The tyranny of sahityam!

[jayaram]

People have mentioned elsewhere the importance of sahitya, the correct pronunciation etc etc. To me, a lapse in sahityam is not as problematic as a slip-up in raga bhavam, swara, sruti, etc. Listening to a great musician like Madurai Mani Iyer, often you get the feeling that he uses the keertanai mostly as an excuse to quickly jump into neraval and swara singing.

A few years ago I attended a great katcheri by KVN in Madras, and he seemed to forget the sahityam at couple of places. I just loved it! The great maestro filled the gaps with pure music, and to me that was a divine experience. This from a man whose enunciation was quite crisp.

I read somewhere that the great Tiger once sang a Pallavi using pedestrian words like 'kathirikkai' etc. - perhaps to underscore how unimportant words are to our music!

Having been a lifelong bathroom singer who can never remember words to any song, I am biased in my views, of course...

Jayaram

[arasi]

jayaram,
Agreed. Reproduction of the exact words in a sAhityA alone won't do if there is no bhAvA. To me, MMI raced along (his style) NOT to get to the neraval and the swara bit. All through his singing his love for swarAs went hand in hand with the sAhityA. When he sang maRupaDiyum karuvaDaiyum kuziyil taLLi--he felt it and made the audience feel one with the mood of the song.
As for KVN, yes, as you say, he took great care in conveying the emotion of the song and in spelling out the words in such a clear manner which brought out the beauty of the lines. Not as easy for others. Yes, he did forget the words towards the end of his life. It did not enhance the performance for me. I was filled with regret that such a master was getting forgetful. Again, MMI who did speed through the words due to his immense talent (NOT forgetting his genuine feeling) made me forget that he raced through the words at times. As for our singing songs for our own pleasure, filling the blanks with 'la la la' is fine. Not so in a concert (but for MMI). In HM sometimes, in the elaboration of ragas where a couple of lines of sAhityA are repeated, they are incomprehensible (once I heard the great Bhimsen singing hari as haDi, daDI, hari and so on!). I disregard it. Still, I expect the rest of the sAhiytA in songs that follow to be understandable. If our treasure house of sAhityAs disappeared from the CM stage and concerts contained only ragas and swaras, don't you think you would change your mind about the place of sAhityA in CM?

[coolkarni]

Ah !
People can be so different.

Some object to the Fan Dancer
Some to the Fan

[arasi]

And Ghalib says?

[ninjathegreat]

good one! :)

[vgvindan]

People have mentioned elsewhere the importance of sahitya, the correct pronunciation etc etc. To me, a lapse in sahityam is not as problematic as a slip-up in raga bhavam, swara, sruti, etc. Jayaram

Mr Jayaram,
Slip-up in sAhitya can occur even to the composer himself, but slip-up or lapse is not same as what is rendered wrongly either because of lack of knowledge of the meaning of the word and the message being conveyed in the sAhitya. Probably you are pointing a finger at my thread on Rendering of Thyagaraja Kritis wherein I have highlighted such errors - these are not slip-ups or lapses.
Further, bhAva arises from a notion, an idea, a thought, a feeling which the composer wants to convey. Devotion being the corner stone of Carnatic Music, the bhAva is always towards the Lord. When a sAhitya like 'paramAtmuDu veligE' is rendered in bhAva, the musician transports the rasika to the presence of the Lord Himself. If one slips in sAhitya while in the bhAva, there cannot be any complaint at all, because being lost in the bhAva one may fail in words and rasika would rather appreciate it.
The problem comes in when the audience and musicians are not on the same wave length or the language is not understood by majority of the audience. In such cases, it becomes the duty of the musician to give short introduction to the kriti. I have heard that elsewhere, a brief of what is going to be rendered by the musician is disseminated to the audience before hand so that the sync takes place.

All the same, the title given to your thread is conveying a totally different meaning. I hope You do not mean sAhitya is irrelevant.
V Govindan

[arasi]

V.Govindan,
Your concern for sAhityA is known on this forum and is well appreciated. I don't think Jayaram employs the word tyranny in a serious sense. I suppose he thinks some of us take sAhityA too seriously (he can whistle like a pro perhaps!)
No doubt, knowing the language heightens our appreciation of the song but when the song is bhAvA laden, the language barrier can disappear. A receptive audience helps too in transmitting the feeling to you and of course, similar sounding words in your own language help here and there. In another thread we are discussing entry into temples. The concert hall (like the temple) should be open to all. Hopefully, all of us who enter them do so with due respect, especially to sAhityA

[jayaram]

Read the following excerpts from back in 1995 in the newsgroup rec.music.indian.classical:
==========================================================
From: Srini Pichumani
Date: Fri, May 26 1995 8:00 am

1. In general, Sanskrit pronunciation of most speakers shows a
marked influence of their regional languages and mother-tongues.
This is a very well-established fact in scholarly circles. One
can read up on this in the varied writings of Sanskrit/Vedic
scholars like Prof.Frits Staal, Prof.Deshpande, etc...

In my own limited observation, I have found that most Telugu speakers
pronounce the syllable "tya" with a sound close to "ccya" (ergo, no
Telugu can sing a Tyagaraja kriti right by definition ) - I have
observed this in normal speech, and in C.music, of varied people such
as my classmate Kambhampati Subbarao, our local music teacher Bhanumati
auntie, Balamuralikrishna, Nedanuri, Hyderabad brothers, and so on...

Most Telugu speakers also mix up the fricative s (as in sAgaram)
and the sibilant sh (as in shAnti or peace), and use the retroflex
L unnecessarily (as in kalA vs kaLA) - this includes the great
infallible Balamurali, and lesser mortals like Hyd brothers...

Some Telugu speakers may wax eloquent about shAstra (or shAstramu)
but most of them cannot pronounce the open vowel ending of the
first syllable "shA" correctly... they tend to pronounce it
somewhat similar to the first syllable in the name Shannon.

The influence of Malayalam on the Sanskrit pronunciation of
Keralites has been very well remarked upon by Frits Staal in
his small monograph "Nambudiri Veda Recitation". This point
is all the more noteworthy since the Nambudiris have retained
quite possibly THE MOST archaic, "authentic", Vedic traditions
and have been held in great respect on that account. And, it
is well known that the emphasis on proper pronunciation and
enunciation cannot get any more anal than in the Vedic tradition.

Recently, there was a note on the Indology list, by a graduate
student at Harvard working on the Paippalada rescension of the
Atharva Veda, relating to the typical peculiarities of Kashmiri
Sanskrit pronunciation and the problems it creates in reconstructing
the text.

Bengali pronunciation is a classic of its own

2. Sanskrit words when borrowed into regional languages undergo
various phonetic changes. This again is a thoroughly established
fact e.g. "rUpa" becomes "rUpamu" in Telugu, rUp in Hind (I find
this rear end chop feature of Hindi particularly unaesthetic; of
course, the standard Mehmood parody of S.Indians reflects precisely
the opposite opinion i.e. that S.Indians use a lot of "open-ended"
words), and "uruvam" in Tamil. There is no big deal or "objective"
wrong that arises on this count - at least there shouldn't be,
speaking from a humanist viewpoint.

Thus, while Shanmukhapriya may be pronounced as such in normal
Sanskritic discourse, when it occurs in a Tamil kriti like
"saravaNa bhava" the third syllable sounds closer to the voiced "g".

When "artha" gets borrowed into Telugu, it definitely sounds like
"arda", as in "ardamu"... in Malayalam "nt" always gets changed to
"nd" even in Vedic recitation ...such "corruptions" don't seem to
bring the house down however... it is always the the Tamil case that
gets pointed out...

3. When it comes to native language pronunciation, there is no
pervasive unanimity either, due to regional, dialectual, variations
and such. In the limited context of kritis, I have asked enough
native Telugu speakers about which is right "telusukoNTi" or
"delusukoNTi", "daramA" or "taramA", "cUDa" or "jUDa", etc...
The answers in most such cases have always seemed more HUMANISTIC
than the hawkish opinions presented on the net. For example, our
neighbor in Madras, Kandaswami Naidu gAru, originally from SulurpETA,
just shrugged his shoulder, and said both are correct.

4. Another important point to consider in this whole affair - specifically
when it comes to evaluating the pronunciation of Tyagaraja kritis -
- would be the particular dialect of Telugu found in and around the
Tanjavur/Trichy districts. Prof.Sambamoorthy and others have remarked
very briefly on this topic - about its relations to Rayalaseema language
etc... We need to know more about this, hence one cannot accept
corrections, emendations, and such, of the lyric and the pronunciation
based on some woolly notions of "pure telugu", or Krishna/West Godavari Dt
lingo.

5. The use of language in musical compositions, particularly
of the highly melismatic variety like varNams, pallavis, krtis,
padams, as opposed to the simpler gItams, kIrtanas, etc, is
essentially a "meta-linguistic" use, from various viewpoints...

This is no figment of my imagination or an ad-hoc rationalization;
apart from what I have gathered by my own observations, my own
very feeble and humble attempts at singing, I have heard/read
equivalent statements to this effect from serious musical scholars
like Sangita Kalanidhi T.V.Subba Rao, Sandhyavandanam Srinivasa Rao,
Prof.P.Sambamoorthy, Sripada Pinakapani, Prof.V.V.Sadagopan etc...

For example, when you look at compositions from a combined musical
and prosodical viewpoint, there are various rhetorical devices
employed that result in AUTOMATIC padaccEdam, different points of
stress in words than what one would encounter in regular speech or
pronunciation, different and conflicting elongation values regardless
of syllable length, and other such issues that tend to throw off the
pronunciation of even a careful musician or a native speaker.

Prof.Sambamurti writes under the title PadaccEda (South Indian Music,
pg.301, Book IV, 3rd edition):

"There are many instances of songs wherein words and even proper
names have been literally dissected in order to conform to the rules
of prosody. The word or name is so split up, that the second part
is sung at the commencement of one pAda or Avarta and the first part,
at the end of the prior pAda or Avarta. This is a license that has
been enjoyed by composers from ancient times. Such splitting up,
in order to suit the exigencies of music, is found in the sAma gAna
also, wherein words are permitted to be detached and grouped to suit
the music. This splitting up of words constitutes another link
between poetry and the sAhitya of musical compositions.

The padaccEda in musical compositions, is necessitated not only by
the requirements of prosody but also by the rule that there should
be an equitable distribution of words in the sections of an Avarta"

And the Professor gives numerous instances of kritis where these
occur.

Now, Prof.V.V.Sadagopan, in an interesting article in the Journal
of the Music Academy, draws attention to the fact that Tyagaraja
kritis seem to be the most difficult to sing in this context. He
says that of the 400 kritis he looked into, of which 280 were in
Adi tAla, either in 1 kaLai or 2 kaLai, with 1/2, 3/4, and 1.5
eDuppu - more than 50% have padaccEdam because of the aRuDi i.e.
the midpoint of the tALa, or because of the Avartana end. And
there are various kritis of his in other tALas too where this is
a common feature.

What is more fascinating is that the frequency of this increases
in his later kritis. And the kriti "giripai nelakonna", which is
famous as one the last kritis of the saint, is replete with this.

So, was Tyagaraja LOSING it ???

Hardly. The fusion of word and sound, brimming with the phonoaesthetic
qualities of yati and prAsa, that the Saint wrought in his kritis
is sublime. In some sense, he seems to have intentionally broken
the tyranny of unduly tight coupling between the musical "meter" i.e.
tALa and the word flow... giving a boost to the vast rhythmic
potentials in Carnatic music. (In fact, Rangaramanuja Iyengar
faults Dikshitar on this very count by saying that entire sections
of Dikshitar kritis fall on the tALa counts, giving rise to a
certain monotony. And in a converse sort of way, a very astute
friend of mine, K.N.Raghavan, used to assert that learning Dikshitar
kritis came much much easier to him because of the even flow of
word and rhythm - of course his observation flies directly in the
face of most others' who find the melodic details of Tyagaraja
kritis much easier to learn, speaking in a general sense.)

Leaving aside padaccEdam, we have "unnatural" stresses like
"va" in dEvaki
"gE" in rangEshuDu
"dra","la" in indra nIla maNi
"ga" in ninnu vinAga mari (of Syama Sastri)
and breaks in between words due to "distance" between svaras as in
om - kAra - panjaragI - ra
bhavakeshavA - dirUpavA - savaripu
paramabhA - gavata

In fact, the flow in "jagadAnanda kAraka" is so rocky and
turbulent that it can humble most people's attempts at
understanding the lyrics on the fly, even if they hear a
perfect rendition and have an adequate vocabulary of their
own. The phrase "a nurA garA garA jita kathA sA rahita" is
enough to cause an upset stomach

So what does one make of this (tyAgarAjarukku konjam pOralayO -
SRJ muses thus, rhetorically, when discussing certain petty
suggestions regarding Tyagaraja kritis... literally, it means
"was Tyagaraja not upto it ?")

The only sense I can make out of this is that you can carry
notions of "literality" only so far, and can't keep harping
on it... or else you have to settle for the EXTRA-POETIC
renditions of people wherein they dislodge the makeup of
the kriti to enhance the literality - for instance, Prof.V.V.
Sadagopan points out how unaesthetic the rendition of
raghuvara nannu maravatagunA
sounds if you change it from its setting of
raghuvara nannu ma - ravatagunA
in order to join the two parts of the last word...

or from
enduku peddala va...
to
enduku peddalavala ...

for exigencies of literality. Similar instances have been
very clearly demonstrated by Sandhyavandanam Srinivasa Rao.

Balamurali, in particular does this blatantly on occasion in
the name of preserving sAhityam and it sounds abominable - maybe
the language freaks gloat over this ... Yet, on other occasions,
he enhances the literality in a lot more subtle and thoughtful manner
which makes it very appealing.

==========================================================
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan
Date: Tues, May 30 1995 12:00 am

Sahitya does have its importance, but when it threatens to achieve higher
importance than other purely musical dimensions, it is time to deemphasize
its role. Sama gana does this by introducing meaningless syllables to fill
gaps, the older geetams, including Analekara in Suddha Saveri, have
"nonsense" syllables in them.

As for Jagadanandakaraka, it is impossible to split the words according to
grammatical rules if you want to maintain musical structure. Thyagaraja
seems to have composed the kriti deliberately that way - the swara
passages would make no sense otherwise. Clearly, the composer's intention
is to subordinate the sahitya to the dominant melodic structure.

A large part of why kritis by some modern composers don't cut it seems to
be because of an overdue importance being paid to sahitya. Music is made
subservient to the composer's lyrics, and the result is mediocre, at best.
Moreover, since the goal is ostensibly to create a musical composition,
these compositions are not even good poetry. A very sad state of affairs.

=========================================================
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.musi ... ion+course

[Mahesh]

Very interesting.

If as people say Shaitya is just a sort of "filler" to music, then why bother with them? Let's just have alapanai and swarams. if someone sang a beautiful Kalyani in the Music Academy with a song with double meanings all over the place, will not the carnatic community protest? After all it's the music that matters, not sahitya. If one matters and the other doesnt [as in normal song and a song with double meaning], shouldn't people make sure that the words they are singing are correct? So is it OK as long as the composer meant it nice but the artist is killing it with mis-pronounciation / improper breaks etc ....but the music makes up for it. So it's all nice and easy. Pathetic.

Sometimes I wonder ...did Thyagraja actually did these for spirutal benefit or just composing for the sake of composing? Now if he composed for spirituallity then tala / musical correctness goes out of the window. No imporper breaks etc, sing it as *he* supposed to have sung it. On the other hand if tala / musical correctness did matter to him that much then spirituality goes out of the window, as the sahitya will not mean what he wanted to convey or completely mean the opposite.

I personally think it's the tala that's the hinderance, look at the Odhuvar's singing pann's. Beautiful ragam, no improper breaking up, pronounced correctly. Something to learn?

[ramakriya]

Very interesting.

Sometimes I wonder ...did Thyagraja actually did these for spirutal benefit or just composing for the sake of composing?

Not exactly relavent to the sAhitya discussion going on here, but something relavent to the question above.

Whatever opinion we have about composers like Tyagaraja and Muttuswami Dikshita, and their spiritual beliefs, we should not forget they were musicians first, and foremost.

So, definitely they have composed at least some of their compositions for the sake of composing say, in a new rAga, or for showing differnt facet of a rAga etc.

I think that is true for all composers. I read somewhere about Patnam composing nijadAsavaradA (kalyani) such that it was quite different from all the Tyagaraja kritis in that rAga ( Tyagaraja has 30+ compositions in Kalyani)

-Ramakriya

[arasi]

Jayaram,
Interesting essay by sri.Pichumani.
SAhityA is an integral part of music. CM is tradition and it has more or or less been accompanied by sAhityA all along. Which came first? When we analyse music, we look at different aspects of it in a manner in which we study medicine--of the human body by its nervous system, digestive system and so on. These systems function in us in unison. Now to vocal music. Of course, you can give a concert of just rAgAs. It may be pleasing--after all, we do enjoy instrumental music. SwarAs are neither rAgAs nor sAhityA--yet they are not just vowel sounds as of rAgA. When man spoke no words, he wanted to communicate more effectively than with just sounds and gestures. Words were born. They were connected with objects and emotions. In music, sAhityA plays an important part. A concert where a vocalist just sings alApanA, however good he or she is, it would still be incomplete.
About composers: Songs are not like prose. It seems reasonable to say that songs are spontaneous expressions of the emotions of spirituality or bhakthi of a composer. If music is part of the composer's life, it is all the more true.
Let us take Professor V.V.Sadagopan's article in the Academy journal. While we take him seriously on what he has to say about tyAgarAja kritis, we do not take that particular analysis to be his only thoughts on tyAgarAjA! I knew him well enough to say that he adored T's compositions and those of other great compsers. He was himself a composer. His sensitivity for sAhityA and love for literature brought to the concert hall the first CM concert of kamba rAmAyaNA songs which he had set to music. Earlier, an all bhArathi songs concert at Ettayapuram. SSI said that of all the vidwAns who tuned Ambujam Krishna's songs, VVS was most sensitive to sAhityA.
How many times have we thrashed and trashed:) sAhityA on the forum! Even those of us who give prominence to words call the regional pronounciation quaint and aesthetically quite pleasing. Sometimes, separating a word can't be helped. Fine. But even the most beautiful voice can't do anything without bhAvA--and bhAvA can't be brought about without an understanding and feeling for the composition. All can't be MSS, we say. She is the ultimate when it comes to bhAvA and clarity. So, we have someone to emulate. I ask my friends: would you be happy to listen to MSS singing just rAgAs or for that matter any or all of your favored singers? I don't know...

[Vishnampettai Jayendran]

ok i skimmed thru the Ramayana, and have the dumb question of course... Who is Rama? umm I mean what is Saahitya?

[arasi]

That's one of the few things I know. He is sItA's chittappa (chinna nAynA, chikkappA, kAkAji or whatever). The thamizh saying goes: viDiya viDiya rAmAyaNAm kETTu sIthaikku rAman chittappA enRu solvadu pOl (to hear the story of rAmAyaNA all night and say rAmA is an uncle of sIta)

[vasanthakokilam]

Well.. then.. if we are on that light banter bandwagan answering VJ's question, that word talks about what a popular swara 'sa' is ( sa hit ya!! ).

[arasi]

VK,
YA HIT the SAriyAna (right) note on SAhitya:)

[jayaram]

Sahityam:
(from Wikipedia)

"Sahityam literally means literature, and is used to refer to the lyrics of a Carnatic music composition. Vocalists are required to know the sahityam of a composition thoroughly because it plays an important role in the expression of bhakti."

This is just in case VJ was asking a genuine question!

[jayaram]

Well.. then.. if we are on that light banter bandwagan answering VJ's question, that word talks about what a popular swara 'sa' is ( sa hit ya!! ).

And of course, don't ever say 'Sa hi tya' - the sahitya police will be after you!

[Vishnampettai Jayendran]

cool. gotcha. I am totally sahityam less then!
know only srgmpdns. cant understand a single word of telugu, and dont follow tamil lyrics in real time either.

[Vocalist]

"Vocalists are required to know the sahityam of a composition thoroughly because it plays an important role in the expression of bhakti."

This is a very important point... (hint hint VJ)

[chetana]

Srini Pichumani evidently goes by what he hears rather than in-depth knowledge of the Telugu language. He is so eloquent and forceful that it is almost dangerous. Eloquence and forcefulness when not accompanied by deep scholarship can be dangerous.

tya vs. ccya

OK. The actual tya is Telugu is pronounced with the tip of the tongue at the base /behind hte lower teeth. Not with the tip protruding between the upper and lower. It sounds like ccya but is not tya. It is similar to the difference in the sound of "T" when we say two vs tea.

This is not, however , to say that everyone is infallible. Language and usage changes with time and people get used to the wrong way of saying words.

2. se, sha, sa

In telugu, the se as in shaastramu is pronounced differently from the sanskrit equivalent. telugu se sounds like "say" in English.

sha is the same as the sha used in shat/ shanmukha etc.

Therefore shaastramu is wrong. is it zAstramu. (using the standard transliteration scheme)


Mixing Sanskrit and Telugu is not personally to my liking. If it is a Sanskrit kriti, then care should be taken to use the Sanskrit pure form. Similarly, Telugu kritis are better when they sound like telugu.


3. arda, ardha well the correct word is artha (there is an ardha also in telugu but it means hald) but the artha does sound like ardha.

4. jUDa, delusukonTI etc.

the pure form is cUDa, telusukonTi.


cUDa becomes jUDa when the word preceding it ends in dwitIya vibhakti.

ninun jUDA is perfectly correct. It is not a mistake of pronunciation. It is a grammatical adornment.

Another example, nanun gani

Srini P, if you want clarifications, please check with someone who has studied the language. Not lay people who merely speak it. I would not have been able to explain the validity of both cUDa and jUDa had I not heard this explanation from a scholar.

5. dialects in Telugu and evaluating Tyagaraja kritis

It is true that there are many dialects in Telugu. But Tyagaraja keertanas do not pose a challenge in terms of regional nuances in pronunciation, as far as I can tell. He may have however, used words specific to a region(although I cant think of any examples). These cannot be changed and replaced by Krishna/Guntur district's pure Telugu equivalents anyway.

For e.g., slipper is cheppu in K/G. It is jODu in Rajamundry


6. la and La

In the original Sanskrit, there is no La. Telugu has both la and La. kala in Sanskrit is kaLa in Telugu. I was told that La was included later in the Sanskrit alphabet also.

All said and done, saahityam is important and cannot be discarded as a deadweight on the musician.

[jayaram]

Excerpted from a newsgroup:
...
Another example of an old-timer who sang such pallavis was Tiger Varadachariar. He would apparently sing pallavis like "katharikai kUdai kondAdi" sung to the same tune as niranjanamE nitya paripUraNamE and uppuma kindadi peNNE, nanRAka (from memory!). T.K.Sethuraman also narrates an incident when Tiger performed in sIrkAzhi village and was asked to sing a new pallavi after he had sung rAgam and tAnam in kAmbOji. Apparently at that time a street-vendor came around shouting katharikkai, katharikkai and Tiger sang "katharikkai vAnga vAyENdi tOzhi".

[arasi]

Jayaram,
Is that you going into such details about sAhityA? Well, This kattarikkAi vendor has been around for a while. After building a case against sAhityA, you are not supposed to care two figs--I mean, kattarikkAis for ANY kind of lyrics. If I were present at Tiger's concert, I would have been amused and would have enjoyed the concert doublefold. By the way, I don't think Tiger sang the kattirikkAi pallavi to belittle sAhityA. My guess is that the vendor announced his ware in a tuneful manner and Tiger was inspired by it! Imagine--had he been inspired by a passing steam engine, he would have just whistled through all the pallavi part...

[arasi]

Chetana,
I feel that srinipichumani's article has a lot of validity. I think it helps us to examine one aspect of CM. A component does not make a car run. sAhityA alone doesn't a concert make. I am not a layA oriented person. But I do know its place of it in music. The intricacies of it are not my bounty but I do respect it as a valuable part of CM. We do not have go overboard about perfect pronounciation either. As you say, regional pronounciations and accents do vary. It is all understood. All that we expect of vocalists is this: just as they pay attention to keeping within the rAgA and tALA, they should first understand the meaning of the song and then be as clear as they possibly can--within the musical framework. Sometimes it is difficult to deliver the words as in speech (rAgA, tALA strictures). But where possible, not to break a word into two. Worse, to split a word in such a way that it means something else or makes no sense at all. Example: ninnu cheppa kA raNAmEmi manasA. I would even put up with mispronounciation if the vocalist has understood the sense of the song and sings it with bhAvA. bhAvA is as essential to me as sAhityA which makes me SB police, some may say

[jayaram]

Jayaram,
Is that you going into such details about sAhityA? Well, This kattarikkAi vendor has been around for a while. After building a case against sAhityA, you are not supposed to care two figs--I mean, kattarikkAis for ANY kind of lyrics.

Arasi, good catch. I am not totally against sahityam per se, but just the anal retentive part of it. A bit of laissez-faire approach can be helpful. It's just that when I listen to a rendition, I don't carefully listen to every word that is being uttered, I enjoy more the ragam, layam and bhavam of it.

But I realize some people love to nitpick and find fault with sahityam lapses. I would prefer not to sit next to them at concerts!

[jayaram]

Imagine--had he been inspired by a passing steam engine, he would have just whistled through all the pallavi part...

I rest my case.

[Vishnampettai Jayendran]

"Vocalists are required to know the sahityam of a composition thoroughly because it plays an important role in the expression of bhakti."

This is a very important point... (hint hint VJ)

cool I am saahitya less, and now godless too! yay!

let me go and listen to Madurai Mani Iyer English Note!

[hsuvarna]

Mr Pichumani's essay was mind blowing. I am not sure to which telugu people he spoke in his findings. I am happy that I did not finish it fully. If sahityam is so unimportant, why sing tyagaraja or shyama shastry or Papanasam? Why not hindustanize CM?

I wonder whether the people arguing against sahityam would be able to put up if a song in their mothertongue is badly pronounced during a rendetion.

True devotees such as Tyagaraja, ShyamaShastry, Muttuswamy, Ramadasa, Annamacharya, their bhakti was expressed into the kirtanas. I don't even think that they would have searched for words or prasa or yati or chandas when composing those. When you are immersed and united with god, you won't be thinking about better words or better grammar. They are precise. Why screw up such sahitya if you cannot pronounce well. These kritis will stay on forever, as they are result of true bhakti.
All the hit songs in 1960 will vanish after our generation just like we don't know about any songs of 1940. But not these songs of tyagaraja/ss/md.

It doesnot matter tamil or telugu or kannada or sanskrit. There are expectations tobe met pronouncing.
Every language rules must be adhered. Just like you don't want pronounciation mistakes when chanting vedas or a raga with apa-swaram.

[chetana]

hsuvarna,

Bang on!


arasi,

bhava and purity of sahityam are not mutually exclusive. bhava is important and so is sahityam. the bhava that is independent of sahityam is a silent one that cannot be shared with others. it is something that the individual feels.

[humdinger]

arasi,
I am completely with you that its the bhAva thats important and we should not nit pick on the pronounciations. But at the same time if bhAvam becomes bAvam repeatedly, its a little hard to enjoy for me.
anybody can make a slip on pronounciation while singing in a flow but it adds value when someone cares a little not to repeat mistakes.

and IMo, things like "ninnu cheppa kA raNAmEmi manasA" are sins

And whatever Chetana wrote was absolutely correct. Srini P obviously doesnt have his facts right.

[jayaram]

I have to disagree here.

I have heard musicians render Malayalam (my second mother tongue) compositions, and they pronounce several words 'incorrectly', but I have never found their singing to lack in bhakti by any means. In fact, I have found their mis-pronunciations quite cute indeed.

Considering that the bulk of CM kritis are in Telugu, I would hope Telugu speakers would be a bit more tolerant when non-Telugu musicians sing in their language. And not think the bhakti element is seriously affected just because a word or two is uttered wrong.

[shanks]

On a tangential trajecgtory:

I have found it strange that a good chunk of Telugus associate themselves a lot more with Annamachraya than with Tyagaraja.

In our town, we have aradhanas for Tyagaraja as well as Annamacharya - every single time, i see big number of telugus participate in the Annamachrya aradhana (increases each year too). I find this quite interesting and have heard the arguments that understanding Annamacharya compositions are easier and that the tunes are easier - by and large that is a fact. Is it that Tyagara hailed from tamilnadu and he is not truly a telugu - while that is never stated, the implications point to that as the basis.

It is a fact that these discussions have been regular in forums since the advent of internet forums and this is not going to go away. This discussion is here to stay and neither the folks crying foul for the least of the mispronunciations nor the tolerant ones are going to go away.

To be fair to the performing artists:

1.analysis of the current day ones are far superior in their diction and pronunciation than the previous ones - this is only because they are conscious about the need to have the right diction and they have more gap to cover. They take a lot more pains and care in singing the compositions, but their mother tongue and lack of early exposure to other languages does have an impact on their pronunciation.

2. they surely have to balance between the music and the diction and what has the priority - surely the musical aspects and down goes the diction.

3. if an instrumentalist produces beautiful music (like Ravikiran) that brings tears to your eyes, does diction really matter? Really for a musician, the musical aspects of the performance is priority.

think about it - what would make you cringe most - musical errors or pronuniciation errors - the answer is quite obvious.

Srini's comments are surely from a musicians perspective and much of the examples he has quoted must be based on personal experiences - most music lovers can easily related to those facts being accurate.

[Lakshman]

shanks wrote:

3. if an instrumentalist produces beautiful music (like Ravikiran) that brings tears to your eyes, does diction really matter?

Yes it does matter because you want to savor the richness of the language and the associated meaning.

what would make you cringe most - musical errors or pronuniciation errors - the answer is quite obvious.

The answer is quite obvious - BOTH.
Why should one be more important than the other?

A little humor: A tamilian was invited to a dinner at a north indian's home. After a sumptuous dinner the host asked the guest how he enjoyed the dinner. The answer was "bahut gAnA gAyA"

[chetana]

1.What does tyagaraja not being truly telugu mean?

2. voice and instrumental music cannot be equated. if you are singing, then you have to get the words right.

3. interestingly, annamacharya's telugu is harder to understand the tyagaraja's. he uses more dialectics in his lyrics.


4. srini p - well- he is presumptuous at best. i really dont want to comment on the merit of his essay.

5. i would liek to bring to the attention of all people on this thread to one fact:-

there is a reason why most CM is in telugu. even non-telugu speaking composers composed in telugu because of its lyrical quality.

all words in telugu end off in vowels. thats what gives it its musical quality and that it why it was a natural choice for writing music.

italian has the same quality and that is why it is the language of choice for opera.

i would like all who want to dilute the importance of telugu and purity of language to reflect on that.

mispronounced words sound cacophonous. sudha raghunathan's mispronunciation of sanskrit and telugu makes me cringe. her music is not what i would term evocative. would taking away the words make it more evocative? i doubt it.

here is a simple reason why understanding the lyrics and language is important - knowing hte meaning of the words enhaces the bhava the singer feels and expresses to the audience.

how can i enjoy alai payuthey kanna if i have no idea what the lyrics mean? would tamil-speaking rasikas enjoy it if it sounded like telugu when a telugu-speaking singer sang it?

the deeper issue here is understanding the language and the meanings of words. having the shraddha to understand it.

[Nick H]

I think that Italian composers found Italian the natural language for opera. German composers wrote in German.

Two utterly different languages to listen to.

[Nick H]

didn't only the lyrics of annamacharya survive him to the current day, the melodies being composed (or 'tuned' as people here put it) by more recent and even modern-day musicians? Perhaps it is the more modern music that people like?

[jayaram]

3. interestingly, annamacharya's telugu is harder to understand the tyagaraja's. he uses more dialectics in his lyrics.

Really? The few Telugu friends I know (who are also Carnatic music rasikas) tell me otherwise. Apparently Tyagaraja's Telugu is 'Old Telugu' - hence more difficult to understand - while Annamacharya's is more contemporary and colloquial.

Having said that, you guys are the experts in Telugu, so we will take your word for it.

Question: how does Syama Sastry's Telugu compare to that of Tyagaraja and Annamacharya?

[drshrikaanth]

Really? The few Telugu friends I know (who are also Carnatic music rasikas) tell me otherwise. Apparently Tyagaraja's Telugu is 'Old Telugu' - hence more difficult to understand - while Annamacharya's is more contemporary and colloquial.

ARe you sure you have not got it the wrong way around? (Not meaning any offense at all). annamAcArya's language is more rustic and colloquial and hence more difficult to understand universally. This is not just my impression but what I have heard from telugu people themselves(Those who know it well included).

[drshrikaanth]

there is a reason why most CM is in telugu. even non-telugu speaking composers composed in telugu because of its lyrical quality. all words in telugu end off in vowels. thats what gives it its musical quality and that it why it was a natural choice for writing music.

As pointed out already, this issue has been discussed thorughly before on sangeetham (And elsehwer Im sure). There are certainly other lnaguages that fit the bill of vowel endings and soft sounds. I will not go into this side-track of dicussing these issues again.

[ramakriya]

Could it be that annamayya's telugu is more poetic ( whether it is old or not) -even if it is more difficult to understand - and hence have more sAhitya bhAva than tyAgaraja's? Let me make it clear I am not at all talking about musical quality here.

-Ramakriya

[arunk]

if i may stick my head into this hornet's nest (:-).

I think the disagreement here is a direct result of what seems to me as two different viewpoints on appreciation of cm. I may be stroking with a broad brush here, but I do believe that an overwhelming majority of cm rasikas in tamil nadu (myself included here) do not understand the words and meanings of the telugu and sanskrit krithis. I may dare also suggest that even when they are told the meaning (or read it up), it does not ring truly to their hearts as it would to a person who knows telugu/sanskrit well and to whom the language resonates with. It just never will unless you learn and perhaps more importantly practice it.

However, there is no doubt that all these rasikas from tamil nadu are mesmerized by these exact same krithis - they hold them in the highest regard. If that was not true, the tamil isai movement would have garnered enormous public support and would have sidelined non-tamil krithis (to the profound loss to us all). It is also true that the tamil rasikas do enjoy tamil krithis on a separate level because they understand. But if i may be bold again, i think they do not value that extra factor as that significant (there may be other factors/counter-arguments that can be offered but let us not go there). I am not sure they consider it an "extra" level of enjoyment . People love tamil krithis but they also love non-tamil krithis - sometimes more. That is why you see arguments that for upliftment of soul from music, understanding and relating to lyrics is not important. But to then immediately take the argument to the extreme and ask "why not do away with lyrics completely" (as has been asked everytime this has come up), while from a strict logical point of view may seem very valid, is not that valid. This is because, for many people, words you can sing (even if you get only say 80-90% of it right) allows to be able to relate to the tune better than instrumental. So words are indeed important to them but on a entirely different scale. One may dismiss that lightly but i think that does not change the reasoning as to why people relate to krithis better even if they dont understand the language vs. abstract instrumental music.

But having said all this, I totally understand how mispronounciation of words can sound cacophonic for people who know and can relate to the language. People in tamil nadu with some interest in film music should all turn back to the ribbing KJY took in his early days when his pronounciation was - let us say evolving. His songs were hits then, but many a fan cringed at some words.

So i think people just ought to be more respectful and tolerant to either side. We must recognise that mispronounciation is not ok - we should give all our efforts to avoid it. We should definitely not take pronounciation lightly. I think if the effor for right pronounciation is evident in an artist's work, most people will respect that. But is this effort evident in artists from tamil nadu - past and present? I am not convinced. I dont have hard evidence to back it up, but i do think many people dont pay it enough attention. They are able to get by because most consumers of their music (or let us say the overwhelming majority which matters to the artist) cant tell the difference, or dont give it enough attention. That is an unfortunate truth. I think we need to admit that and try to correct it when pointed out - not justify that it is ok.

On the other hand, one must also recognize that expecting ideal pronounciation from people is not achievable - particularly from folks who dont practise the language, even if they try hardest. Accents particularly with vowels are very very difficult to get over - and as we know in real world even among native speakers of a language, accents exist. So some leeway should be allowed. Tying back to above, if it is perceivable that an artist is trying his/her best to get pronounciation right, hopefully that can be respected and some leeway allowed.

So hopefully the middle ground is best effort towards understanding lyrics and avoiding mispronounciation (and correcting mistakes when pointed out). Now will that happen (;-)(;-)?

Arun

[drshrikaanth]

Neatly expressed Arun. There will always be some minor points that people will differ on but your views are balanced and sound.

[arasi]

Thanks folks! Once again, all this stirring and outpourings on sAhityA to bhAvA to pronounciation has not been in vain. Personally, it makes me focus more on practising a few things I learnt again while this discussion progressed. It works for me anyway: the awareness for sAhityA on the part of vocalists is increasing (hope); the sAhityA is not in the language of the singer, so take it easy (tolerance) let's enjoy the music! (open minedness)--then my prayers for a bhAva pUrva rendering of sAhityA--after all, that is how the composers went about it (we call them composers. They did not think of themselves that way. They just sang or poured it out in words)...

Lakshmanji,
GAnOn kE sAth khAnA bhi hOgA tO achchA lagEgA:)

[Music]

True, middle ground seems to be the best. However, if the singer & the listener attempt to understand the lyrics, it just opens up a whole new world. Not an easy task though. It shows how much more the compositions have to offer and adds another dimension to appreciation of music.
Dr. Balamuralikrishna is the only singer as far as I know who almost speaks out the lyrics. It is generally hard to catch all the words when you listen to any song in general. But BMK's rendering lays a lot of focus on the words & the meaning conveyed in the song. His rendition of pancharatnas is a really good example.

[vasanthakokilam]

the ribbing KJY took in his early days when his pronounciation was - let us say evolving

You have a way with words, arunk!! Is it still evolving? Kidding aside, I can relate very much to what you wrote.

Given the suffering some native telugu speakers go through when hearing mis-pronounced words ( the gross violations variety ) and my own feeling of cringiness when someone messes up tamil words ( especially the 'l' and 'L' ), it seems it is a blessing in disguise that I do not understand telegu enough to know right from wrong. I am on a very slow path to learning to pay attention to sahitya ( no matter what language or type of music ) and I can see dangers lurcking

[hsuvarna]

On a tangential trajecgtory:

I have found it strange that a good chunk of Telugus associate themselves a lot more with Annamachraya than with Tyagaraja.

In our town, we have aradhanas for Tyagaraja as well as Annamacharya - every single time, i see big number of telugus participate in the Annamachrya aradhana (increases each year too). I find this quite interesting and have heard the arguments that understanding Annamacharya compositions are easier and that the tunes are easier - by and large that is a fact. Is it that Tyagara hailed from tamilnadu and he is not truly a telugu - while that is never stated, the implications point to that as the basis.
...

.

There is really no bias of telugu people between Annamacharya and Tyagaraja. Tyagaraja is given much more reverance like the state song 'maa telugu talliki .... ' uses tyagayya. But of the late with the finacial support
of TTD, Annamayya gitalu have been popularized by light classical singers like Shobharaju and BalaSubramanyaprasad (I donot remeber his name). Even Sri Nedunuri put effort to popularize Annamayya Gitaalu. These songs of sri Annamayya are deemed tobe light-cllassical (music rendering) without sangathis, swaraas etc. The result is in a local musical night at least one of the Annamayya songs is sung by the singers who have not learnt classical music. More and more such singers sing these. Whereas the moment you say Tyagayya, classical learning is by default assosiated. So common people donot know at all. The view of Tyagayya being born in Tamilnadu etc is not true at all.

The telugu of Sri Tyagaraja Swamy is old and some of the words are not in use today. But Annamyya's telugu seems to be OK for nowadays. But the underlying meaning and message of both is same.

In our town usually, the annamayya function is organized by local telugu assosiation. So many people know about this and many are not fearful of singing the annamayya gitaalu semi/light-classical way. hence large turnout. The impression gets multiplied as the hasll is small too. Where as the Tyagaraya function is held by the local CM assosiation in a professional big hall. As I said, whoever is confident of singing with sangathis, gamakaas (in 5mins one should finish),
will come forward. This number is less. These days, I would'nt call this a far less number.

[drshrikaanth]

of TTD, Annamayya gitalu have been popularized by light classical singers like Shobharaju and BalaSubramanyaprasad (I donot remeber his name). --

Balakrishnaprasad.

[Music]

Sorry to digress, but talking of tunes of Annamacharya songs - I think there is a lot of free lancing going on in this area. You hear so many different versions of tunes for the same song. Various singers have tuned it their own way. Sri Nedunuri tuned them (I believe he tuned 108 songs) in a semi classical style and Smt. MSS popularized some of them. I have heard a lot of other singers (non-classical) rendering it with a touch of film music and it is light music altogether. I guess the good thing is that it reaches the masses with such tunes, but not an iota of classicism in it.
Dr. Sripada Pinakapani garu has tuned many Annamacharya songs in a pure classical style, will ample scope for manodharma. We hear a few now and then from the Malladi Brothers.
It is sad that we don't have the original tunes. Sri S.R.Janakiraman has tuned some of them in the original ragas as found in the manuscripts. I guess the only way we can get some standardization in these tunes is by popular musicians popularizing them. Just like MSS's Srimmannarayana - cannot imagine it being rendered any other way.

Apologize again for the digression. If this is more apt in another thread, I will move it elsewhere.

[arasi]

Agreed, Music, but would you call Nedunuri's tuning semi-classical?

[hsuvarna]

I have not heard Sri Nedunuri's tunings. I might have but I don't know. two years back in Cleveland tyagaraja aaradhan concert Sudha raghunathan gave a 3-4 hr annamacharya-only concert. That was after the demise of MSS as a tribute to MSS. It was heavy classical. While on the sahityam part, I can't stop appreciate MSS rendetion of telugu kirtanas.
Really great. Naanaatiki bratuku naatakamu and Sreemannarayana stand out. Similarly the vishnu sahasra naamaalu, bhaja govindam are great examples of sahitya-sangita-bhava by a non-telugu person. That is why MSS is part of every house hold. May be these wonderful devotional things affected me in enjoying her other classical music.

The other way is I heard good appreciation of pronounciation is that of SPB singing Tamil/kannada. Ofcourse, his hindi songs, have problems (not pronounciation but saying hindi in a telugu way). Yesudasu did a decent job singing telugu/Hindi songs. I think his Hindi rendetion is better than SPB's.

In general I will always appreciate how difficult it is for non-telugu people to learn CM and render as most of the kirtanas are in telugu. These are always at a disadvantage.

[drshrikaanth]

Similarly the vishnu sahasra naamaalu, bhaja govindam are great examples of sahitya-sangita-bhava by a non-telugu person.

These two are not telugu pieces. They are in sanskrit. How do they figure here?