discussion; all I can think of is that line from Sri OVK's kRti - 'ingitam enrAlE enna vilai enru kETpAraDi inda mannan' (he knows nothing about good manners, he will wonder about its cost, thinking it is something that can be bought) - and substitue 'esthetics' for 'ingitam'!

[munirao2001]

Forunites

Tomorrow you will know TMK's idea of aesthetics, which he has written in his book, through the extract I will be posting.
It is very essential for the rasikas to know the artist for making value judgment. Without knowing the artist and his unique quality offering in his art/music, opinions and its communications are not conducive and helpful.

munirao2001

[ramamantra]

So, what is this mysterious "aesthetics" that TMK keeps referring to? Is it some profound philosophical idea only known to a learned few? Is it something more than what the audience collectively perceives as being pleasant?

) He himself has no idea. That's why he gets stuck to that word and not able to explain.

[Purist]

So, what is this mysterious "aesthetics" that TMK keeps referring to? Is it some profound philosophical idea only known to a learned few? Is it something more than what the audience collectively perceives as being pleasant?

The so called "aesthetics " would be exposed if someone can pick his renderings in recent concerts, arrange them in some
orderly fashion ( I mean varnam , raga/krithi, krithi/swara , RNS , RTP , Virutham etc etc or to put it short ' sans idiosyncracies' ) and juxtapose it to a concert say of year 2000-2005. Judge what impact it has on the listener ( ofcourse one with an open mind and not conditioned by current realities). My guess is you will find TMK has only moved towards chauka kalam and savours vishranti.
This hubbub is only randomization garbed as aesthetics. :p

[sureshvv]

@vinsim: Can we try to address your idea of aesthetics wrt Saveri and Kadanakuthuhalam? I believe that may be more "constructive"

TMK is attempting to liberate CM from under the dual yokes of poetry & devotion. If successful, he will make it threadbare so even the lay audience will be able to partake of it.

[arasi]

Sureshvv,
Now, you need to define the lay audience for me. Lay audience over time have been drawn to music only for one of the two reasons, or both--however unschooled they were in CM. Have times changed?

[Nick H]

I'm the lay audience here for most of the year

[sankark]

vinsim - hope TMK knew that the email discussion with you could end up in a public forum.

Having said that, should he have to explain his "aesthetics" even? He has his own idea of aesthetics and there is a set of folks that enjoy his performances(/concerts/whatever) and that aesthetic he is projecting. Just leave it be; each one of listens to music/performance/concert they like.

[sankark]

sureshvv
About 50% (I am just pulling this out of thin air and have a suspicion it could be even higher, and I am part of that 50%) of audience in today's Chennai CM concerts wouldn't be able to understand, let alone get devotion, out of most T's songs - language barrier. For that matter PD's devarnAmas or MD's krithis. So what part does poetry play there? If poetry goes out the window there, how does one derive devotion out of un-understood poetry?

Was listening to E rAmuni (vakulAbharanam) by Deekshita as I was typing; not able to understand one word of it and not resorting to sahityam.net. All the same the music seems endearing.

[arasi]

Sankark,
I am glad you said that. A seasoned rasikA like you says that. Language (words) needn't be a barrier. What feelings words convey with the intensity of emotion (bhAvA of both feeling and rAga bhAvA) can reach both the lettered and unlettered to appreciate what they hear. MMI's music touching a rikshaw puller is not simply an exception. It's an example. 'kallum kaniyum gItham' music which would melt even stone (Kalki) is not merely a poetic expression. It describes the human capacity to appreciate music when it touches the heart. Yo need not go to a school to learn it. Or be a musicologist or be experts and discuss it on forums like this.
My feeling is, as appealing and easy (?) it is to respond to good instrumental music, it's also possible that we may want words, some words, in any language to listen to it every now and then!

Emphasis is on presenting words with emotion, of course

[vasanthakokilam]

Arasi, I think what you stated above is for the most part same as what I remember TMK writing about a while back. He opines that the sound of the words plus music by themselves have artistic meaning and beauty. That is, the principles concerned with the nature and appreciation of the beauty of music ( i.e. musical aesthetics ) can involve only the sound of the words, melody and the laya. The implication of that is that one can have a lot of enjoyment of the art form without considering its language meaning or spiritual context(paraphrasing here). I do not think that itself is a controversial position.

But he goes to the next level, which is controversial in the CM context, and say that the predominant principles involved in such musical appreciation can be captured by the above three. While acknowledging that the language meaning and the spiritual context is important and critical to a lot of people, he opines that is not a necessary condition.

[arasi]

VKokilam,
I am glad he said all that. However, why does he give it all piece meal to us--by which I mean, makes me feel like a child opening an advent calendar, a piece of chocolate or a little gift hiding behind every window it opens--only one at a time every day until Christmas? Isn't that how I feel when I hear his measured doses of music given in different ways, dependent on the mood of his musical experience on a particular evening? How am I to know that his mood matches those of his fellow artistes on stage? Being professional artistes themselves, they perform without giving it a second thought?

Yes, I am waiting for this extremely talented, pleasing and learned musician to change his mind some day and give a straight forward, very appealing and creative, muy regular concert (a concert format isn't such an evil thing!).

[vasanthakokilam]

Quite true, but that is a different thread ( there are so many!! )

[tiruppugazh]

How am I to know that his mood matches those of his fellow artistes on stage? Being professional artistes themselves, they perform without giving it a second thought?

Beautifully put :ymapplause:

[sureshvv]

Was listening to E rAmuni (vakulAbharanam) by Deekshita as I was typing; not able to understand one word of it and not resorting to sahityam.net. All the same the music seems endearing.

You are right. The music sets the mood. And when words that mean something to you personally come through, it spikes your heart. Like take arasi's example above: "kallum kaniyum geetham". When those words come thru, it feels like a slam dunk. I think the impact is compounded.

About 50% (I am just pulling this out of thin air and have a suspicion it could be even higher, and I am part of that 50%) of audience in today's Chennai CM concerts wouldn't be able to understand, let alone get devotion, out of most T's songs - language barrier.
For that matter PD's devarnAmas or MD's krithis. So what part does poetry play there?
If poetry goes out the window there, how does one derive devotion out of un-understood poetry?

Verbatim understanding may be quite low (and fixable pretty easily, thanks to sri vgovindan). But there are enough trigger words in the sahityam to get inside you (Could be "veda shastra purana", "kapata nataka", "niddura niragarinchi" etc etc)

For cracking the aesthetics/poetry on MD kritis, attending lec-dems, like rksk's, may help. As I listen to more of it, I am motivated to want to know more (background info, composer's intent etc.) Like did you know in the Dikshitar's navagraha kritis, he starts the kriti with the name of the graham. In most of them.

[sureshvv]

Sureshvv,
Now, you need to define the lay audience for me. Lay audience over time have been drawn to music only for one of the two reasons, or both--however unschooled they were in CM. Have times changed?

I was only borrowing TMK's word from the email, so you can deduce it from his usage (or ask him for the correct definition). I was using it to mean the people who attend his concerts

[munirao2001]

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

[Ranganayaki]

I find the idea of objective aesthetics outside of what one finds beautiful rather absurd. Yes, objective beauty exists. It exists in the beautiful balance of parts, it exists in the harmony of sounds, the brilliance of colors and these exist whether we perceive them or not. But for us to respond to them, to resonate with an artist, to enjoy anything, we cannot use objective measures without involving our inner beings. If TMK is seeking to transport us to another plane, he has to work with our subjectivity.

I am not sure tmk is aiming at any objective beauty. The deflated reaction we experience when a kriti is not sung is because of our deep conditioning. For our entire lives, an Alapana has been folowed by a kriti. I suppose TMK is himself deeply influenced by JK and would like to present more abstract music and liberate us all and himself from the our conditioned response of salivating after a kriti once we hear the raga alapana completed. I am all for deep exploration of the abstract, and it would be ok in my book for TMK to perform brief sketches of a few ragas in addition to deeper contemplation of a small number of others. But an entire concert with ragas whose surfaces are just skimmed, none explored in great depth is just a disappointment. I think TMK should just show his full depth.

[Ranganayaki]

I

"I don't think you see what an alapana is... These Are serious aesthetic questions where the meaning and the idea of aesthetics transcends what you like or find pleasing. Only then will you understand why an alapana can be an complete aesthetic unit."

So, what is this mysterious "aesthetics" that TMK keeps referring to? Is it some profound philosophical idea only known to a learned few? Is it something more than what the audience collectively perceives as being pleasant?

I think I have an idea about this, though I don't know if this approaches his meaning. Let us say that today I am not in a mood for Shankarabharanam (true these days ). I am completely unreceptive to the raga and encountering the most perfect shankarabharanam in a concert could create all kinds of reactions, even irritation. I am impervious to the beauty of the raga. My Western or Chinese friend who finds all of this alien, is impervious in a different way. My seat-neighbor may be enthralled.. and they could be equally taken by an inferior Shankarabharanam too. See, there does exist objective inferiority. If the entire population turned away from CM, the beauty of it still remains, its objective parameters being laya, raga lakshana, established prayoga, new imagination, beautiful voice, and may be many more things. These parameters are not subjective, though our responses may be. These parameters transcend any and all subjectivity or opinion or mood or any other individual and response situated at any moment, any location, in any era.

Aesthetically, though raga, tala, sahitya are all integral components of CM, I wonder if they are all equal. May be TMK is more concerned with Music than with Song. So kritis and sahitya would just be instances of raga, it is the raga that is music. So I think it is possible that TMK is more concerned with raga and tala and bhava than sahitya or kriti. He may or may not feel the need to add sahitya if he is satisfied with an alapana or if he is not in a mood for sahitya.

So to perceive the aesthetics, you need to know the aspects of the raga, and that would be the understanding of the art, the knowing how to listen, and these transcend the tyranny of the mood, the moment, the fad that the audience finds itself in, individually or collectively.

But I think that in spite of all this, the individual rasika is not responsible for the success of the concert, the musician is.

[sampoorna]

This is my understanding with regard to the sahitya of songs. Being hindus we believe in the power of mantras whether we understand them or not. Sage Valmiki became a sage only because of repeating the Rama mantra even though he did not understand it. Our songs are powerful just on the basis of taking God's name. I heard that each of Deekshitar's kritis is a mantra. There can be no harm, only potentially great benefits to repeating our songs. So let us enjoy them and get their benefits. If we believe that words have power then our songs score high, whether we understand them or not.
Narayana,
Sampoorna.

[Nick H]

I am now posting the portion of TMK's writing on the aesthetics, from his book:

I respect TMK's intellectual and analytical ability. Probably, though, He would soon get fed up in any conversation with me, because I don't have the same. I can still enjoy his music, though, just as much as I can enjoy anybody else's.

[venkatakailasam]

Interesting thread...here:

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

[sureshvv]

About 50% (I am just pulling this out of thin air and have a suspicion it could be even higher, and I am part of that 50%) of audience in today's Chennai CM concerts wouldn't be able to understand, let alone get devotion, out of most T's songs - language barrier.
<snip>
If poetry goes out the window there, how does one derive devotion out of un-understood poetry?

Couple more points of interest. Thyagaraja's compositions are full of colloquialisms, common expressions that we use daily when we talk to each other - just check out many of the pallavi lines. Even if they can be described as devotional, the attitude is that of having a conversation with a dear one - sometimes taking the upper hand, often begging

[ramamantra]

Aesthetically, though raga, tala, sahitya are all integral components of CM, I wonder if they are all equal. May be TMK is more concerned with Music than with Song. So kritis and sahitya would just be instances of raga, it is the raga that is music. So I think it is possible that TMK is more concerned with raga and tala and bhava than sahitya or kriti. He may or may not feel the need to add sahitya if he is satisfied with an alapana or if he is not in a mood for sahitya.

Aesthetics means a branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of art, beauty, and taste, with the creation and appreciation of beauty (source: Wiki). So, if TMK is concerned with music than sahithya, he's probably not relating it to aesthetics. Aesthetics is so much prevalent in the beauty of words, the sound it generates and gets colored by the tone it is used with and so on. Somebody talking abt aesthetics cannot appreciate one thing (read music) and 'denounce' another (read sahithya/words). If that were so, the person doesn't really cannot appreciate even music forget seeing beauty in everything. Probably TMK uses the word aesthetics and means something else. Probably he hasn't got the right word yet to say what is in his mind. Thus, the generalizing and not able to explain. He proves he is a born musician (who communicates only in a higher level) and cannot use 'low' ways of communication (read words). )

Btw, what is this reputation? I checked the faq, cldnt find anything on it. Can anyone enlighten me?

[sureshvv]

See, there does exist objective inferiority. If the entire population turned away from CM, the beauty of it still remains, its objective parameters being laya, raga lakshana, established prayoga, new imagination, beautiful voice, and may be many more things. These parameters are not subjective, though our responses may be. These parameters transcend any and all subjectivity or opinion or mood or any other individual and response situated at any moment, any location, in any era.

Vinsim seems to think that there is something beyond the subjective/objective divide and that is group subjectivism, which is like the average of the individual subjective responses among members of a large group. And that these contain the defining markers for aesthetics.

[Ranganayaki]

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

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 that if we really want to understand TMK, we have to constantly refer back to his words and see if our view fits.

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

[vasanthakokilam]

btw, just an observation. This is not just about TMK to be sure.

As rasikas, it is perfectly fine to pass judgements, quick, knee-jerk and emotional, that can put the artist in low light about their music. Fine, we can always say that it is our subjective opinion. But we have to be careful to not jump into a conclusion or pass frivolous and not well researched critical comments when it comes to matters like this and more importantly not to disparage the musician in a knee-jerk manner. We are not doing that yet but I can see it spilling over there So it is more a preemptive motion.

We can definitely discuss and criticize his points of view but that has to come from a place of respect when it comes to scholarship like this.
At the minimum, we have to assume that the kind of things he says are well researched by him. Remember, it is not just us he has to satisfy. There are multitude of scholars who listen to this and he has to defend his position and point of view to them as well.

Please do not take this as I pointing fingers to anyone specific in this thread.

Having said this, one thing he can do to further his own point of view, is not to sound too scholarly ( as several of you including ramamantra and ranganayaki have alluded to above ) and 'come down' to our level and explain it in terms that we can relate to, instead of us having to guess what he may have meant.

[ganesh_mourthy]

As you rightly said Vasanthakokilam, .. to put it simply, he probably missed the point that it is esoteric in a way , which leaves many things unclear. I simply did not understand , I never can be a critic.

[Ranganayaki]

If poetry goes out the window there, how does one derive devotion out of un-understood poetry?

Devotion, religiosity, spirituality have all been experienced by artists all over the world across all religions.. Painters, musicians, composers, dancers, poets... The written word has nothing to do with it.

It is perfectly possible to experience devotion through a beautiful raga alapana. Words may be aesthetic, but they are not necessary for aesthetics.

Logically, if words were absolutely essential, then we would not have a single piece of music that did not include words. No tillanas, no taanam, etc, and why would we want alapanas. So if an alapana is aesthetic, then there is no reason why it cannot stand on its on legs. Does it need the kriti as its crutch? Does it not have its own merit? Why do we clap at all then at the end of an alapana?

[Ranganayaki]

Having said this, one thing he can do to further his own point of view, is not to sound too scholarly ( as several of you including ramamantra and ranganayaki have alluded to above ) and 'come down' to our level and explain it in terms that we can relate to, instead of us having to guess what he may have meant.

I'm confused, VK.. where did I say that he has to come down to our level and explain it in terms that we can relate to? I know that someone said that, possibly Ramamantra, but it was not me.

[Ranganayaki]

[quote="ramamantra"]

Aesthetics means a branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of art, beauty, and taste, with the creation and appreciation of beauty (source: Wiki). So, if TMK is concerned with music than sahithya, he's probably not relating it to aesthetics. Aesthetics is so much prevalent in the beauty of words, the sound it generates and gets colored by the tone it is used with and so on. Somebody talking abt aesthetics cannot appreciate one thing (read music) and 'denounce' another (read sahithya/words). If that were so, the person doesn't really cannot appreciate even music forget seeing beauty in everything. Probably TMK uses the word aesthetics and means something else. Probably he hasn't got the right word yet to say what is in his mind. Thus, the generalizing and not able to explain. He proves he is a born musician (who communicates only in a higher level) and cannot use 'low' ways of communication (read words).

Ramamantra, I read that definition of Aesthetics on Wikipedia before I wrote my first response here on this thread. I needed to understand to the best of my ability where he was coming from before I commented.

This discussion is proceeding at so many levels, and there is a lot of cross-purpose here. We need to unravel the thread a bit.

Responding to your post, the order of my points is just the ease with which things can be clarified (from my point of view)

1.Regarding your own views about words, believe me, I understand that words are aesthetic. I love words and I have a deep response to them. I LOVE a piece of writing that is well crafted, and pleases on many planes. So I don't disagree with you at all there. That is MY feeling. In writing about TMK's thoughts, I am not giving anyone my own opinion on his thoughts. I hope you are aware of that.


2. I think it is very clear that TMK does not "denounce" words. All he is saying that he does not think they are necessary for aesthetics. He simply says that a raga CAN stand alone, he does not say that it MUST. He is simply trying to demonstrate that. He is just making a decision for himself, and singing what he wants to sing. So my impression is that it is rather high-handed of you to say that TMK does not appreciate music - this man who produces so much music and strives to bring pleasure to all of us through music.

3. TMK may be a "born musician", but he is not above communicating in words. Certainly, he does a lot of that - symposiums, lectures, interviews and books. Sometimes I wish he would talk less and just let his meaning come through in his work. I think he is good at many of these forms of communication, because he does not have to deal with our response. Going by this email exchange, he does not seem to care much beyond a point to explain himself or dispel misunderstandings. But to do that will take a lot of effort and he may not have the time.

4. "Probably TMK uses the word aesthetics and means something else."
I think you have a point there. He uses the word in his sense and ignores the common meaning, and the rest of us are using it in a more lay sense and we are all enmeshed trying to decipher his meaning and neither sees what the problem is. There can be communication only if words are being used and understood uniformly.

[Ranganayaki]

Btw, what is this reputation? I checked the faq, cldnt find anything on it. Can anyone enlighten me?

Ramamantra,
Reputation is just a total count of the number of thumbs up given to a member. You click on the thumbs-up button located at the end of each and every post.

[Ranganayaki]

btw, just an observation. This is not just about TMK to be sure.

As rasikas, it is perfectly fine to pass judgements, quick, knee-jerk and emotional, that can put the artist in low light about their music. Fine, we can always say that it is our subjective opinion. But we have to be careful to not jump into a conclusion or pass frivolous and not well researched critical comments when it comes to matters like this and more importantly not to disparage the musician in a knee-jerk manner. We are not doing that yet but I can see it spilling over there So it is more a preemptive motion.

We can definitely discuss and criticize his points of view but that has to come from a place of respect when it comes to scholarship like this.
At the minimum, we have to assume that the kind of things he says are well researched by him. Remember, it is not just us he has to satisfy. There are multitude of scholars who listen to this and he has to defend his position and point of view to them as well.

Please do not take this as I pointing fingers to anyone specific in this thread.

VK, I don't think you should worry so much as moderator, though I do appreciate all your moderating actions lately. But as forumites, we are each here for ourselves and each other (as we build relationships), but I don't think we HAVE to be aware of the multitude of scholars who may read us. This is a discussion that WE are having. If I kept thinking of all the great scholars who read me I would worry that they would consider it as drivel , I should be tongue-tied, unable to participate. As far as I am concerned, I have a few of you people in my head when I express anything here. We should certainly keep our standards as high as we can, so that something worthwhile comes about.

Please DO NOT preempt. It's bad policy ( ) as we've learned - never makes the preemptor look good however justified they may feel. You certainly sound and it feels as though you are talking down to the rest of us, though I KNOW that you are so cool and you do not mean that (I mean that). But please do be prompt in weeding out the truly unacceptable responses.

My ideas:
1. I don't think anything particularly wrong has been said here that you need to be alerted about (except for that laughter emoticon (again) which sadly makes Ramamantra's perfectly parliamentary statement sound personal and petty)
2. "we can always say that it is our subjective opinion".. Not only quick knee-jerk responses, but also well thought out words that may express strong dislike should definitely be ok. Freedom of speech. It does not even have to be subjective. I could give very objective reasons to say why I hated a concert - with the focus on the topic or concert being discussed. If it is not rude or hurtful, it should be ok.
3. I think it is very very very important that we are respectful to the artists even as we express our strong opinions. When we are not, that is when you should step in as a moderator and we should all speak up.

[vasanthakokilam]

Ranganayaki, I definitely did not write that as a moderator's action. Just as a regular member. I realize why you and others can think of it that way. So I am glad I can clarify it here. I know why I wrote that which we can discuss if necessary. That is mostly about prior history outside of this thread. And though I sounded preachy, it was not talking down to you all but more talking sideways if I may
But the last person I would even think of attributing such a thing is to you; your writing is quite level headed looking at it from quite a few different perspectives.

And my reference to scholars is not any such person reading our stuff (I agree with you there), that is more about TMK and the scholars.

On to your other point about I attributing words that you did not write, I agree I should not have combined you and Ramamantra but what I had in mind then was along the lines of your item 4 above.

[Ranganayaki]

Ranganayaki, --- I know why I wrote that which we can discuss if necessary. (1)
---
But the last person I would even think of attributing such a thing is to you; (2) ---
---

(3)On to your other point about I attributing words that you did not write, I agree I should not have combined you and Ramamantra but what I had in mind then was along the lines of your item 4 above.

1- Thanks, VK, not necessary, I am sure something made you wary.

2- Thank you, yes, I'm sure I don't write unparliamentary things.. Still, I was part of the group and I spoke up. Thank you for writing back.

3- I think Point 4 was not about being like a professor who cannot simplify.. There could be some mistakes here (if I am not wrong in my thinking). But I was going to expand on it anyway, so I will do that in just a bit.