aThANa

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 19 May 2006, 20:14

Let us discuss rAga aThANa, which I find quite interesting.

To avoid possible repetition of earlier discussions, I will simply summarize the proposals first, and we can discuss further depending on which points you learned gentlemen/ladies find interesting or debatable.

1) aThANa is one of those rAgas that seem to have "fallen through the cracks" of the melakarta-janya classification. Proposal: it is neither a 28th nor 29th melakarta janya, but is most appropriately classified as a 22nd melakarta janya.

2) A widespread view is that there is no relation between the karnatak aThANa and the hindustani aDAna. Proposal: They are quite closely related, and the karnatak aThAna may very well be a modification of the hindustani aDAna.

If these issues have been discussed in the past, and conclusions reached, kindly post/link those if possible.

Best Wishes,
Sangeet Rasik

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 19 May 2006, 21:00

Can you please provide reasons why it would be appropriate to classify under 22nd mela? And also why it is less appropriate under 28 or 29?

Thanks
Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 20 May 2006, 00:28

Is this some kind of a joke

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 20 May 2006, 01:29

http://freepgs.com/carnatic/viewtopic.php?t=109&start=0
Discussion on aTAna

meena · Post by **meena** » 20 May 2006, 03:14

suji ram

thanks for 'searching/looking up first' on the forum

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 20 May 2006, 04:10

http://freepgs.com/carnatic/viewtopic.php?t=109&start=0
Discussion on aTAna

Thanks for the info. I was especially interested in the brief analysis provided by Dr. Shrikaanth:

aThANa is, as CML has correctly summed, a rAga that cannot be reduced to a scale. It is traditionally allocated a ubhaya sampUrNa scale. It is placed under the harikEdAragauLa or harikAmbOdhi mELa. Exceptions are more than the rule. During the present day, aThANa has lot of N3 and is also placed under dhIraSamkarAbharaNa, the 29th mELa. But N2 is invariably associated with D as an anuswara. It can also be placed under kharaharapriya comfortably as G2 also occurs. In places, shades of darbAr are palpably evident.

I will make a detailed post below.

SR

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 20 May 2006, 05:06

To kick off the discussion, here is a brief alapana of rAga aThANa (rendered by myself sometime in the recent past):

http://rapidshare.de/files/20903567/Atana.mp3.html

First let us examine the strength of the existing assignment of this raga to the 29th (as opposed to 28th) melakarta. This bhAshAnga raga superficially admits both the kaishiki (N2) and the kakali (N3) nishadas. The first question is which is the anya swara.

To understand this, let us look at another raga with a similar issue: begaDa. This raga is correctly assigned to the 29th melakarta. The nishada is neither N2 nor N3, but is definitely closer to N3. Moreover, there are almost no prayogas wherein the N2 is individually heard - some musicians attempt this in alapana and encroach upon kAmbhoji. We must note that the authoritative compositions in begaDa, e.g, SrImAta (MD), vallabhanAyakasya (MD), nAdopAsana (T), and SankarI nIve (SS), do not support an individual identity for N2. The N2 is mostly associated with the N3 (e.g., during descent from tara shadja or tara rishabha), creating a kind of "intermediate", and even gamaka-laden (e.g., "S n, d p") nishada. In other cases, it is an oscillation from dhaivata. Furthermore, in some prayogas, the N3 is almost - though not quite - pure: e.g, "m p d p S n R S", or "R S n S d p m d p m g m r". Thus begaDa is a borderline case but just about makes it to the 29th melakarta.

Now in aThANa, the N2 is much more prominent than in begaDa. Many prayogas explicitly use N2, e.g., "p d d n n S", " R S p, d n p", "p d n p m p g ,". The N3 appears clearly in almost no prayogas, and even in these prayogas, an "intermediate" nishada can be substituted (e.g., R S n S d , "). Further, N3 often appears only fleetingly in gamakas (e.g.," m p (n) S" and "S (n) d ,") and never appears with its own identity. Although N2 is often associated with dhaivata, it is not an anuswara but has its own identity. Again, authoritative compositions such as bRhaspate (MD) and SrIkumAranagarAlaye (ST) clarify these issues. Thus, in comparison to BegaDa, the assignment of aThANa to 29th melakartha is weaker. In other words, N3 is more likely the anya swara and not N2.

However, a more reliable assignment must be based on further factors which are often not considered. The first such factor is the gandhara, which is purportedly the antara gandhara (G3). However, this assignment is even weaker than the nishada, since there is in fact no antara gandhara in this raga. The gandhara occurs mostly in the prayoga "m p g, m r s" and also in " m p g , m p". Note the first prayoga: it is a classic kAnaDa phrase, the only difference being that in aThANa, the gandhara is not pulled all the way down from P to sadharana gandhara (G2); however it is definitely not a G3. In addition, it is a highly oscillatory gandhara - another mark of the raison d'etre behind the creation of kAnaDa rAgAnga. We must remember that a rAga is not born merely from a scale of swaras, but from the phraseology arising from relationships between these swaras. In the present case, the gandhara-containing prayoga in aTHANa is clearly in the same spirit as that found in kAnaDa (the reason for this will be soon evident).

At any rate, it is already clear (due to combined effects of nishada and gandhara) the assignment to 29th and even 28th melakarta is extremely weak if not untenable.

This note will be concluded in a separate, following, post to improve readability.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 20 May 2006, 05:43

The final factor that sheds further light on the origin and assignment of aThANa is the consideration of two hindustani ragas: darbArI kAnaDa and its close ally, aDAna. For those unfamiliar with hindustani sangeet, Rajan Parrikar provides an excellent overview of these two ragas:

http://www.sawf.org/newedit/edit12112000/musicarts.asp

In particular, let us focus on aDANa. If one drops the highly oscillatory and drawn-out sadharana gandhara of darbAri kAnaDa (e.g., "g, , m r s") and replaces it with a shorter one (" g m r s"), and in addition truncates the suddha dhaivata in a similar manner, one has aDANa. In some cases, the dhaivata is omitted altogether.

Very interestingly, there is a debate in hindustani circles regarding the nishada of aDAna, as mentioned by Parrikar:

The value of the Adanic nishAd is of considerable interest. Many vidwAns consider it to be between the nominal komal and shuddha nishAd. This is also the viewpoint embraced by Jha-sahab, in a telling demonstration of the shades of nishAd.

The following demonstration by the hindustani vidvan Ramashreya Jha is extremely interesting (paste link into browser to hear audio file if the URL tag does not show):

http://www.sawf.org/audio/kanada/jha_adana.ram

In fact, this "intermediate" nishada of aDAna is the self-same "intermediate" nishada of aThANa.

Now, observe the lakshaNa of hindustani aDAna in this clip of Bade Ghulam Ali Khan from Parrikar's site:

http://www.sawf.org/audio/kanada/bgak_adana.ram

Forgetting for a moment the suddha dhaivata, it is clear that the lakshaNa is very close to that of aThANa. The opening line of the composition begins with the prayoga: "R, , S n S m p n R S , d n p", which is a legitimate AThANa prayoga. The link between the two ragas is quite clear - of course, the suddha dhaivata creates a difference (see below). Finally, the clip cuts off just as BGAK begins kalpanaswara, but we hear another aThANa-like swaraprastara: "m p S, S n R S , R n S...".

Considering these issues, we can propose the origin for aThANa which also clarifies its melakarta assignment. We already know that the karnatak raga kAnaDa is a northern import, and its form is derived by substitution of the suddha dhaivata (D1) in darbarI kanaDa with chatussruti dhaivata (D2). It is now easy to see how aThANa is similarly derived from aDAna by replacement of its D1 with D2. Thus, both the karnatak ragas kAnaDa and aThANa are logical derivations from the hindustani counterparts darbArI kAnaDa and aDAna respectively.

This also makes clear the assignment of aThANa as 22nd melakarta janya, with both the sadharana gandhara and the kaishiki nishada being subject to a dose of antara gandhara and kakali nishada. We also note a similar tendency in kAnaDa where the kakali nishada appears in certain prayogas (e.g., "R R S n S").

To summarize: the most reliable assignment of the janya of aThANa can be accomplished by a combination of several factors, including: 1) analysis of the nishada and the gandhara, 2) comparison to other ragas in the 29th and 22nd melakarta; 3) comparison to the allied hindustani ragas darbArI kAnada and aDAna and to the karnatak raga kAnaDa. The last factor also reveals the close link of aThANa and aDAna, and its likely origin as a northern raga. Although no single factor allows reliable assignment, the combination of all evidence appears to indicate strongly the 22nd melakarta janya for this fascinating raga aThANa.

SR

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 20 May 2006, 19:46

SR,

Thanks.

my (not that worthy) 2 cents.

I will read through your arguments more thoroughly. But to me, unless G2 is prominent, it generally does not give the feeling of 22nd mela - this is just my perception. I am not sure why and hence perhaps this is not really a worthy counter point - i guess i am trying to see why aTANA to me does not have any feel for 22nd mela. There are indeed ragas under 22nd which skip G2 altogether - prime example is madyamAvati which i have no problem associating with 22! And also assignment to melas need not necessarily associated with feel - although that has been given reason in some cases. So I guess I am already sliding on a slippery slope! But i persist ... L

et us take your argument about connection to kAnaDA and darbAri kAnaDA. Am i right in that in kAnaDa G2 is an important swara and hence a lot more prominent? But in aTANA isnt gandhara an "alpa" swara and sparingly used? And on top of that it is not a standard G2. So would a comparison be as meaningful? In that same light, consider your following quote:

If one drops the highly oscillatory and drawn-out sadharana gandhara of darbAri kAnaDa (e.g., "g, , m r s") and replaces it with a shorter one (" g m r s"),

Isnt this a drastic change to darbAri kAnaDa - this sort of change would pretty much overhaul the signature of darbAri kAnaDa it seems (besides you mention a further morph of D1 too). I mean by this sort of "morphing", you can turn many ragas into many others not necessarily that close and find connections when they dont exist or tenuous at best.

Just want to point that I am probably going into areas I shouldnt and others more knowledgeable (like DrS) would be better suited to discuss this! So i may morph (pun intended!) into a silent observer!

Thanks!
Arun[/quote]

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 20 May 2006, 20:14

Let us take your argument about connection to kAnaDA and darbAri kAnaDA. Am i right in that in kAnaDa G2 is an important swara and hence a lot more prominent? But in aTANA isnt gandhara an "alpa" swara and sparingly used? And on top of that it is not a standard G2. So would a comparison be as meaningful?

Yes, as mentioned above the G2 is important in darbArI kAnaDa, and continues to be so in karnatak kAnaDa. The main "job" is done on the dhaivata (converting it from D1 to D2). This gives the basic form of karnatak kAnaDa. Obviously new lakshaNa develops after doing this.
In converting darbArI kAnaDa to hindustani aDANa, two "jobs" are done:

1) the ponderous G2 is clipped (this is why you also see a rather clipped gandhara in karnatak AThANa) but it still retains the kAnaDa-like behavior. Contrast this with the weak gandhara in a 29th janya, Arabhi. The gandhara in AThANa does not originate from any "job" done on SankarAbharanam/HarikAmbhoji or any 29th/28th janya raga, but rather it clearly shows its kAnaDa origin.

2) the dhaivata is also clipped (and often omitted altogether in the Arohana). When you take this hindustani ADANa and again convert the D1 to D2, you get the basic form of karnatak aThANa. In my mind the kAnaDa-core of AThANa are unmistakeable and it does not fit in at all with any of the janyas of 29th or 28th melakarta.

Isnt this a drastic change to darbAri kAnaDa - this sort of change would pretty much overhaul the signature of darbAri kAnaDa it seems (besides you mention a further morph of D1 too). I mean by this sort of "morphing", you can turn many ragas into many others not necessarily that close and find connections when they dont exist or tenuous at best.

This is the beauty of rAga-sangeet and bharatiya shastriya sangeet in general. It is also the crux behind the creation of new ragas, especially those of complex character. The new rAgas develop their own lakshaNa. Nobody can say "kAnaDa is just darbArI with D2", but still there is a clear logic behind creation of new ragas based on tuning of the key phrases of parent ragas, and this logic is embedded in the new raga, even though on the surface it may seem only tenuously related to the previous one. Think of it as "musical DNA".

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 20 May 2006, 21:45

SR,

the ponderous G2 is clipped (this is why you also see a rather clipped gandhara in karnatak AThANa) but it still retains the kAnaDa-like behavior. Contrast this with the weak gandhara in a 29th janya, Arabhi. The gandhara in AThANa does not originate from any "job" done on SankarAbharanam/HarikAmbhoji or any 29th/28th janya raga, but rather it clearly shows its kAnaDa origin.

I am saying that I do not really (as?) much connection between the gandara or kAnaDA and aTANA (:-). You are implying a pretty clear connection (which also seems the "seed" for your theory). I definitely am not seeing that. Saying it another way even if the ga connection to 29/28 is weak, i am not seeing a strong connection to 22.

This is the beauty of rAga-sangeet and bharatiya shastriya sangeet in general. It is also the crux behind the creation of new ragas, especially those of complex character. The new rAgas develop their own lakshaNa. Nobody can say "kAnaDa is just darbArI with D2", but still there is a clear logic behind creation of new ragas based on tuning of the key phrases of parent ragas, and this logic is embedded in the new raga, even though on the surface it may seem only tenuously related to the previous one. Think of it as "musical DNA

Again I guess I have to disagree. Yes you can derive new ragas from one to another by morphing swaras and there is of course history behind it (albeit somewhat speculative), but i am not sure it is broadly applicable. Also in particular, in this case I am unable to see as coherent a connection/logic that you are seeing. The nomenclature similarity between different ragas in HM and CM is also a can of worms - it seems to have enough wild discrepancies to be used as a reliable indicator of "exchange" of ragas between the two, or suggestions that a raga in one system was the "parent" of raga in another system.

Arun

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 20 May 2006, 22:20

I am saying that I do not really (as?) much connection between the gandara or kAnaDA and aTANA (:-). You are implying a pretty clear connection (which also seems the "seed" for your theory). I definitely am not seeing that. Saying it another way even if the ga connection to 29/28 is weak, i am not seeing a strong connection to 22.

You may not see it instantly. I did not arrive at this theory suddenly either. You may see things clearly if you examine carefully the material I provided above.

Maybe I should record a demo as well.

Consider another angle:

In hindustani darbArI kAnaDa there are two main themes: in the pUrvAnga the main theme is :"m p g , , m r , s". In the uttarAnga the main theme is "p n p" or some variation thereof (e.g., "p d n p" or "m d n p").

To convert to aDANa, the pUrvAnga theme is weakened deliberately, i.e. the "m p g , , m r s" is discarded and replaced with a weak "g m r s". Moreover (and this is important) aDANa is mainly an uttarAnga rAga, i.e. the "g m r s" is not often used. In direct analogy, the karnatak aThANa also has a greatly withered pUrvAnga prayoga "m p g m r s" and is also a uttarAnga rAga.

In other words most prayogas in aDANa and aThANa do not go below madhyama (also correctly observed by Dr. Shrikaanth), and if they do, the intent is to quickly scramble back to P or D (see also the brief alapana provided, in which the gandhara almost does not exist).

As I said, consideration of several factors is required. My proposal is not just based on one point, neither on the similarity in the names (although as it turns out, it is far from coincidental !).

SR

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 20 May 2006, 22:29

Dear SR

I tend to agree with Arun. I am also carefully following your theoretical arguments which are valid. But many of us feel that aTaNa is not a ragam which can be described by the mUrccana. It is indeed the phrases that count. The proof of the pudding is in eating. Do please identify the sancaaram where aTaNa sounds like K or DK! I hear your lovely aTaNa and my aging ears were unable to capture even a ghost of K or DK. Could you identify using a timeline area which conforms to your theory. If necessary do a fresh sancaaram to make your point. Thanks!

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 20 May 2006, 23:08

Dear SR

I tend to agree with Arun. I am also carefully following your theoretical arguments which are valid. But many of us feel that aTaNa is not a ragam which can be described by the mUrccana. It is indeed the phrases that count. The proof of the pudding is in eating. Do please identify the sancaaram where aTaNa sounds like K or DK! I hear your lovely aTaNa and my aging ears were unable to capture even a ghost of K or DK. Could you identify using a timeline area which conforms to your theory. If necessary do a fresh sancaaram to make your point. Thanks!

CMlover,

I believe my point was missed.

pUrvAnga: aThANa does not sound like kAnaDa or darbArI, precisely because the rationale of the darbArI ---> aDANa conversion in hindustani sangeet is to deliberately weaken the "m p g , , m r s" phrase which in characteristic of K and DK. In both aDANa and aThANa, the " m p g m r s" phrase is therefore weak.

In my alapana, this phrase " m p g, m" or "m p g m r s" or "g m r s" appears at locations such as 0:13, 0:28, 1:19, 1:28, 2:02.

uttarAnga: Again, aThANa strongly resembles aDANa, which itself is a morph of DK. You will not see K and DK in aThANa except in more abstract terms - that is the whole point. On the other hand, extended aDANa-like prayogas (of course, with D2 instead of D1 where relevant) are dime-a-dozen:

The opening phrase itself: " m p S, , S n R S n S d, n p" at 0:01.

"m p n S R S" at 0:41.

"p R, S n p d n p" at 1:31.

SR

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 21 May 2006, 00:05

aThANa has been used in CM for more than 400 years(4 centuries). And its swarUpa has undergone quite a bit of change during this time. During the time of venkaTamakhi and muddu venkaTamakhi the ArOhaNa was said to be krama sampUrNa. (muddu)venkaTamakhi's gIte starts on "GPDS" which is completely different from what we sing today:- "SRMPNS" with "PDNS" also occuring. gANdhArA also appears to have been quite prominent then. So you cannot simply conjencture by looking at how aThaNa is today and "conclude" that it was derived from another rAga.

As N2 is more prominent and always occurs as an anusawara of D2, this was placed under the 28th mELa hari kEdAragauLa/harikAmbOdhi. Also D is swung upwards towards S similar to rAgas like kannaDa which is another good reason why both are placed under the same mELa- 28th. N3 was treated as the foreign note. G2, G3 and intermediate frequencies occur in the rAga. Unlike in kAnaDa where G is associated with R2, in aThANa G is asscoiated with the higher notes-P or M. This is a crucial difference.

By simply replacing 1 or more swaras with another and changing the gamakas on each swara, literally any rAga can be derived from another imaginarily(Arun has already made this point). The derivation of aThANa from HM aDANa comes under this category. But that is not how things work in reality.

You cannot draw anologies between kAnaDa and aThANa. kANaDa does have a resemblance to darbArI kANaDa but no such resemblance is made out on hearing aThANa and aDANa side by side.

I have some questions for you

1) How old is aDANa in HM?

2) For discussion sake- What makes you convinced that CM aTHANa was derived from HM aDANA and NOT the other way round?
In our own times, we have seen abhOgi being borrowed from CM and given kAnaDA ang and sung as abhOgi kAnaDA. SO it is well possble that aThANa was borrowed and given kAnaDa signature and sung as a lighter version of darbAr kANaDa.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 01:10

aThANa has been used in CM for more than 400 years(4 centuries). And its swarUpa has undergone quite a bit of change during this time. During the time of venkaTamakhi and muddu venkaTamakhi the ArOhaNa was said to be krama sampUrNa. (muddu)venkaTamakhi's gIte starts on "GPDS" which is completely different from what we sing today:- "SRMPNS" with "PDNS" also occuring. gANdhArA also appears to have been quite prominent then. So you cannot simply conjencture by looking at how aThaNa is today and "conclude" that it was derived from another rAga.

I am referring to what is called aThANa for the last 250 years. Dikshitar, Tyagaraja etc have composed in the present form of aThANa. Purandaradasa's "sakalagrha" is today sung in aThANa, though we do not know what its original raga was.

Also, just to clarify - my argument is not a conjecture - it is supported by logic and fact.

As N2 is more prominent and always occurs as an anusawara of D2, this was placed under the 28th mELa hari kEdAragauLa/harikAmbOdhi. Also D is swung upwards towards S similar to rAgas like kannaDa which is another good reason why both are placed under the same mELa- 28th. N3 was treated as the foreign note. G2, G3 and intermediate frequencies occur in the rAga.

N2 is not an anuswara of D2 in aThANa. Your argument for assigning 28th melakarta sounds somewhat arbitrary. G3 (if it even exists in aThANa) and N3 are anya swaras.

Unlike in kAnaDa where G is associated with R2, in aThANa G is asscoiated with the higher notes-P or M. This is a crucial difference.

In kAnaDa, G2 is not directly associated with R2. This is too simplistic. In kAnaDa, the key pUrvAnga phrase is " G, M R S" and the connection to the uttarAnga is with phrases like "G M D N P". Again, one is missing the point by trying to compare aThANa with kAnaDa in any way except for the "m p g m r s" or "m p g m".

By simply replacing 1 or more swaras with another and changing the gamakas on each swara, literally any rAga can be derived from another imaginarily(Arun has already made this point). The derivation of aThANa from HM aDANa comes under this category. But that is not how things work in reality.

Dr. Shrikaanth, your interpretation of my argument is not accurate. As I have said several times, it is not simply a question of replacing swaras here and there. The derivation is much more complex - but also much more sound - that what you make it out to be.

You cannot draw anologies between kAnaDa and aThANa. kANaDa does have a resemblance to darbArI kANaDa but no such resemblance is made out on hearing aThANa and aDANa side by side.

Would you please present substantial evidence to back up this claim. I have already mentioned how the weak pUrvAnga phrase "m p g, m r s" is related to kAnaDa and how it is manipulated. What about the several prayogas that I pointed out ? One cannot simply wish away these aspects, which are core to indian music.

It is true that ragas are surrounded by a lot of mythology and legend, but in essence they do not develop "accidentally" (especially complex ones). They develop through the very process I demonstrated above, which is central to the Indian musical intellect and philosophy. One cannot ignore it.

Perhaps an obstacle is the fact that we usually take ragas "for granted" (especially old ones) and in our karnatak sangeet education/training, there is not always enough insight on how janya ragas came into existence. In Indian music there is a difference between classification (which occurred after the fact, for example the melakarta or thaat systems) and genealogy of ragas. The modern karnatak system places emphasis on rigorous classification but not so much on genealogy, whereas the hindustani system is the opposite (the classifications are fairly loose, but the genealogy is very important).

Returning to the aThANa-aDANa comparison, I have pointed out not only the logical derivation based upon sound principles of Indian raga sangeet, but also several prayogas of similarity. You cannot wish them away.

1) How old is aDANa in HM?

aDANa (in present form), like darbArI kAnaDa, is believed to be a creation of Tansen (mid-1550s).

2) For discussion sake- What makes you convinced that CM aTHANa was derived from HM aDANA and NOT the other way round?

Please see my entire discussion - I derived aThANa from hindustani aDANa based on similar principles that drive the derivation of kAnaDa from darbArI. How is the reverse accomplished ?

SO it is well possble that aThANa was borrowed and given kAnaDa signature and sung as a lighter version of darbAr kANaDa.

This is highly unlikely (although anything is technically possible). In hindustani music, it is well established - based on principles of derivation of ragas - as to how aDANa was derived from darbArI kAnaDa. This is a well-known and standard practice in hindustani sangeet.

Besides, according to you, the old aThANa did not even look like the present one, so when do you propose this borrowal actually happened ?

And suppose this did happen, are you then agreeing that there is indeed a melodic link between aThaNa and aDANa (albeit in reverse) ?

Regarding abhogi - you are absolutely correct. The import has occurred much more recently and is well documented. Nobody in HM claims that this is a northern rAga. Also, it is well known that the kAnaDa concept itself originated from Southern India (this is clear from the name itself). This was during the time when there was no clear separation of hindustani and karnatak music. At the same time, the darbArI kAnaDa is a northern invention from this old kAnaDa, and was re-adapted back to the south in the form of what is called kAnaDa today in karnatak sangeet.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 May 2006, 01:12

I have to listen to those timelines but just an imbedded phrase is not enough proof. The two points that bother me which have been nicely responded by DRS is the use of the gaandhaaram which is alpa in 'present day' aTANa vis-a-vis Kaanadaa; the other is the mood of the raga - whereas aTaNa evokes the veera rasa K and primarily DK evoke dhainya which appear incompatible. I am sure our laterday composers used aTANa primarily for its mood and I can vouch for it from its employ in a number of harikathas. Try singing 'baalakanaga' in DK and you will get my point. Even in the movies IR used aTANa very effectively to display the 'challenge'(or recalcitrance) element!

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 01:17

I have to listen to those timelines but just an imbedded phrase is not enough proof. The two points that bother me which have been nicely responded by DRS is the use of the gaandhaaram which is alpa in 'present day' aTANa vis-a-vis Kaanadaa; the other is the mood of the raga - whereas aTaNa evokes the veera rasa K and primarily DK evoke dhainya which appear incompatible. I am sure our laterday composers used aTANa primarily for its mood and I can vouch for it from its employ in a number of harikathas. Try singing 'baalakanaga' in DK and you will get my point. Even in the movies IR used aTANa very effectively to display the 'challenge'(or recalcitrance) element!

If you are still trying to compare aThANa to kAnaDa, it is unlikely that you will see the crux of the argument! I don't understand what the purpose of trying to compare aThANa directly with K and DK is.

By the way - in hindustani sangeet, aDANa is also used to portray the vIra rasa.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 21 May 2006, 01:47

I am referring to what is called aThANa for the last 250 years. Dikshitar, Tyagaraja etc have composed in the present form of aThANa. Purandaradasa's "sakalagrha" is today sung in aThANa, though we do not know what its original raga was.

So are you wishing away the fact that aThANa existed even earlier than 250 years. So the original aThANa ceased to exist and aDANa was borrowed wholesale and had several of its swaras replaed and morphed to yield the aThANa of today. Is this your argument?

Also, just to clarify - my argument is not a conjecture - it is supported by logic and fact.

It does not appear logical to us. And what facts are you alluding to?

N2 is not an anuswara of D2 in aThANa. Your argument for assigning 28th melakarta sounds somewhat arbitrary. G3 (if it even exists in aThANa) and N3 are anya swaras.

You misinterpreted my statement. Let me clarify. D2 is Always accompanied by anuswAra of N2. I did not imply that N2 only occurs as anuswara to D2. N2 is an independent note in its own right in aThANa.
G3 is sung very clearly in the tArasthAyi in aTHANa. There can be no doubt about its presence or identity here.

In kAnaDa, G2 is not directly associated with R2. This is too simplistic. In kAnaDa, the key pUrvAnga phrase is " G, M R S" and the connection to the uttarAnga is with phrases like "G M D N P". Again, one is missing the point by trying to compare aThANa with kAnaDa in any way except for the "m p g m r s" or "m p g m".

It is not simplistic. That is what gamakas are about. And there is certainly a difference in the gamaka on G as I have explained.

Dr. Shrikaanth, your interpretation of my argument is not accurate. As I have said several times, it is not simply a question of replacing swaras here and there. The derivation is much more complex - but also much more sound - that what you make it out to be.

I have followed all your arguments. Try and see what i am saying.

Would you please present substantial evidence to back up this claim. I have already mentioned how the weak pUrvAnga phrase "m p g, m r s" is related to kAnaDa and how it is manipulated. What about the several prayogas that I pointed out ? One cannot simply wish away these aspects, which are core to indian music.

What evidence? There is no way aThANa can be heard as resembling aDANa. ARe you saying that just because a phrase such as "MPGMRS" or "DNP" occurs in different rAgas, they have got to be evolutionarily related; even regardless of different swarasthAnas?

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 21 May 2006, 01:48

aDANa (in present form), like darbArI kAnaDa, is believed to be a creation of Tansen (mid-1550s).

Ok. So aThANa has been around for at least as much time as aDANa(taking CDP as cut off as I dont have other texts to refer to). Now are you trying to say that Sothern musicians borrowed aDANa the moment Tansen conceived it? A rAga takes years for its potential to be explored and for it to gain some status. aDANa was not born in a day. Likewise, aTHANa is mentioned in a treatise which means it should have been around for a good while before that to have gained that status.

Please see my entire discussion - I derived aThANa from hindustani aDANa based on similar principles that drive the derivation of kAnaDa from darbArI. How is the reverse accomplished ?

The reverse is accomplished in just the viceversa way that you did. That should be logical to you.

Besides, according to you, the old aThANa did not even look like the present one, so when do you propose this borrowal actually happened ?

Hello. Do you see the weakness in your argument here? If you can argue one way that as the structure was different it could not have given rise to aDANa, how can you argue that th reverse is true?

And suppose this did happen, are you then agreeing that there is indeed a melodic link between aThaNa and aDANa (albeit in reverse) ?

I have answered this before. The 2 are and sound very different.

Nobody in HM claims that this is a northern rAga. Also, it is well known that the kAnaDa concept itself originated from Southern India today in karnatak sangeet.

Yes but someone like you could come up 4 centuries later and claim exactly that. Do you follow me?

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 21 May 2006, 01:53

Your argument for assigning 28th melakarta sounds somewhat arbitrary. G3 (if it even exists in aThANa) and N3 are anya swaras.

It is not simply my argument. That is what is mentioned in the SSP. ANd it is sound logic too. You do not see D being treated that way in the 22nd mELa or any of its derivatives as far as I can recall. But this is very common in janyas of the 28th and 29th mELa.

The bottom line is aThANa is a rAga that cannot be classified under any one mELa and is hence best left alone. One would not achive a great deal by shifting it to 22nd mELa.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 02:14

So are you wishing away the fact that aThANa existed even earlier than 250 years. So the original aThANa ceased to exist and aDANa was borrowed wholesale and had several of its swaras replaed and morphed to yield the aThANa of today. Is this your argument?

I am not wishing away anything. That the original karnatak aThANa ceased to exist is clear to all - including yourself. The current aThANa is not what was earlier called by the same name.

Saying that a raga was borrowed "wholesale" is simplistic except in very few cases. I am saying - essentially, although it is a bit more complex - that the current aThANa is derived from aDANa. Essentially only one swara is replaced (D1 with D2) - just like HM darbArI ---> CM kAnaDa. What "several swaras" are you referring to ?

N2 is an independent note in its own right in aThANa.

Great - we agree on this! Also, N3 is much less prominent than in borderline 29ers like begaDa. So 29th melakarta is eliminated then, and the only question is between 28 and 22.

G3 is sung very clearly in the tArasthAyi in aTHANa. There can be no doubt about its presence or identity here.

Can you point me to a major composition that portrays the G3 in the clear light that you mention ? And at what location ? A recording if available would be very useful.

It is not simplistic. That is what gamakas are about. And there is certainly a difference in the gamaka on G as I have explained.

Of course there is a difference - I agree with you. Maybe there is some genuine misunderstanding here. I have already mentioned in detail that the G2 in aThANa (as in the M P G M R S and M P G M P phrases) is only a weak form of the kAnaDa concept. That is why it is related to aDANa (not directly to kAnaDa) which similarly carries the weak form derived from darbArI kAnaDa. I think CMlover also has the same misunderstanding.

What evidence? There is no way aThANa can be heard as resembling aDANa. ARe you saying that just because a phrase such as "MPGMRS" or "DNP" occurs in different rAgas, they have got to be evolutionarily related; even regardless of different swarasthAnas?

Again, I am just hearing a "no way" without more substance. Once more, the pUrvAnga "m p g m r s" phrase is just a side-show (albeit a significant one). I don't understand why it is so important, given that both aThANa and aDANa are uttarAnga ragas.

The main action is in the uttarAnga, wherein many sancharas (including swarasthAnas) are similar if not same. Of course, D1 has to be changed to D2, but this is the same philosophy behind the HM DK ---> CM K conversion. Let me post the relevant excerpts again:

The following demonstration by the hindustani vidvan Ramashreya Jha is extremely interesting (paste link into browser to hear audio file if the URL tag does not show):

http://www.sawf.org/audio/kanada/jha_adana.ram

In fact, this "intermediate" nishada of aDAna is the self-same "intermediate" nishada of aThANa.

Now, observe the lakshaNa of hindustani aDAna in this clip of Bade Ghulam Ali Khan from Parrikar's site:

http://www.sawf.org/audio/kanada/bgak_adana.ram

Forgetting for a moment the suddha dhaivata, it is clear that the lakshaNa is very close to that of aThANa. The opening line of the composition begins with the prayoga: "R, , S n S m p n R S , d n p", which is a legitimate AThANa prayoga. The link between the two ragas is quite clear - of course, the suddha dhaivata creates a difference (see below). Finally, the clip cuts off just as BGAK begins kalpanaswara, but we hear another aThANa-like swaraprastara: "m p S, S n R S , R n S...".

pUrvAnga: aThANa does not sound like kAnaDa or darbArI, precisely because the rationale of the darbArI ---> aDANa conversion in hindustani sangeet is to deliberately weaken the "m p g , , m r s" phrase which in characteristic of K and DK. In both aDANa and aThANa, the " m p g m r s" phrase is therefore weak.

In my alapana, this phrase " m p g, m" or "m p g m r s" or "g m r s" appears at locations such as 0:13, 0:28, 1:19, 1:28, 2:02.

uttarAnga: Again, aThANa strongly resembles aDANa, which itself is a morph of DK. You will not see K and DK in aThANa except in more abstract terms - that is the whole point. On the other hand, extended aDANa-like prayogas (of course, with D2 instead of D1 where relevant) are dime-a-dozen:

The opening phrase itself: " m p S, , S n R S n S d, n p" at 0:01.

"m p n S R S" at 0:41.

"p R, S n p d n p" at 1:31.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 21 May 2006, 02:24

I am not wishing away anything. That the original karnatak aThANa ceased to exist is clear to all - including yourself.

Sorry that is not what I said. You are interpreting it in your own way.

Great - we agree on this! Also, N3 is much less prominent than in borderline 29ers like begaDa. So 29th melakarta is eliminated then, and the only question is between 28 and 22.

Hold on. You are jumping again. And I dont agree with your arguments about bEgaDe at all. But that is not the point of discussion here.

That is why it is related to aDANa (not directly to kAnaDa) which similarly carries the weak form derived from darbArI kAnaDa. I think CMlover also has the same misunderstanding.

We are not having any misunderstanding. You are refusing to see that we do not agree with you.

Again, I am just hearing a "no way" without more substance.

Excuse me! This is rather humourous. :cheesy: The onus lies on you to prove what you are saying. I do not see any substance in your "logic" like my friend here.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 02:30

Ok. So aThANa has been around for at least as much time as aDANa(taking CDP as cut off as I dont have other texts to refer to).

How do you conclude this ? Tansen was a mid-1500s guy, whereas Venkatamakhin was a mid-1600s guy. And besides, you mentioned that muddu-Venkatamakhin (mid-1700s) uses a different form of aThANa than the current one. So how has aThANa (the one we are discussing) been around for as long as aDANa ?

Now are you trying to say that Sothern musicians borrowed aDANa the moment Tansen conceived it? A rAga takes years for its potential to be explored and for it to gain some status. aDANa was not born in a day. Likewise, aTHANa is mentioned in a treatise which means it should have been around for a good while before that to have gained that status.

How am I saying it was borrowed the moment it was conceived ? The authoritative aThANa compositions start to appear in the Trinity period. This is well over 200 years. Also, I don't dispute that a different raga by name aThANa could have been prevalent in the South. This is not relevant to the discussion.

Hello. Do you see the weakness in your argument here? If you can argue one way that as the structure was different it could not have given rise to aDANa, how can you argue that th reverse is true?

I never even claimed any link between aDANa and any old form of aThANa - you brought this into the discussion. I am only talking about modern aThANa and aDANa.

Yes but someone like you could come up 4 centuries later and claim exactly that. Do you follow me?

Actually, I don't. Firstly, there is no incentive to make such claims except if they are substantiated and serve to update our knowledge and understanding. There is no financial or career benefit to be gained by anyone.

HM aDANa is most certainly derived from HM darbArI kAnaDa. The need was felt for a "more vigorous and speedy" form of darbArI which is a weighty and even somber raga. This is not unique in HM. For example, Marwa is another weighty raga that has a "lighter" version called Sohini, which is derived from Marwa using the same principles that underlie the indian raga framework. The karnatak version of Sohini is HamsAnandI. This raga has appeared only recently in karnatak sangeet.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 02:44

The bottom line is aThANa is a rAga that cannot be classified under any one mELa and is hence best left alone. One would not achive a great deal by shifting it to 22nd mELa.

I don't agree with that.

I do partially agree with your statement that one does not achieve a great deal by moving it to 22nd melakarta. The more interesting part is to see how it is likely derived (genealogy) and how in the process its correct classification is also established.

We can agree to disagree on this one. In my mind, a deeper look at aTHANa reveals many interesting points:

1) Its weak pUrvAnga appears in the same spirit as aDANa, which ultimately derives from the kAnaDa concept.

2) Its strong uttarAnga shows clear similarity to aDANa once we substitute the dhaivata, exactly like in HM darbArI ---> CM kAnaDa.

3) This combined with the weak N3 and a practically non-existent G3 seem to establish its most appropriate place in 22nd melakarta. It seems a complete misfit alongside 28th and 29th janya ragas.

best Wishes,
Sangeet Rasik

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 May 2006, 03:15

Dear Sir
here is a clipping from the lecdem of Vid||Subramaniam on ATANA
http://rapidshare.de/files/20967349/Ata ... m.mp3.html
It answers most of your queries as also some addressed to DRS.
He does conclude that aTANa may be attributed to meLa 22. But that is not the issue here. Many of us feel that the meLa attribution for a number of ragas are indeterminate. He has not addressed the aDANa-aTANa issue at all since it does not exist

Would you mind doing a lecdem on this issue to bring out your point since confessedly many of us (me in particular) are weak on HM. It will be highly appreciated. Thanks

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 21 May 2006, 03:27

How do you conclude this ? Tansen was a mid-1500s guy, whereas Venkatamakhin was a mid-1600s guy. And besides, you mentioned that muddu-Venkatamakhin (mid-1700s) uses a different form of aThANa than the current one. So how has aThANa (the one we are discussing) been around for as long as aDANa ?

venkaTamakhi wrote CDP in first third of 17th C. Please follow me carefully. rAgas do not get into treatises the moment they are born. It takes a long time for them to be explored, expanded and accepted. Also, it is erroneous to say the old aThANa ceased to exist and is not relevant to our discussion. That is sweeping uncomfortable things under the carpet. We are taking of a time span of at least half a millenium, not a day. So what was aThANa then has very gradually changed in some of its sancAras and in the emphasis on certain swaras to become aThANa of today. A majority of our rAgas have changed with time and this is very well knwon. Instead of accepting this fact, you are arguing that the earlier aThANa ceased to exist and was suddenly replaced by a drastically
different northern counterpart which also took its name. This is illogical.

How am I saying it was borrowed the moment it was conceived ? The authoritative aThANa compositions start to appear in the Trinity period. This is well over 200 years. Also, I don't dispute that a different raga by name aThANa could have been prevalent in the South. This is not relevant to the discussion.

Part of your question is answered by what I wrote above. mudduvenkaTamakhi's is authoritatively notated in SSP. Now what is the earliest composition in HM aDANa that is "auhtoritatively" notated? I am not aware of Tansen's notated manuscripts having been preserved.

I never even claimed any link between aDANa and any old form of aThANa - you brought this into the discussion. I am only talking about modern aThANa and aDANa.

ANswered above.

Actually, I don't. Firstly, there is no incentive to make such claims except if they are substantiated and serve to update our knowledge and understanding. There is no financial or career benefit to be gained by anyone.

No. Most of these things are not done for financial or career progression. It is simply done out of "blind faith", "self-righteousness" or "holier than thou" attitude. It is like saying all languages in the world are derived from Tamizh simply because my mother tongue is tamizh and I believe that it is the oldest language.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 21 May 2006, 03:35

I do partially agree with your statement that one does not achieve a great deal by moving it to 22nd melakarta. The more interesting part is to see how it is likely derived (genealogy) and how in the process its correct classification is also established.

Yah! Humans evolved from apes and hence they should be placed under apes. Going even further, we all ultimately evolved from unicellular organisms so we should still be placed under porkaryotes.

We can agree to disagree on this one.

I think we have to do that on most points.

1) Its weak pUrvAnga appears in the same spirit as aDANa, which ultimately derives from the kAnaDa concept.

2) Its strong uttarAnga shows clear similarity to aDANa once we substitute the dhaivata, exactly like in HM darbArI ---> CM kAnaDa.

3) This combined with the weak N3 and a practically non-existent G3 seem to establish its most appropriate place in 22nd melakarta. It seems a complete misfit alongside 28th and 29th janya ragas.

best Wishes,
Sangeet Rasik

Now, the more we reason with you, the more you are clutching tenaciously to your beliefs. You will have to give up what is dear to your heart, look at all the discusion reasonably and change your belief. If you donot want to change, thats fine. There are lots of people who believe in what is not necessarily true or correct. Thats the way of the world.

Best wishes to you.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 05:59

Dear Sir
here is a clipping from the lecdem of Vid||Subramaniam on ATANA
http://rapidshare.de/files/20967349/Ata ... m.mp3.html
It answers most of your queries as also some addressed to DRS.
He does conclude that aTANa may be attributed to meLa 22. But that is not the issue here. Many of us feel that the meLa attribution for a number of ragas are indeterminate. He has not addressed the aDANa-aTANa issue at all since it does not exist

Would you mind doing a lecdem on this issue to bring out your point since confessedly many of us (me in particular) are weak on HM. It will be highly appreciated. Thanks

Remarkable. Thanks very much for the audio file.

Indeed, the scholar concludes that aThANa is now categorized as 22nd melakarta janya and is not indeterminate , which was in fact one of my proposals. In fact, I believe aThANa is not particularly difficult to assign once subjected to analysis using principles that have defined indian music for thousands of years. As I mentioned in my first post, it is one of the ragas that has "fallen through the cracks" so far.

However, I am equally interested (as you also are) in the issue of aThANa-aDANa. Thanks for the provocative statement that this issue does not exist

. I will try to put together a demo, as I mentioned in an earlier post.

A strange thing he mentions was that the raga was once rendered with a G3 in the tarasthayi. One question is whether this is documented in any compositions. He does not mention any. I have alaready requested our learned friend Dr. Shrikaanth to provide some references if available.

In my mind use of a prayoga like "S G3 M R S" is totally contrary to the aThANa spirit. This is the realm of more "folksy" ragas like Kannada and is possibly an aberration/spurious insertion, not an integral feature of a raga like aThANa.

Now that the assignment to 22nd melakarta is robust, a good next step is to explore the kAnaDa connection - possibly through hindustani sangeet.

Best Wishes,
Sangeet Rasik

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 May 2006, 07:20

A strange thing he mentions was that the raga was once rendered with a G3 in the tarasthayi. One question is whether this is documented in any compositions.

If you have access to Adi sangita rasaarNavam of KV Srinivasa Iyngar (check pp 88-90) you will see a number of tArA G3 notated as GGRR,- SG,RR, and RGRS (all tara sancaaram) in the context of 'vAcAmagOcarumDani..' (Mysore sadasiva rAyar kIrtanai).

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 21 May 2006, 09:50

I first want to mention that that many early texts have aTANA as 28th melakarta (rAgalakshaNA of muddu vEnkaTAmakhi, sangItasAramu of thiruvEnkaTakavi, and mahabharacUDAmani). It was sangrahacUDAMaNi which first mentions 29th mElakarta. And another work also called rAgalakshana (author unknown 18th-19th century) mentions aTANA as both under 28 and 29.

None (until SSP) mention sadharana gandhara.in aTANA (which still classifies it under 29). Given assignments to 28 or 29 by so many early texts, the usage of gandhara in times before SSP must have been antara (level of usage not mentioned in texts). The usage of G2 in aTANA also seems like a later development. And we do note that it is still in a limited way.

SR - based on this (and also as DrS already pointed) - why should an existing established raga, morph gAndhara because of a Northern raga's influence (which i still do not see - not the kAnaDA connection, not the HM aDAna connection)? And also still use it sparingly? I am sorry this seems like extremely weak logic to me also and you are claiming it as rock solid!

IMHO, the gandara of aTANA seems mostly neither here or there because it seems rendered with gamaka - it is also never rendered plain (the lecdem mentions this never used as swasthAna (sp?) plain prayOga). To me atleast that makes the link to 22 weak and that qualifies more as an anya swara. Even if there is absence of G3. a sparing presence of G2 does not seem to me as a strong for 22 mela classification. Yes it is already done in many books but it seems as weak as the assignment to 29

(but mela classification in many cases seems a bit bogus and pointless to me!)

I like the association better to 28. In fact I am puzzled why 29 won over 28? Given references to texts, it seemst to that it is more because of N3 and not G3 as people have taken it (including lecdem). But is it fair to compare the usage of N3 (and lesser prevalence w.r.t N2) similar to how it is used in kAmbhOji and khamAs? I agree it is perhaps stronger in aTANA but doesnt it seem like an anya swara? So I guess I like 28 with both G2 and N3 as anya swaras. Arbitrary you say? Perhaps perhaps

but who believes that mela classification is founded on solid, scientific principles? Read the early texts and you see contradictions between them left and right. And now we have many ragas which just dont fit into melas neatly but "force fit" them. To what end? What is the point? Does it help you render these "complex" ragas any better? I dont think so.

May be what we need is 73rd "mela" which has "ragas that dont clearly fit into 72"

!!!!

Arun

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 11:18

ArunK,

I first want to mention that that many early texts have aTANA as 28th melakarta (rAgalakshaNA of muddu vEnkaTAmakhi, sangItasAramu of thiruvEnkaTakavi, and mahabharacUDAmani). It was sangrahacUDAMaNi which first mentions 29th mElakarta. And another work also called rAgalakshana (author unknown 18th-19th century) mentions aTANA as both under 28 and 29.

This is perfectly reasonable. I do not understand why this is a problem. However, the present-day aThANa is not a 28/29.

None (until SSP) mention sadharana gandhara.in aTANA (which still classifies it under 29). Given assignments to 28 or 29 by so many early texts, the usage of gandhara in times before SSP must have been antara (level of usage not mentioned in texts). The usage of G2 in aTANA also seems like a later development. And we do note that it is still in a limited way.

Again, I have no problem in accepting that there was an earlier version of aThANa that was not a 22nd janya. In other words, sometime close to the Trinity period, the old aThANa evolved to its current form. Do we at least agree on this ?

SR - based on this (and also as DrS already pointed) - why should an existing established raga, morph gAndhara because of a Northern raga's influence (which i still do not see - not the kAnaDA connection, not the HM aDAna connection)? And also still use it sparingly? I am sorry this seems like extremely weak logic to me also and you are claiming it as rock solid!

I think I see the problem/misunderstanding now. If you believe that existing ragas do not get modified under influence of external ragas, then that is a bit simplistic ! Remember the case, e.g., of kAnaDa. This raga developed quite late in the karnatak system and is definitely inspired by darbArI kAnaDa. However, in karnatak music it did not show up suddenly as an "alien". Indeed, darbArI kAnaDa by itself never became popular in the South till very recently. No major composers took up this raga. On the other hand kAnaDa was developed in two possible ways:

1) by taking the existing raga karnATaka kApi and modifying it to suit the kAnaDa concept. Dikshitar and his followers were among the latest to embrace this new raga - for example, Dikshitar still used Venkatamakhin's old karNATaka kApI in his compositions. That raga is now extinct and could have "morphed" into the modern kAnaDa under influence of the northern raga darbArI kAnaDa.

2) Directly modifying darbArI kAnaDa to get kAnaDa which became popular, so that karNATaka kApi fell into disuse because of "competition".

Similarly, the northern aDANa could have either served as the inspiration for the shift to a 22nd janya of the existing raga (which happened to also be called aThANa and already has other common phrases). This existing raga fell into disuse. Or, aDANa could have been directly modified as in the case of darbArI kAnaDa into a new raga that strongly resembles (but is not the same) as the old aThANa. This new raga became popular and the previous aThANa was discontinued.

Regarding the modification process itself, I have posted notes on this already and it seems a demo will be in order. I hope to do this soon.

IMHO, the gandara of aTANA seems mostly neither here or there because it seems rendered with gamaka - it is also never rendered plain (the lecdem mentions this never used as swasthAna (sp?) plain prayOga).

We know this already. The gandhara is essentially G2 with a hint of G3. The gamaka-laden gandhara that you mention is a kAnaDa-inspired import. As for the other prayogas I mentioned in the uttarAnga, they are already very similar in both the northern and southern ragas.

To me atleast that makes the link to 22 weak and that qualifies more as an anya swara. Even if there is absence of G3. a sparing presence of G2 does not seem to me as a strong for 22 mela classification. Yes it is already done in many books but it seems as weak as the assignment to 29 (but mela classification in many cases seems a bit bogus and pointless to me!)

I think we have reached the limit of discussion on the melakarta issue, and it is now resolved. Considering the present form of aThANa the assignment to 22nd melakarta is now obvious. The 29 and 28 melakarta assignments are now obsolete and any version of aThANa using these is now extinct for practical purposes. The message for karnatak sangeet practitioners and students:

28/29th melakarta janya aThANa is long dead. Long live 22nd melakarta janya aThANa!

This is not "gloating" in any form - just a small example to emphasize that our music is still a living, breathing, robust entity wherein musicological principles still prevail over excessive tradition/fatalism ("leave it alone since it is indeterminate"), and ensure its long-term vitality that tradition alone cannot preserve.

End of story at least on this issue.

Footnote: Major compositions: bRhaspate (MD) and SrIkumAranagarAlaye (ST) have no use for G3. I have learned/heard elA nI dayarAdu from two gurus of entirely different paramparAs (one from the Kerala tradition and another in the direct line of Tyagaraja), and neither use G3. Also the only place where it *could* show up is at the location "karuNalavAla".

And now we have many ragas which just dont fit into melas neatly but "force fit" them. To what end? What is the point? Does it help you render these "complex" ragas any better? I dont think so.

We are not force-fitting them if we are analyzing them according to established principles. Our music is continually evolving, tying up loose ends, creating new innovations. There is no need to be fatalistic about this.

Finally, to the question: "does it help to render the raga better ?" An emphatic YES (at least for me). When I sing aThANa I do not see any intrusions from sankarabharanam or harikambhoji but I see it in a completely different light with its own set of phrases that fit much better with the 22 janya crowd.

SR

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 21 May 2006, 18:28

other words, sometime close to the Trinity period, the old aThANa evolved to its current form. Do we at least agree on this ?

Dikshitar based on Muddu vEnkatamakhin's work. Tyagaraja's system was similar or based on gOvindAcharyA's. Neithet mention G2. SSP was much much later. So cannot reliably say that it was close to trinity period.

think I see the problem/misunderstanding now. If you believe that existing ragas do not get modified under influence of external ragas, then that is a bit simplistic ! Remember the case, e.g., of kAnaDa. This raga developed quite late in the karnatak system and is definitely inspired by darbArI kAnaDa. However, in karnatak music it did not show up suddenly as an "alien". Indeed, darbArI kAnaDa by itself never became popular in the South till very recently. No major composers took up this raga. On the other hand kAnaDa was developed in two possible ways

I think I also see the problem. As DRS as pointed out you are taking the case of a kAnaDa where a previous unknown raga came into being under the influence of northern raga. But you are conveniently forgetting that aTANA existed long before that. It is not the same as for kAnaDA! The comparison to kAnaDA in terms of evolution is what I would call misguided and your theory of morphing swaras, changing swarasthanas to bolster a tenuos connection - that i would call simplistic!

I am sorry you have built a castle of a case for aTANA out of air! To be just reiterate "it is firmly established", "very clear", "logical" is not going to make it "solid" (pun intended).

Similarly, the northern aDANa could have either served as the inspiration for the shift to a 22nd janya of the existing raga (which happened to also be called aThANa and already has other common phrases). This existing raga fell into disuse. Or, aDANa could have been directly modified as in the case of darbArI kAnaDa into a new raga that strongly resembles (but is not the same) as the old aThANa. This new raga became popular and the previous aThANa was discontinued.

Can you see the "air" in your castle here? First of all you have zero evidence in texts. But you also start with could have and then build up an elaborate hollow case on conjecture and you have claimed it as "fact" in an earlier post.

I think we have reached the limit of discussion on the melakarta issue

Oh! we are very sure of this

You are not listening a bit to the other side! This has already been pointed out by DRS. How can discussion proceed then? I realize now that it really had no hope from the beginning!

Considering the present form of aThANa the assignment to 22nd melakarta is now obvious.

Now it is obvious? I dont believe this!! You obviously felt this way from the beginning. But after I offered my reasons as to why it is weak, you say now it is obvious? Yes this is no discussion here. I feel like I have called into Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly! Pardon for the US reference, but folks in US will relate to this better. These two people are (very popular) talk radio hosts who allow supposedly "any one" to call in and disagree/agree with them. But have preconceived notions on ideas and also about the folks calling in, they simply stick to their side - no matter what!

This is not "gloating" in any form

No it obviously isnt. To gloat first the other side (and everyone) has to pretty much know you have "won" something. You have not won anything

! Without that this is not gloating, and it (sorry to say) not that mature either!

All this shows you had certain ideas which you firmly believed everyone would also see as "obvous, logical". That didnt happen but you refuse to see and keep on harping your own side of argument. I am not the first one to observe this.

You will excuse me if i think there is zero point in continuing this discussion!

Arun

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 21 May 2006, 23:34

ArunK,

Dikshitar based on Muddu vEnkatamakhin's work. Tyagaraja's system was similar or based on gOvindAcharyA's. Neithet mention G2. SSP was much much later. So cannot reliably say that it was close to trinity period.

MD and T compositions show that G2 was the prominent swara. In fact in "bRhaspate" G3 does not exist anywhere, and in T's "elA nI" there is only one theoretical location for G3. In Kerala, ST's "SrIkumAra" also shows no trace of G3. There is no evidence that all these compositions had G3 in them and then were altered en masse down the line. Major composers have not had any problem tweaking ragas that are defined differently in older texts. It seems to me that by the Trinity period most compositions were using G2 (which nevertheless appears only in a weak form owing to the character of the raga itself), and G3 is even weaker and practically non-existent. So I see two points here:

1) In terms of how the raga was actually sung and used in compositions, the G3 was likely dropped by major composers around the Trinity period if not earlier.

2) The G3 is anyway almost non-existent in the raga, so it is not clear what is so important about it. G2 occurs much more clearly in the pUrvAnga prayogas. I agree that in some ragas, a change in a swara dramatically increased its popularity. E.g., in AbhEri the D1 --> D2 change dramatically increased its melodic appeal. But in aThANa, the G3 was hardly an important swara in the first place, and most of the raga's prayogas are in the uttarAnga. The main character of the raga is that of the 22nd janyas.

I think I also see the problem. As DRS as pointed out you are taking the case of a kAnaDa where a previous unknown raga came into being under the influence of northern raga. But you are conveniently forgetting that aTANA existed long before that.

You chose to ignore karNATaka kApi which I mentioned in detail in my previous post. That raga was the karnatak forerunner of kAnaDa, and was either modified to kAnaDa (inspired by darbArI kAnaDa) or simply was disused after creation of kAnaDa from darbArI.

In case of aThANa, the same thing is proposed. The existing raga aThANa was either modified (inspired by aDANa) or simply disused after creation of a new raga aThANa from aDANa. Just like in case of kAnaDa and darbArI kAnaDa, the similarly of aThANa to aDANa after the D1--> D2 conversion is high.

I am sorry you have built a castle of a case for aTANA out of air! To be just reiterate "it is firmly established", "very clear", "logical" is not going to make it "solid" (pun intended).

First of all, I never said it was already "established". My purpose in creating this thread was two-fold:

1) To address the issue of melakarta janya classification: This is not trivial and is not simply a question of artificial classification. It is based on the very character of the present raga, which is now increasingly accepted by musicologists to be a 22nd janya. I think the discussion has been exhausted on this topic, and I hope the 22nd janya assignment will become fully established in the literature in the near future.

2) To explore the aDANa-aThANa connection: Again, I have not claimed this is already established. I proposed a theory. We build theories starting from analogy and "conjecture" in addition to facts. Sometimes the intention of theory is to predict other occurrences for which facts are unavailable. If we already knew everything factually, then we would not need musicological theory much.

Can you see the "air" in your castle here? First of all you have zero evidence in texts. But you also start with could have and then build up an elaborate hollow case on conjecture and you have claimed it as "fact" in an earlier post.

When did I ever claim this as an established fact ? What I claimed as established fact are:

1) The process by which DK is converted to aDANa in HM.

2) The process by which DK is converted to kAnaDa in KM, displacing the older karNATaka kApi; or alternatively how karNATaka kApi was changed to kAnaDa inspired by DK. Perhaps both occurred simultaneously.

I then applied the similar principles to arrive at a derivation for aThANa from aDANa.

Again, you have not provided any evidence that this is invalid. Note, "invalid" is not the same as "factually incorrect", in other words some process may be logically valid but may not have actually occurred in that manner.

Let me also define "valid". As you mentioned correctly, it is theoretically possible to generate almost any raga from another one. I never meant that my method is "valid" by this trivial yardstick. When I said "valid", I meant it is valid on basis of principles by which Indian musicologists have derived janya ragas from janaka ragas. In other words, the ragas still are closely connected. Obviously I have no interest in deriving, say, amRtavarShini from SuddhadhanyAsi. I am focusing on a particular case where there is strong melodic link, historical link, and even classificational link (as it turns out we are consideriing only 22nd janya ragas, without confusion from 28 and 29).

On the other hand, neither have I proved that my proposal is factually correct. I never claimed I did. One will be able to:

1) unearth factual evidence to support this, or
2) establish circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt, or
3) establish that there is not enough to support this argument.

I am exploring this issue and I welcome your participation and criticisms (which I am also free to criticize objectively in turn!).

Now it is obvious? I dont believe this!! You obviously felt this way from the beginning. But after I offered my reasons as to why it is weak, you say now it is obvious? Yes this is no discussion here. I feel like I have called into Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly! Pardon for the US reference, but folks in US will relate to this better. These two people are (very popular) talk radio hosts who allow supposedly "any one" to call in and disagree/agree with them. But have preconceived notions on ideas and also about the folks calling in, they simply stick to their side - no matter what!

Oh, come on now, let us leave the melakarta classification aside. I understand that you are unwilling to accept it and I have no problem with that. I am not here to forcibly push my viewpoint down anyone's throat. The entire discussion is public and readers can form their own opinion and compare it with what is increasingly accepted by musicologists.

I am not approaching these discussions with a "win/lose" attitude. I have learned a great deal just from this thread (not to mention the vast number of other threads on this fine forum). I also think that in particular, our friend Dr. Shrikaanth is a very intelligent and musically gifted individual. Let us engage in objective discussions.

CMLover: I would like to respond to your last post here. Thanks for the reference to KVS' text. However, are there also recordings (to your knowledge) wherein the G3 is clearly used ? The thing is, I also have a standard textbook "gAnAmRta varNamAlikA" by Panchapakesa Iyer (published 1989) that has an Adi tALa pada varNa "sAmI ninne" of Patnam Subramania Iyer. The text does not mention G2 at all, though rendering the varNa with G3 sounds totally absurd. If I was an outsider and never heard aThANa, I would get a misleading impression that in 1989 the raga was still rendered with G3.

SR

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 May 2006, 23:59

One demo is worth a thousand words. I would love to hear one aDANa oriented aTHANA which I and others here will accept as aTANa!
Your aalaapana fails to do that!

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 22 May 2006, 00:05

One demo is worth a thousand words. I would love to hear one aDANa oriented aTHANA which I and others here will accept as aTANa!
Your aalaapana fails to do that!

The alapana was not intended to demonstrate this. It was simply karnatak aThANa. And yes, a demo will be forthcoming.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 22 May 2006, 00:15

I am focusing on a particular case where there is strong melodic link....

Listening to HM aDANa and CM aTHANA side by side, they sound quite different from a purely artistic point of view ( the musicological, historical and all other such non-artistic debates aside ). I realize you have stated that the uttarAnga prayogas of these two ragas are similar after the dha substitution. My reaction is, so what? As a lay listener, they do not sound like they are even remotely related, so there is something strongly different between the two in artisitc terms, even if the prayOgas are similar. The aDANAa still has strong traces of DK's romance, softness, 'I am open to a few options here' type of sentiment etc. and lacks the aTHANA's 'putting the foot down' kind of rasA. aTHANA is not about those at all, it seems to be about 'strength', 'no wavering', 'commanding attention' etc.

Even if you succeed in getting supporting evidence historically, musicologically ( whatever that means ) and for the prayOga similarity, the melodic link does not seem to exist when a lay listener just sits down and listens calmly to the two ragas...That is a big deal breaker for your theory.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 22 May 2006, 00:20

Pl don't make sweeping statements

In Kerala, ST's "SrIkumAra" also shows no trace of G3

.

I have the book 'maharAjA Sri svAtitiruNAL k^ritimAlai' presented to me by SSI who himself has notated Srikumara (pp 305-306) with PPMG and S'R',G'R' (occurring at least3 times. Incidentally SSI attributes aTANa to 29th mELa which is what he taught us.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 22 May 2006, 01:00

SR,

Thanks for level headedness in your reply. Better than mine!!

You may be surprised that I am more willing to give the possibility of 22 as one possible melas than you think (or i have led you to believe). It has already been suggested in recent literature. What I am very reluctant is your view that it is clearly to 22 and links to 28 and 29 are weak. I disagree there - i dont think the link to 22 is that strong. I think aTANA will remain ambigous in this respective - so there will be differing view points, and thus conflicting classification (which is where i feel the assignment of ragas to mElas fall short and it is done more to fit to "rules"). I do not think classification to one mela vs other influences ragas like aTANA. So ultimately I just feel "big deal!" :cheesy:

However, I am in the same boat as DRS, cmlover (and now vk) about your theory of aTANA being influenced by aDANA, I just do not think your case is solid there at all. This is melodically but also historically. The connections are very tenuous that it seems like you are making quite a few wide leaps. But you still dont see where we are coming from.

Regarding why I interpreted you claims as fact. You first said your "argument is supported by logic and fact". DRS asked "What fact?". I was thinking the same. Only now you have clarified:

The process by which DK is converted to kAnaDa in KM, displacing the older karNATaka kApi; or alternatively how karNATaka kApi was changed to kAnaDa inspired by DK. Perhaps both occurred simultaneously.

If it is "fact", there has to be evidence supporting this. do you have evidence in texts? First of all (from the references i have) while kAnaDa appears in older texts, karnAtaka kApi doesnt. The ragas have similarities but do you have references as to why k.kapi is kAnaDA's ancestor? Without it, what happens to your argument?

Your presentation of your theory is fine, but to do it scientifically and with logic as you claim you have done, you have take a look back and also look for signs that counter the theory. Otherwise, its like one comes up with a premise and only look for signs that support it. With that way, it is not uncommon for the eventual theory to be built upong premise after premise. I do not know if you did the counter analysis, but from your posts it doesnt seem that way - you seem not open for the opposing arguments. That is quite frustrating to me and i am sure others too

.

I have no doubt you are very knowledgeable in CM. I am also fairly sure I am not that knowledgeable - but I am an avid fan of the history of CM (and earlier music) - that is probably the main reason why I got sucked so deep into this topic passionately

I repeat - that historically from what references i have, your case is very weak to non existent. Now if you can present historical evidence to bolster you claim, and demos as you promised to bolster the melodic evidence, you have a better chance. I am really skeptical that you can turn this around

- but i am willing to be open.

Thanks
Arun

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 22 May 2006, 05:08

Pl don't make sweeping statements
In Kerala, ST's "SrIkumAra" also shows no trace of G3
.

I have the book 'maharAjA Sri svAtitiruNAL k^ritimAlai' presented to me by SSI who himself has notated Srikumara (pp 305-306) with PPMG and S'R',G'R' (occurring at least3 times. Incidentally SSI attributes aTANa to 29th mELa which is what he taught us.

Again, there is obviously a difference between the notation and how it is actually sung. Maybe Semmangudi (like others) continued to use the 29th janya out of tradition in notation and in texts, even though the G3 had long since been dispensed with.

Since Semmangudi has taught you this composition, would you please point out the locations where the G3 occurs ?

Better still, is there a recording available of Semmangudi singing this composition ? I have two recordings of SrIkumAra - one by K.V. Narayanaswami and the other by M. S. Subbulakshmi. For the life of me I cannot see any G3 in either of these renderings. For that matter I do not even see G3 in the tarasthayi theoretical location at "karuNAlavAla" in "elA nI" rendered by Semmangudi:

http://rapidshare.de/files/5776126/01_B ... garaja.wma

Of the gandhara-containing 29th janyas, one of the weakest (and maybe the weakest) gandharas is in Arabhi - "d p m (g) r". Even there you can still hear it in many prayogas. The so-called antara gandhara in aThANa does not even approach this level of strength - because it seems fictional.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 22 May 2006, 05:51

ArunK,

Your presentation of your theory is fine, but to do it scientifically and with logic as you claim you have done, you have take a look back and also look for signs that counter the theory. Otherwise, its like one comes up with a premise and only look for signs that support it. With that way, it is not uncommon for the eventual theory to be built upong premise after premise. I do not know if you did the counter analysis, but from your posts it doesnt seem that way - you seem not open for the opposing arguments. That is quite frustrating to me and i am sure others too .

I think we are on the same page now. My intention so far was to present two proposals, not absolute assertions. The first proposal (janya) was purely "musical" in nature and it has now been corroborated to a substantial extent.

The second one is substantially more complicated and at this stage I have simply made a plausible hypothesis. Considering that I make a living from making proposals and validating them

, I am well aware of the need for critical analysis. My intention is to present a more comprehensive discussion, mainly relying on the musical aspects, and secondarily the existing karnatak and hindustani texts (obviously, there is an array of texts that are not directly accessible to us and hence this aspect cannot be completely dealt with by one person).

Best Wishes,
Sangeet Rasik

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 22 May 2006, 06:06

I am focusing on a particular case where there is strong melodic link....
Listening to HM aDANa and CM aTHANA side by side, they sound quite different from a purely artistic point of view ( the musicological, historical and all other such non-artistic debates aside ). I realize you have stated that the uttarAnga prayogas of these two ragas are similar after the dha substitution. My reaction is, so what? As a lay listener, they do not sound like they are even remotely related, so there is something strongly different between the two in artisitc terms, even if the prayOgas are similar. The aDANAa still has strong traces of DK's romance, softness, 'I am open to a few options here' type of sentiment etc. and lacks the aTHANA's 'putting the foot down' kind of rasA. aTHANA is not about those at all, it seems to be about 'strength', 'no wavering', 'commanding attention' etc.

Even if you succeed in getting supporting evidence historically, musicologically ( whatever that means ) and for the prayOga similarity, the melodic link does not seem to exist when a lay listener just sits down and listens calmly to the two ragas...That is a big deal breaker for your theory.

Without elaborating much on this subject for now, I will simply say: comparing how the ragas "sound to the lay listener" is a weak criterion that is unreliable for all but the simplest cases. Genealogy of ragas in bharatiya sangeet is more complex. Example: to a lay listener bhUpAli, deSkar and mohanam sound almost identical ("s r g p d s"). But they are much different from each other.

I remember the Illustrated Weekly (discontinued since 1993) used to have a humorous photo section on its last page titled "Separated at Birth ?" where they used to compare photos of well-known personalities who look alike but have no blood relation. :cheesy:

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 22 May 2006, 07:07

I remember the Illustrated Weekly (discontinued since 1993) used to have a humorous photo section on its last page titled "Separated at Birth ?" where they used to compare photos of well-known personalities who look alike but have no blood relation.

:cheesy: Indeed the case. For the life of me I can not reliably distinguish between Intel's Andy Grove and Israel's Shimon Peres...

Back to the topic, your example is not a logical response to my point. I agree that just because two look alike, it does not mean they are genealogically related. True. Why is that a logical counterpoint to what I said? ( I do understand what you wrote ).

Also true, outward dissimilarities do not necessarily mean genealogically separate. ( That would have been the counter point ).

But both of these cases tend to be the exceptions. If you bring forth such things, they would be considered extraordinary claims. And extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. In this case, your claim is extraordinary and thus the onus is upon you to provide the extraordinary evidence and not just push under the carpet the counter-evidence that the two do not sound melodically similar to a listener.

In Linguistics, for example, they have found some 'transformational theorems' that can be uniformly applied to determine genealogical relationships between languages even if at the outward level they do not sound the same. Indian music raga genealogy is not such a science. It is still an artistic exercise and you have to go by the artisitic merit rather than any (artificial ) analysis of the lower level items. The musicological and hypothetical analysis has to pass that red-face test.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 22 May 2006, 07:57

For that matter I do not even see G3 in the tarasthayi theoretical location at "karuNAlavAla" in "elA nI" rendered by Semmangudi

You picked the right spot. It must have been S',R',G'G'R', but SSI sings S,R,P'G'R', with the alpa prayOgam (but it is there I know for sure). Also make allowance for mama's characteristic dislike for tAra sancaaram.

I don't have his recording of Sri kumaara but will look for it..

But am awaiting your aDANa--aTHANa demo..

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 22 May 2006, 20:02

SR,

You are making this very hard for me! i dont want to sound like a preacher, but ...

I think we are on the same page now.

I think you are sort of jumping the gun here. The part of my post to which you responded so was the one time I was giving you some leeway :cheesy:. And you grab on to that and claim we are on the same page! The fact that I consider your theory (aTANA from aDANA) as presented so far as (sorry!) bunkum means I dont consider we are on the same page. I may be presumptuous here but all your responses show that you are only looking for points to bolster your side and turning a blind eye and deaf ear to counter points! We have pointed this to you many times - please consider it!

My intention so far was to present two proposals, not absolute assertions.

I am sorry it did not come out that way at all in your arguments later. You can take a poll on everyone who has responded to you if you want. I am confident they will say the same. In other words, your intention may have been that, but your responses havent!

The first proposal (janya) was purely "musical" in nature and it has now been corroborated to a substantial extent.

Can I ask if you read through any existing literature before your proposing your theory? You are most definitely not the first to suggest that aTANA should rightfully belong to 22! (now i know you are grab and proclaim victory - note that in spite of this aTANA will remain ambiguous and defy clear mela classification!). I hope you did read some literarture and forgot about it, because otherwise this shows lack of due diligence - if you are offering theories on history of music, prior due dilgence is a must! Otherwise you are wasting everyone's time! In these cases, it is your responsibility to do proper due dilgence before presenting (and for god sake arguing strongly for it, even when people present counter arguments from history!!!)

The second one is substantially more complicated and at this stage I have simply made a plausible hypothesis. Considering that I make a living from making proposals and validating them , I am well aware of the need for critical analysis.

I want to not sound harsh here (again), but this is going to be difficult. I am going to say this somewhat bluntly so that you will atleast begin to see that there are counter arguments and do further analysis (again - this should have been done before). That there is no historical support you have shown yet (and there is historical evidence to counter it), and others are finding you melodic evidence also as weak, your theory is still a "blue sky" kind of thing - which others are already starting to shoot down. A blunt assessment would be "it is full of conjecture and imagination with wide leaps in logic, and has no due dilgence to back it up". You need to correct this before presenting it.

Arun

kaapi · Post by **kaapi** » 22 May 2006, 21:11

Here is an atANa by veterans MVI and KRP. Hope this gives us a feel of atANA as it was sung in the first half of the previous century.

http://rapidshare.de/files/21105164/09. ... a.mp3.html

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 22 May 2006, 21:56

Dear SR

Could you kindly provide a short resume of your CM/HM training? As I myself who is mainly a rasika had some training under SSI would appreciate knowing your style of analysis based on your musical background. Thank you.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 22 May 2006, 23:03

Dear SR
here is a short synthetic 'aTANa' aalaapan
http://rapidshare.de/files/21115120/ATa ... n.mp3.html
Since every note is under my control I can vouch for the prayOgams.
Please comment!

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 23 May 2006, 00:28

You are making this very hard for me! i dont want to sound like a preacher, but ...

Then take it easy and allow the discussion to unfold without losing calm.

Can I ask if you read through any existing literature before your proposing your theory? You are most definitely not the first to suggest that aTANA should rightfully belong to 22! (now i know you are grab and proclaim victory - note that in spite of this aTANA will remain ambiguous and defy clear mela classification!).

Did I ever say I was the first to suggest this ? Again, I made no claim that any of these proposals are original. If there were others to suggest this, that's great. Indeed I was very happy to see that scholars have already considered this and come to the same conclusion.

The vast majority of posters/readers here are likely not aware of the previous work (and I was not either), but perhaps you were already well aware of the previous work on this subject. In that case, why did you not post a summary of the previous studies like CMLover did (by providing a useful lec-dem from a well-known scholar)? Remember - in my first post I deferred to others who may already be aware of existing work,and asked them to post/summarize those discussions. Instead you made a post asking me to explain my reasons for my proposal, and offering no existing information. I then explained my views. And now you come back and say that others have already done this! My response is - well and good! I am not here to claim that I am discovering new vistas in Indian music - I have made it repeatedly clear that I am here to learn. I am not sure I am interested in running around in circles with you on this.

If I was doing a comprehensive scholarly study of this issue, I wouldn't be doing it on a discussion forum. Not because the participants are unscholarly, but because it is simply not an efficient and highly productive way to do it.

I hope you did read some literarture and forgot about it, because otherwise this shows lack of due diligence - if you are offering theories on history of music, prior due dilgence is a must! Otherwise you are wasting everyone's time! In these cases, it is your responsibility to do proper due dilgence before presenting (and for god sake arguing strongly for it, even when people present counter arguments from history!!!)

I have already said this - my first proposal has nothing to do with history - it is simply an analysis of the raga as it exists today and why its 22nd janya classification is natural.

Arun[/quote]

I want to not sound harsh here (again), but this is going to be difficult. I am going to say this somewhat bluntly so that you will atleast begin to see that there are counter arguments and do further analysis (again - this should have been done before). That there is no historical support you have shown yet (and there is historical evidence to counter it), and others are finding you melodic evidence also as weak, your theory is still a "blue sky" kind of thing - which others are already starting to shoot down. A blunt assessment would be "it is full of conjecture and imagination with wide leaps in logic, and has no due dilgence to back it up". You need to correct this before presenting it.

Sir, I have already mentioned to you that I am well aware of the existence of counter-arguments and I have just begun to make my case based on the hypothesis I made on the second proposal. As I go along I may modify or discard my initial theory as required, but I am sure I and other posters will learn a lot along the way. I do not see any loss of face because of this. You seem to be under an impression that I am somehow intent upon "proving something". I am sorry to ask, but how many more times should I type this so that it becomes clear to you ? I am not going to type the same response to you again, so please let us discontinue this needless argument.

SR

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 23 May 2006, 02:47

Here is an atANa by veterans MVI and KRP. Hope this gives us a feel of atANA as it was sung in the first half of the previous century.

http://rapidshare.de/files/21105164/09. ... a.mp3.html

Thanks for this valuable recording. Do you know when approximately it was made ? The sound quality seems great!

Here is what I learned vis-a-vis the current discussion:

1) Alapana of MVI: Everything sounds the same as in other aThANa versions, and the G3 is used in the "expected" theoretical location once (2:04).

2) kRti (elalo praNatArthiharuni) : shows no application of G3.

3) kalpana swara: G3 appears again in the same "G M R S" prayoga towards the very end (at 10:02).

Following up on the Subramanian lec-dem, one can understand why the prayoga "G3 M R S" supports the belief that this is a 29th janya raga.

Currently this prayoga is not used and its classification is a 22th janya.

If the other participants in the discussion are basing their views on the traditional rare application of G3 despite the main character of the raga which is G2-oriented, then I agree that the mela would seem hard to classify for those folks.

My viewpoint is based on consideration of its main character as seen in important compositions and its lakshaNa. I support a more "rational" rather than "traditional" view of this raga. Also from a purely personal point of view, I find the G3 in aThANa rather distortive of its character, and hence I do not use it.

At the risk of annoying the "traditionalists" further (and no annoyance is intended), I might add that if the "G3 M R S" prayoga indeed contributed anything substantial to the main aesthetic of this raga, then the community at large would not discontinue its usage.

SR