Article - South Indian Performing Arts: Whence? Where Now? W

coolkarni · Post by **coolkarni** » 18 Jan 2007, 07:35

Still trying to figure if my last post could have been offensive in any way

I am also doing the same....

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 18 Jan 2007, 07:55

Music wrote:Jeez, some reason I always expected only kind words in vgvindan's posts. Still trying to figure if my last post could have been offensive in any way.

I don't think anyone has taken offence or is unkind - I think they are expressing the feeling that nothing much is likely to come from these discussions...that's all!

jayaram · Post by **jayaram** » 18 Jan 2007, 16:24

Based on my observation, there seem to be two broad categories of rasikas: one who focus on the musical (i.e. ragam and layam) aspect of the song, the other more on the sahityam. (I am sure there are rasikas who are a combo of both, but this categorization is more to highlight my point below!)

I must admit I belong to the former group (i.e. not focused on sahityam). I've been listening to CM for >3 decades, but don't pay much attention to the words of a kriti, even if the composition is in a language I understand, e.g. Tamil or Malayalam, and Sanskrit to some extent. So long as the words sound nice and go well with the feel of the ragam, I am happy. I agree with the following line from a recent excerpt Meena posted under the S. Ramanathan thread:

The most important aspect of our music is the melodic and rhythmic framework of the compositions - not the lyrics.

I am definitely NOT trying to revive the lyrics vs raga topic (debate?) we've had before, but the point I want to make is that I feel I am a valid card-carrying CM rasika even though I don't pay attention to (or understand) the words. And people like me are plenty out there, so let's not keep them out of the rasika world. Just as technical discussions on ragam and talam should not put off one group of potential rasikas, very involved sahityam debates should not keep the other group out either.

And I definitely believe the sahitya-challenged group can find moksha thru CM - possibly they will end up in a heaven devoid of words, but hey that may not be that bad!

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 18 Jan 2007, 20:48

You have a point there, Jayaram. We rasikAs are a varied lot. While some are keen on ONE aspect of CM (and are proficient in it too), some are absorbed in other aspects of it. My not being knowledgeable in tALA doesn't mean that I am indifferent to it. I know, music and the lyrics sound better with the beat. I am all agog with the patterns percussionists make, though I do not understand them. I am not able to grasp the intricacies of tALam and it doesn't bother me. SAhityA isn't a tyranny to me

It enhances my enjoyment of music. When we consider it, as rasikAs, we are all about enjoying music--each in his or her own way...

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 18 Jan 2007, 20:58

i dont know how it got to this. Who was implying that you attain salvation only if you understand lyrics? J ust because you understand them and can appreciate them from the bottom of your heart, doesnt mean you get a free ticket or a privileged pass. You got to live it. You may perhaps have a good chance (not necessarily a guarantee) of living it if you appreciate the morals behind the lyrics deeply, but then you may have that chance even otherwise! It does not matter if you listen to cm just for music, or just for lyrics, or for both music and lyrics, or not listen to cm!

Again all this as per hindu (and most world) religion and philosophy, which you are free to buy into or not

.

I did imply that if you understand the lyrics your enjoyment maybe deeper - but i was referring to what some may say *at me* (who dont understand most of the great songs i adore), and that *i think* they may have a point. Obviously others dont have to agree

Arun

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 18 Jan 2007, 21:28

arunk,
I don't know what you mean by 'how it got to this'; 'the morals behind the lyrics' is another thing I am doubtful about. Not every song we appreciate is a lesson in morality. As a matter of fact, some may hint at morality, but that's not all. A song could be adoration of an Ishta dEvatA, an expression of awe about the beauty of God's creation and so on. A beautiful song elevates our spirits. With some, it could mean higher levels of spirituality (agreed), with others, it could just be aesthetic appreciation. Others may incorporate both in varying measures. That's why I said we come in all varieties. I used the word 'tyranny' because there was a long thread called the Tyranny of SAhityA! I enjoy sAhityA. It is neither a tyranny nor the only requisite for my enjoyment of music...

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 18 Jan 2007, 21:57

arasi,

arasi wrote:I don't know what you mean by 'how it got to this';

i sensed that some were thinking that people were implying understanding lyrics was better spiritually etc. and jayam's latest post mentioning something like hope people who dont understand lyrics attain moksha. That is what i was referring to.

'the morals behind the lyrics' is another thing I am doubtful about. Not every song we appreciate is a lesson in morality. As a matter of fact, some may hint at morality, but that's not all. A song could be adoration of an Ishta dEvatA, an expression of awe about the beauty of God's creation and so on. A beautiful song elevates our spirits. With some, it could mean higher levels of spirituality (agreed), with others, it could just be aesthetic appreciation. Others may incorporate both in varying measures.

Agreed. When i mean morality implied in lyrics, i mean you take the entire body of work of a composer (like tyAgarAja). Individual songs may not speak as much and as vgvindan points out may actually be inappropriate even in case of tyAgarAja who was quite open in his songs.

That's why I said we come in all varieties. I used the word 'tyranny' because there was a long thread called the Tyranny of SAhityA! I enjoy sAhityA. It is neither a tyranny nor the only requisite for my enjoyment of music...

I agree. I will offer one more thought though at the risk of resurrecting lyrics vs music - as much as i am figting it, the steering wheel is turning in that direction!

Let us say there was an offensive song (i mean really offensive if you know the meaning), which was written in beautiful poetical form (this is quite possible), and then woven with the majic of a major rakthi raga (pick your most favorite here). Someone who doesnt know the language, has no clue the meaning, hears it a few times and falls in love to it. Then he/she runs into someone who says if you really understood this song, it is quite offensive and crappy, and tells him/her the meaning.

How many would (a) develop revulsion and drop the song fully from their tastes (b) do change their stance but still see it as a "guilty pleasure" since the magic of the tune is still there, and words in a language they dont understand dont carry enough power to their minds enough to lessen that magic (c) dont mind at all since they say "the song's tune has a magic on me which is very very enjoyable that it doesnt matter"

I would like to fall in (a), but feel somewhat uneasy that i may fall into (b)

! But then there is probably a degree of subjectiveness here. The "degree of offensiveness" for us to move from (c) to (b) to (a) would vary among each of us.

Now this of course is perhaps an extreme, and is also not talking about better enjoyment of music - but why not understanding lyrics can be undesirable and thus saying i will enjoy something even if dont understand lyrics can be undesirable. One could make a similar argument for a song which has deeper meaning (and thus understanding can enhance enjoyment) - but i am not sure it can be as sensationalistic

!!

Arun

bala747 · Post by **bala747** » 19 Jan 2007, 09:05

Arunk, the first thing I thought of when I read your posts was 'javalis'. Many javalis are composed in languages that the average Tamil CM Singer doesn't understand. Some of the language as we know can be very 'graphic'. The last thing you might want to sing if you're a top female singer (insert name of favourite/least favourite/most alluring famous female singer here) is what you expect your man to do to your breasts or some such vivid description of the kind of stuff that goes on behind closed doors. (Disclaimer: I am not intending this to be offensive to any particular artiste, I was just referring to some Javalis whos meaning can be extremely, ahem, 'wild'). In fact one of ST's javalis was so vivid, TKG just 'refused' to translate, leaving me with a cryptic statement along the lines of 'a woman describes a night of passion with her lover in vivid detail' (I am paraphrasing his exact quote in his book on ST Compositions)

Strangely enough, I find it amusing when men sing the Purvikalyani javali of Pattabhiramaiah, Nee Maatale Maayanura! I don't know why, but the concept of a man tellign another man 'you trickster, always filled with false promises!' in a supposedly cheeky tone is highly amusing to me.

If someone sings a tamil javali would the audience leave or be offended? Do audiences in Andhra run out when someone sings a particularly racy one? How do they explain it to their kids?

Incidentally are there any Javalis in Tamil? I heard from someone that tamil is not a language that is readily amenable to erotic literature (But then again he's a hardcore Malayali fanatic).

Music · Post by **Music** » 19 Jan 2007, 19:15

bala747 wrote:Some of the language as we know can be very 'graphic'.

Same thing goes with Annamacharya's Sringara kirtanas. Wonder if we are really eligible to be so graphic about activities between Lord Venkateswara and his consort. I always thought Annamayya did that to reach out to the masses and make the bhakti theme reach out to them, given that the language in his kirtanas is old Telugu with a lot of colloquial words used by weavers and other groups of people. But that is my personal explanation to be able to sing the kirtanas. Otherwise it is hard to render them if you know the meaning.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 19 Jan 2007, 20:31

bala,

I was thinking of a (hypothetical) contrived example where the intention behind was deep in malice.

But javalis are a good example too. The idea is to pick a sentiment that you would find offensive (which as i mentioned is subjective).

If someone sings a tamil javali would the audience leave or be offended? Do audiences in Andhra run out when someone sings a particularly racy one? How do they explain it to their kids?

I would put it a bit differently and more personally. If a certain kind of sentiment in offends you, would it offend you less if it was in a song in language that you dont understand as opposed to a song in your native language or a language you understand very well and can relate to?

To make crass comparison, while in college in india, i remember more than once hearing that "swear/vulgar words" in one's native language, made a person cringe more and he felt it less offensive (and hence easier to use

) if it were in other language - e.g. English!

Incidentally are there any Javalis in Tamil?

I believe there are but not sure of details.

Arun

venkatpv · Post by **venkatpv** » 19 Jan 2007, 20:40

singing graphic tamil lyrics gives the singer a jaw-vali... so nobody ventures into it

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 19 Jan 2007, 20:46

:LOL
Venkat,
With that big of a bite (kaDi) your jaw must be hurting as well!

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 19 Jan 2007, 21:11

arunk wrote:
>>To make crass comparison, while in college in india, i remember more than once hearing that "swear/vulgar words" in one's native language, made a person cringe more and he felt it less offensive (and hence easier to use

) if it were in other language - e.g. English! <<

Yes, with respect to using cuss words, using them in a language different from your mother tongue is considered OK (actually more respectable!). I noticed it among Indians in the US who use four-letter words in English at the drop of a hat--it is even more so among college-educated Indians in INDIA!

As for jAvaLis ignorance is bliss in this case! If you don't understand the language but the music is good you are in paradise (especially for those who insist only on melody and rhythm ignoring sahityam). Look at how popular some of the rap music songs are in the US (and in India too). The language is awful in many cases openly mentioning rape, orgy, violence, sex, and murder. If you are a rap fan and gloss over the words, the melody and rhythm is acceptable to you. Human nature, as it is, perhaps permits accepting such "unacceptable" words so long as one is not subject to such undesirable activities oneself. Look at how much interest people exhibit in watching movies which are full of violence and sex.

Coming back to jAvaLis, I do not understand the reason for them. Are the composers going overboard in giving vent to their suppressed basal instincts? That is what I think. Even some of Annamacharya's kritis indicate description of female anatomy---not of mortals mind you-- but the goddess. It is also true of some other padams. If one wants to listen to erotic descriptions, there are so many other places--definitely not CM. Those who understand the language and still insist the music is good justify their stand by saying, "it is all jIvAtma-paramAtmA stuff"!Imagine that!

So going back to my earlier remark, ignorance is really bliss--what you don't know does not hurt!

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 19 Jan 2007, 21:28

On a recent trip, my wife brought back a coffee table book brought out by the Royal Academy in London to commemorate the exhibition of chOlA bronzes (see this blogspot for a review: http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/12/31/082040.php) - in that book, tonnes of poetry from comtemporaneous tamizh poets have been translated into english by the author. When I first saw the book, I thought it would be lovely to share it with my daughter, as it has numerous bharatanATyam poses - especially of naTarAja. But, once I saw what the poems actually described, I have hidden the book in mortification. Not just annamACArya, but many of our tamizh saints took such liberties with descriptions of pArvatI and other female deities - it would make a sailor or courtesan blush! It certainly is no coffee table book!

Kiran/DRS, if you get a chance, do not miss the exhibition. I am told that it is a musician/dancer's delight!

vasya10 · Post by **vasya10** » 19 Jan 2007, 22:01

If one wants to listen to erotic descriptions, there are so many other places--definitely not CM.

No, I think sringAra rasa is a part and parcel of indian poetry & music. Tiruvalluvar had dedicated an entire section for it. kAlidAsa's kumArasambhava is so descriptive that my Samskrita teacher told me that a couple of cantos had to be "censured". Im pretty sure there are lot of tamil poetry too of this variety. Bhakti in CM is a later evolution, so we cannot judge what must be in CM and what must not.

Also, several of recent tamil film songs are pretty crass, but people still sing it. I think its just in the subjective mind. Even if you understand the meaning and you decide to gloss over it (or putting the excuse on tune), the lyrics are alright. But if the mind predetermines that its an offensive content, it wouldnt matter if its a different language or not.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 19 Jan 2007, 22:17

vasya10 wrote:[I think its just in the subjective mind. Even if you understand the meaning and you decide to gloss over it (or putting the excuse on tune), the lyrics are alright. But if the mind predetermines that its an offensive content, it wouldnt matter if its a different language or not.

True it is most definitely subjective in practice but there in lies the rub. Different people can justify many different things this way and some maybe downright offensive to you. Consider just vulgarity which is more on the subjective end, but take something less subjective and more clear-cut as malice (as mahakavi's examples in other genres).

But even within the world of subjectivity consider this. Forget whether a particular sentiment is universally right or wrong, and hence whether it should apply more broadly to all of us. Think of it this way. If something is offensive to you, and let us limit it only to you, is it less offensive when delivered in a melodically fabulous tune we dont understand, even after meaning is explained to you? Would it matter if you fell in love with the tune before? What does this mean to you?

Tying this back to spirituality - the message from spiritual masters would (IMO) be simply that if you let your mind and ego do the work (which is so for just about all of us), your own feeings of right vs wrong shifts around. You let go your ego fully, then they dont shift - you wont justify something you feel is wrong no matter how it is "cloaked". Of course that is the ideal, which supposedly very very very very few of us achieve

Arun

jayaram · Post by **jayaram** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:05

It's fascinating how this thread takes various turns...like a river weaving its way, until it reaches its final destination: the great ocean.
Hope we reach our ocean, wherever that is! (jIvAtmuDu paramAtmuDu...)

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:10

vasya10 wrote:No, I think sringAra rasa is a part and parcel of indian poetry & music.

Just remember - sRngAra rasamanjarIm srI kAmAShIm gourIm

(Muttuswamu dIkshita's composition in rasamanjari)

-Ramakriya

jayaram · Post by **jayaram** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:11

Going back to a previous topic in this thread (money and spirituality), Ariyakudi's favorite Kalyani piece was apparently 'nidhi cAla sukhama' - wonder why?

venkatpv · Post by **venkatpv** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:22

ramakriya,
MD has other references too...

kOmaLa kuca kaca bharAnginIm - neelotpalambam i think (was the transliteration correct??)

and one more...
nArI yOnI svAda mOdanE :O - in a kriti in kasiramakriya (BMK sings it)

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:31

Sure MD had many more references too..

But the kriti in kASIrAmakriya deals with more of tantra aspects, than sRngAra IMO, and describes a specific gaNapati sculpture in Tiruvaroor temple I think.

-Ramakriya

jayaram · Post by **jayaram** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:41

Kalidasa's 'mAnikya vINAm upalALayantIm' (sung as an invocatory poem at various functions, often by young children) has quite a graphic description of the goddess in the 2nd line (kucOnnate kumkuma...)

Hindu philosophy and music have had a fairly healthy and open attitude to what are today's 'hush-hush' topics.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:41

ramakriya wrote:But the kriti in kASIrAmakriya deals with more of tantra aspects, than sRngAra IMO, and describes a specific gaNapati sculpture in Tiruvaroor temple I think.

It is about ucciShTha gaNapati, one of the SODaSa gaNapati forms as described in iconography.

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 19 Jan 2007, 23:54

But for all time blushing description, I think kALidAsa's description in kumAra sambhavam probably takes the cake: he describes the path taken by a dew drop as umA/gowrI/pArvatI becomes aparNA and when she is drinking dew drops, one of the drops falls on her brow and travels downwards!

The first caraNam of the song yArO ivar yArO in aruNAchala kavI's ramanATakam also describes sIta's physical attributes through rAma's eyes very literally (this is one repect where AK is different from vAlmIki - who only describes sItA's beauty through rAvaNa's lascivious eyes). Incidentally, this caraNam, which I have not heard sung, is the one that establishes that the song is in refernce to sItA and not sItA's description of rAmA....

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 20 Jan 2007, 02:35

The foregoing posts' tone indicate that anything goes including the "pudenda agenda" of MD. If MD sanctions it who is going to stop?

If I indulge it is OK but if others do it may not be OK--right?

So why then quibble about film songs or rap songs?

gnanasunyam · Post by **gnanasunyam** » 20 Jan 2007, 03:06

As others have pointed out, Indian literature/ arts had no qualms about discussing/ describing topics that are considered low class today. Otherwise, why would our kings allow all those graphic sculptures in temples? There are several Nalangu songs (not usually sung now-a-days) in Tamil that can make one uncomfortable but they do exist!

This (being touchy on some subjects) must have been acquired after Victorian vlaues of the British influenced us and may have begun earlier with muslim influence.

Of couse, a lot depends on context- a bad movie song may actually be enjoyable/ appropriate in the context of the movie where it may appear for a few minutes while the same song as an audio or a stand-alone video may be unbearable.

If we forget the context and view the raw meaning only, we will be missing a lot of good things in life. Even Valluvar may become a 'bad' poet!

coolkarni · Post by **coolkarni** » 20 Jan 2007, 04:14

Hindu philosophy and music have had a fairly healthy and open attitude to what are today's 'hush-hush' topics.

The first time My maternal grandma came to live with us , after a three day journey from Karnataka to Bihar , she was aghast see me and my Dad play cards for stakes at Home.
Strict Lady that she was , she had to contend with this justification from her darling Son In Law.
" There is no doubt that this brat is going to learn it , somewhere or the other.It is better That I teach these things right here so that he gets rid of the fancy value attached to them and does not land himself into trouble ,elsewhere.He can see things for what they are really worth better, here.."

Maybe that was the reason for all this kind of exposure ,in Temples and literature ,we are talking of.

vasya10 · Post by **vasya10** » 20 Jan 2007, 06:01

But for all time blushing description, I think kALidAsa's description in kumAra sambhavam probably takes the cake: he describes the path taken by a dew drop as umA/gowrI/pArvatI becomes aparNA and when she is drinking dew drops, one of the drops falls on her brow and travels downwards!

oh yes, that was one of the slokas i had in mind when I posted about kAlidAsa.

Though its slightly taking the topic away from the main issue, I would like to post that particular sloka:

stithAH kshaNaM pakshmasu tAditAdhArAH
payOdharOtsedha nipAta chUrNitAH |
balIshu tasyAH skhalitAH prapedire chireNa
nAbhim prathamodabindavaH ||

vsnatarajan · Post by **vsnatarajan** » 20 Jan 2007, 18:47

umm, my two cents.
in Lalitha Sahasranamaa, the Mother is described as "sringaara rasa Samboornaa" The first 21 lines describes her head to Toe, beautifully. The Soundharya Lahari describes Ambaal beautifully. there are so many temples the presiding Goddess is called by the beauty of Thy Breasts..

one(Men, rather) needs to graduate from seeing women just as gratifying objects and go on to appreciate the beauty of a woman as created by God. it is very difficult but comes slowly.

The most beautiful Woman.

Whose Waists become burdened by the Lusciousl Bosoms.

Whiose midriff is dotted with Millions of fine little Hair.

The feet like a crimson red.

Oh Divine Mother.

Surrender to Thy Feet.,

The CM Sringara rasa krithis are in similar vein.

Remove the mist of Kaama from our Eyes.

We can appreciate Beauty

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 20 Jan 2007, 19:41

So, man creates (immortal) goddess in a (mortal) woman's image--interesting!

Could he also clothe her decently, please?

Could beauty be appreciated only when naked?

Then why do all the pictures of gods and goddesses appear so resplendent in nice clothes and fine jewelry? If ears can tolerate the description the eyes could too!

Why did so many people object to Hussein's(?) painting the goddess Saraswati in the nude? If you can describe the naked body in words what is wrong in painting it?

Where do we stop?

vsnatarajan · Post by **vsnatarajan** » 20 Jan 2007, 19:52

mahakavi wrote:So, man creates (immortal) goddess in a (mortal) woman's image--interesting!

Why did so many people object to Hussein's(?) painting the goddess Saraswati in the nude? If you can describe the naked body in words what is wrong in painting it?

Where do we stop?

.

Interesting.

when we are all in Good health, parruppu saadham. with rasam, varutha Potato Curry, a dash of curd all goes well in.
When we fall sick, the same thing tastes bitter and causes indigestion. At that time only Arrow Root kanji will go in and and is also good to bring us back to good health

If we are in a good state of mind, beauty of Gods(even nude) goes well. In a slighly degenerated state, Goddesses need to be clothed fully. Further, Gods need not be nude all the time. Surely we can have beautifully dressed, Resplendent Gods. Just the way the We want our Women to be seen to the outside world.

And Man only replicates Mortal Women(Men) created by the immortal one.

vsnatarajan · Post by **vsnatarajan** » 20 Jan 2007, 19:59

and to add, Hussein's painting need not had to be Nude. The on lookers definitely are not like Adi Sankara, devoid of womanly desires. I wonder what was his motive. But then atristes-- That creativive sparks-- it surely never need to be curbed

chalanata · Post by **chalanata** » 20 Jan 2007, 20:08

it is science- the sthri purusha concept. all human and other beings are only women and only the Supreme is Man- the prakruthi and the Purusha.
Hussein's concept is very superficial. we have to ignore it.
Coolji! you will be able to explain this after all these years of experience and seeing all things philosophically. Are you aware of Basavanna's concept of Ardhanareeswara? He said one part was full of diamonds and precious stones and the other was full of wounds filth and dirt.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 20 Jan 2007, 20:19

vsnatarajan wrote:[

If we are in a good state of mind, beauty of Gods(even nude) goes well. In a slighly degenerated state, Goddesses need to be clothed fully.

Exactly my point too! It applies equally to verbal description. It is a degenerate world all over--ears, eyes, touch.......

jayaram · Post by **jayaram** » 20 Jan 2007, 20:24

It is a degenerate world all over--ears, eyes, touch.......

This is a good point of departure to get back to the main topic of this thread.
How can CM help in changing this state of affairs?

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 20 Jan 2007, 20:30

vsnatarajan wrote:And Man only replicates Mortal Women(Men) created by the immortal one.

I should clarify. If we take the Bible, we read that "God created man in His own image". Granted. But then God wanted man/woman to be naked. Upon Satan's seduction man/woman started clothing themselves, right? Accept that premise and extend it further. In our everyday life we clothe ourselves, except during some intimate moments. So a description of ourselves should be about us in our regular attire, as is a picture of us too. Then when man replicates God/Goddess in word or picture in his own image it should be in a clothed form even in devotional verses. That is my point.

vsnatarajan · Post by **vsnatarajan** » 20 Jan 2007, 21:22

mahakavi wrote:Then when man replicates God/Goddess in word or picture in his own image it should be in a clothed form even in devotional verses. That is my point.

I quite agree

Music · Post by **Music** » 21 Jan 2007, 02:44

This is still a digression from the main topic, but I can't help adding my 2 cents worth. Like Viashnavite and Shaivite traditions in Hinduism, there is another line of worship of the Divine Mother/Shakti where she is everything. In this tradition, She is the creator, She is the ultimate. Even gods such as Brahma and Vishnu worship Her (unlike Vaishnavism & Shaivism where Vishnu & Shiva are the ultimate respectively and all other gods are inferior). In this form of Shakti worship, Devi is very vividly described and worshipped. If you notice, many Devi slokas elaborately describe various parts of the Divine Mother & it is not considered as something wrong. Dikshitar would have followed the same in the examples mentioned in some of the above posts. Easy to look at it in the wrong light, but it is a whole philosophy in itself. And this is an ancient concept. The Divine Mother is also described as Digambari, because she is clothed only in space.

ninjathegreat · Post by **ninjathegreat** » 23 Jan 2007, 00:01

Wow! This topic is entertaining, informative and educational at the same time... I'm looking in after a very long time... Busy busy busy!!! Just thought I'll contribute my two pies, on the various sub-topics that have cropped up over the course of the 9 pages of discussions!!!

How does one try to instill classical music into the common man, who preferes light music? I feel that it's the patronage that effects everything. In the old days, zamindars, kings etc use to patronize performers; and there were a large number of such patrons. In fact, in the years fallowing independence, the government patronized the arts. National Programs of music, All India Festival of Music, of Dance, the spirit of Unity concerts... Patronage to music in anyform encourages peoploe to listem. For the common man, the government is more or less God. If a politician does comment on the divineness of Classical music people will listen to it. So, a concerted effort to persuade government/private patronage to the arts is essential. Less commercialization. It's good to be professional and all, but that's forcing performers to sing to available time rather than to sing from the heart. One can see that in quite a few major performers.

Are there any famous/good young hindustani artistes? You don't read about them or hear about them in the papers. At least Carnatic music is reviewed in The Hindu etc...

"poems that make us blush"... well, we should realize that sex & nudity was not taboo in pre-islamic india.. First Islam and then the Victorian British is the reason why we find those topics uncomfortable.. not that I support it's resurgence in movies and all those god awful music videos... But if you see the ancient idols, other than an elborate komanam, and elaborate jewellery, there's not much else clothing them... Even in the Mahabharatha, Krishna's leelais are evidence enough that talking about the above topics were not uncommon... About MFH's painting, needless controversy. He's a painter, and he takes artistic license. Religion was dragged into it, which is what made it all that controversial...

Cheers, Ninja

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 23 Jan 2007, 21:44

Ninjaji - quixk reply to your point about young HM artists - there are plenty of them and they get MUCH more publicity than our artists (who reads Hindu outside Chennai anyway?) - think Amjad's sons, Anoushka Shankar, Purbayan Chatterjeee, the Santoor glam-boy, Meeta Pandit (genuinely very good) - these are just some of the prominent ones. Of course you also have slightly older Sanjeev Abhayankar, Ashwini Bhide etc.

In fact there was an article on India Today or Outlook about a year back about the young HM bridage - it was about how they were increasingly looking at fusion/films etc. There was a small box on how this was exactly the opposite in CM.

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 25 Jan 2007, 12:12

Regarding Eroticism in Temple sculpture, I am reminded of Dharmi (Nagesh) in Tiruvilaiyadal, as he enters the Royal Assembly, where he stumbles at each and every one thinking him to be the king. In his case, the persons, say openly that they are not king. So, he ultimately finds the king.

In the case of temples, there is none to guide excepting our own perception as to what God is. This is what Sri Thyagaraja sings in his kRti 'darSanamu sEya' - Raga nArAyaNa gauLa - http://thyagaraja.sulekha.com/blog/post ... vam-20.htm

In this regard I would like to quote Annie Besant (episode of gOpi vastrApaharaNa)-

The Gopis were Rishis, and the Lord Supreme as a babe is teaching them a lesson. But there is more than that. There is a profound occult lesson behind the story. When the Soul is approaching the Supreme Lord at one great stage of initiation, it has to pass through a great ordeal. Stripped of everything on which it has hitherto relied, stripped of everything that is not its inner self, deprived of all external aid, of all external protection, of all external covering, the soul itself, in its own inherent life, must stand naked and alone, with nothing to rely on save the life of the Self within it. If it flinches before the ordeal, if it clings to anything to which it has hitherto looked for help, if in the supreme hour, it cries out for friend or help, or even the Guru himself, the soul fails in that ordeal. Naked and alone it must go forth, with absolutely none to aid it save the divinity within itself. And it is that nakedness of the soul as it approaches the supreme goal, that is told of in that story.

(Source - http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvi ... page1.html)

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 25 Jan 2007, 21:36

Yes, nothing is wrong in baring yourself (shedding external attachments including clothing) so long as EVERYBODY is in the same state. If all of us go back to prehistoric times and shed our clothing then it would not be a problem since that would be considered standard. When a majority is clothed and then a nudist colony appears it creates a stir.

The description of goddesses need not have to include the anatomy (i.e.,without clothes). All the lAvaNyam of the full figure, lotus-like eyes, pAdAravindamu, and the protecting hands would suffice. Why present something lascivious and then say one has to interpret beyond the description? I say remove the offending portion in the description and don't find fault with those who get offended.

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 25 Jan 2007, 22:22

IMHO, Temple Sculpture has been heavily influenced by Tantra. If you go through the Tantra literature, you will find the evidence. Tantra is also called 'kaula mArga' and in the LalitA Sahasra Namam, one of the epithets of Mother is 'kaula mArga tatpara sEvitA' - One who is worshipped by those who are devoted to the Kaula tradition.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa "... accepted BrAhmani as his guru ... practiced all the disciplines of the sixty-four principal Tantra books ..." (Introduction to Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna - Page 20).
Please also visit the website - http://www.sacred-texts.com/tantra/maha/index.htm to know about Maha Nirvana Tantra. There is one more website dealing with more secret rites about which I would not like refer publicly.

For your information, these rites are still prevalent and practiced in our part of the country by respected people.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 26 Jan 2007, 02:14

Well, this discussion is deepening into uncharted territories. Tantra is incomprehensible to many. So it is better left to the sages and mystics. We should not justify a practice just because some (very few indeed) practiced a voodoo-like methodology called tantra. I do not know enough of tantra (if anything at all) to discuss that and I am not inclined to listening to argument based on tantra. To me if something is not "right" then a thousand angels dancing on the head of a pin would not make it right.

ninjathegreat · Post by **ninjathegreat** » 26 Jan 2007, 02:25

mahakavi wrote:Yes, nothing is wrong in baring yourself (shedding external attachments including clothing) so long as EVERYBODY is in the same state. If all of us go back to prehistoric times and shed our clothing then it would not be a problem since that would be considered standard. When a majority is clothed and then a nudist colony appears it creates a stir.

The description of goddesses need not have to include the anatomy (i.e.,without clothes). All the lAvaNyam of the full figure, lotus-like eyes, pAdAravindamu, and the protecting hands would suffice. Why present something lascivious and then say one has to interpret beyond the description? I say remove the offending portion in the description and don't find fault with those who get offended.

Mahakavi,

It was not my intention to justify eroticism. I'm just pointing out that as an artist, M F Hussein did not have any qualms in representing the goddess as he did. If he had been a hindu, I doubt if the painting would have been controversial. that it would still have offended sensibilities is beyond doubt. We also have to bear in mind in what form Shiva is worshipped in the nation to understand the minds of the ancients. Even eroticism was holy in some way.

Regarding eroticism in poetry/sahitya/songs, if it's crass, it's ugly; if it's subtle, like the javalis we have, and like a lot of ancient poetry, it's beautiful... I think it should be sung and represented with the emotion it evokes...

Vijay, thanks for that info... I hear most of those names in relation to pop/film music rather than hindustani classical... And please don't "ji" me

...

Cheers
Ninja

jayaram · Post by **jayaram** » 26 Jan 2007, 02:47

This practice of glorifying the human body is present in ancient Greek and Roman mythology. Some of their gods' statues can make many people blush even today.

'Paramapurusha' or the ultimate human is the way we describe our gods and their avatars, e.g. Lord Rama. I believe Tyagaraja has described his ishta-deivam's physical beauty in his kritis.

Anthropomorphic representation of god seems to be the basis of several religions.

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 26 Jan 2007, 06:56

Coming back to the original topic of this thread, see the review of Rajesh Vaidya's performance below:
http://www.hindu.com/fr/2007/01/26/stor ... 040200.htm

Maybe this is whither it's headed!

jayaram · Post by **jayaram** » 26 Jan 2007, 07:28

State-of-the-art reflections
http://www.malabarian.com/reflections.html
The writer makes a strong indictment of various segments of CM, including rasikas:

"Under the cloak of spirituality, many important issues are ignored. No one wants to talk about them for fear of being ostracised from the charmed circle of `rasikas'."

"One major danger with the websites is that since anyone can create one, some put `scholarly' information that is not factually correct, and there is no one to check it."

"In an art where sruti is considered the mother and laya the father, today it is money and opportunity that have become the parents."

coolkarni · Post by **coolkarni** » 26 Jan 2007, 08:05

<<Maybe this is whither it's headed!>>

It Started a long time ago .
Roughly at the same time Ravisankar-Allah Rakha drew repeated applauses for their repeated Sawal Jawaabs,

Elsewhere Nikhil Bannerji was asked why he got angry with the audience applause , which erupted 5 minutes before he closed the Raga-already in the throes of a climactic eruption- and he replied...
"55 minutes I took to build up a platform , just for those last 5 minutes of climax.It was all a means to an end ..but obviously they had not got my message.Did I fail in some way.?All that clapping got me mad.No one really heard the best part of the recital-All drowned in the applause.You guys missed it."
Ravi
Take a look at the way people eat a small piece of cake.
Some eat only the icing.
Some labour through the bottom and lap up the icing in one shot.
Some take a measured bite, right across the whole Cake.Everytime.
Wonder, what is the correct way ?

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 26 Jan 2007, 08:07

Kji,
The best thing I think is to have the cake and eat it too!