Spotlight
Carnatic Music In The Thirties

Of course, kriti-s
and other pieces should, in the nature of things form the mainstay of a South
Indian music concert. But even there, the question of variety in raga-s, of the
same with reference to raga bhava are as important as their numerical quantity.
Raga and
raga bhava
The unique feature
and glory of Carnatic music are to be found in the conception and beautifully
classified system of raga-s pure sound
melodies of rich variety, exquisitely pleasing to the ear and capable of
rousing different moods and emotions without the aid of words of any language
whatsoever, though one may not believe in all the exaggerated and legendary
notions of their magical effects. Classified and codified as they are with
mathematical precision, you have got ample scope also in them for the play of
your personal genius, skill and imagination. A musician who has got good
conception of and mastery over raga-s and raga bhava, gives a more distinct and
exquisite flavour to what all he sings, than one who is comparatively deficient
in them. And yet, as a result of the excessive development of tala
accompaniments, music has been driven to attune itself to the steel-frame
jati-s of the rhythmic variety, to the detriment of raga-s and raga bhava. The
climax is reached when raga alapana itself is not infrequently found to be
reduced almost to a sort of swarajati-s though veiled in form.
The learning and exposition of compositions, swara and tala
are perhaps comparatively more mechanical, and easy than those of raga-s which
are somewhat elusive and which require no small skill, imagination, patience
and other personal qualities. More than the latter, the former variety seems to
suit easily the convenience and circumstances of the average professionals,
with their struggle for life and desire to shoot up quickly into cheap fame and
with their need to satisfy the tastes of large sections of modern audiences for
music of the galloping variety particularly in pieces and swara sanchara-s. In
the paucity of the natural grace of raga bhava, some of them seek to make their
wares attractive by a sort of mechanical finish and polish. In short, they have
got only the dry bones of swara and sahitya and wellnigh lost the flesh and
blood of raga and raga bhava.
Formation
of good taste
This naturally leads one to the question of taste in
musicians and music lovers, which is after all the chief determining factor in
standards and appreciation of art. You cannot expect much of uniformity,
steadiness or refinement in that matter in the many headed multitude; nor can
you blame them for it. Hence all the more is the responsibility for forming
good taste on the part of the musicians and the discerning among music lovers.
The crowd will always follow what lead it is given, provided it is definite and
strong. Tastes in turn depend not a little upon culture and character. The
former gives the artist the capacity to discern good from bad and the latter
enables him to withstand or avoid any temptation to lower himself and his art
or to pander to the vitiated or moribund taste of the gallery.
Voice
qualities
There is again the baffling paradox in voice qualities. It
is a notorious fact that in South Indian Music, not much attention is being
paid to selection and cultivation of voices as such. An apparently rich and
gifted voice, pleasing as it is on its first onset, is really found to be so
ill-trained as not to display the necessary elements of good and well
cultivated music. It is a mountain stream rushing through a narrow strip of
coastland to waste its waters into the sea without being harnessed to much
useful purpose. Often you come across musicians of profound knowledge
struggling with bad or indifferent voices and all the same compelling your
respect and admiration for their wonderful sadhaka or practice and exposition
of brilliant features of a highly developed system of music . Th e uninitiated
crowd, including man y of the so-called educated gentry who cannot be pleased
except by sweet sounds as such would swear only by the music of the stage stars
and slipshod amateurs with ravishing
voices and bad or no technique and practice and would prevent by legislation,
if possible, the so-called scientific musicians with defective and indifferent
voices from taking to vocal music . Th e pundits and prudes on the contrary can
only be propitiated by musical gymnastics and acrobatics and would look upon
mere sweetness as effeminate and fit only for the ununderstanding plebians....
[In the absence of a master musician of the type of a Maha Vaidyanatha Iyer who
was reputed to have combined in him most of the necessary desirable and highly
appreciable qualities of voice and technique, practice and presentation,
culture and good tastes, such kinds of factions in tastes and appreciation are
bound to exist. There is not much to choose as between them.] Nor can it be
denied, that [much of the want of attractiveness in the average professional
music of the present day is due to the obtrusively overwrought technique,
killing melody and grace, though honourable exceptions may be found here and
there.
Natural music and human art
It is but natural
that in the general dearth of good and well-trained voices among the platform
musicians, and scared away by the excesses of dry acrobatics of the technical
experts, the real paying patrons of art in the democracy of the music-loving
public should run mad after sweet sounds as such, wherever they are found,
irrespective of the quality of human art. It may not be easy to convince the
democracy that sweetness of natural music, as found in the voice of women,
young boys and singing birds— very necessary and desirable as it is— cannot by
itself and without the human art of developed technique and practice make a whole
and true picture of a highly refined and cultivated system of art, like South
Indian music. Gold ore or bat gold as such is good and valuable. Beat it and
mould it into some shape as that of a casket, it becomes attractive. Give it a
desirable size and proportion and smooth polish as well, it looks very pretty.
Carve some designs on it, it appears to be beautiful. Set some rubies, diamonds
and other precious stones into it, it becomes brilliant. Place it on a
well-carved pedestal, it looks glorious. Both raw gold and the finished casket
are valuable and will have a sure sale. But it is the latter that ought to be
in greater demand and better priced. The trouble comes in only when the casket
is made of tinsel, or over-carved with bizarre designs or ill polished and when
the raw gold is clumsily kept unbeaten into any shape. So is the case with
music as well, in its natural and cultivated forms. It is obvious that good
music is to be sought for in a happy combination of natural music of sweet
sounds and human art of refined technique, practice and presentation. When all
is said, anywhere, at any time, no highly developed art can be well understood
and enjoyed or properly valued without some initiation into its technique and
conventions, though every one need not be an expert either in theory or
practice. The Indian art is not as if it is slowly growing from a crude
primitive stage and by catching from here and there a time or tune at random
from all sorts of sources and making something new out of it. Nor is there
absolutely no room for new creations in it. But before you create something
new, you have to be acquainted with a large part of what already exists or at
least with its basic principles and principal features. Though the contribution
of well-meaning amateurs to art and their influence on improving taste and
ideals are not inconsiderable, there is perhaps not much room for that type of
dilettante with slipshod or no technique in a system of art like Carnatic
music. Want of understanding of even the bare elements of technique and
principles of the art is the excuse either for the lack of proper appreciation
of the same.
Styles in
music
Like literature,
music too has got its styles. Technique, rigorous as it is, can never make it
uniform or stereotyped. In a way, it takes a highly personal colour, according
to the individuality of the singer. It is not mastery of technique so much as
the play of those individual graces, imagery and emotion and the manner of
presentation which are beyond the realm of technique that marks a stylist. The
same piece with set sangati-s or musical phrases sounds differently in
different artists and much more so is the case with raga, swara, pallavi, etc.
A rose is best understood and enjoyed when it is seen, smelt and worn in a
button hole or in a tuft of hair. No amount of analysis of its petals and
pollens can help to give you a perfect picture of the flower. So is [the case
with] style in music. It has to be heard, understood, followed and enjoyed. At
best one can only give out some of the outstanding characteristics of an
artist, which make his art all his own and which are fairly describable in
words. Again, though each artist may have some individuality of his own, it is
not all who have developed it into markedly appreciable styles. Perhaps a
distinct and catchy style is mostly a freak of nature and born with the artist,
irrespective of any profundity or depth of knowledge or intensiveness in
practice. A combination of many mediocre but necessary and desirable qualities
presented with just balance and proportion often enslaves a listening audience
much more than an extensive or even profound exposition of specialised aspects
of the art. Once in a way, you may also come across a genius whose art, though
essentially based on some technique and conventions, yet transcends both and
revolutionises existing notions about them. Technique though necessary and
valuable is but a vehicle or horse for the artist to ride on to the goal of
artistic expression. To the extent to which he controls, guides and directs it
on good and proper paths without being over-ridden or side-tracked by it, he
will be a true and successful artist. The genius too makes use of it to fly to
superb heights and explore new and unknown regions and bring delight beyond the
average run of human knowledge and imagination.
Paper
appreciation
These are only some of the factors in general, that have to
be borne in mind in approaching the problem of style and standards in music and
appreciation of the same. If it is only a want of understanding of fundamental
or essential requirements of art or elements of the technique, the problem
would not be very difficult and it may not be impossible to bring some sort of
uniformity in the means and methods of appreciation. But public opinion, is not
altogether free from unnecessary sentimentality, and from artificial factions
and prejudices regarding art and artists. It is not uncommon also that really
appreciable music is left unnoticed while mechanical and superficially spectacular
varieties are applauded. The situation is further complicated by letting loose
on the public all kinds of radio broadcasts and [recordings]. No doubt, of
late, honest and laudable attempts have been made by those concerned with such
music to bring out the art of the leading and popular professionals and the
service done by them in that direction is highly valuable. But the craving of
the masses for some kind of easily understandable music, not to speak of the
moribund tastes of considerable sections of the crowd, and the business
exigencies of dealing in such music, are making it extremely difficult, if not
impossible even for them to pick and choose and keep to any standards. Perhaps
these are only passing phenomena....
Conclusion
In the nature of things and in such a state of affairs,
criticisms in art are not likely to carry conviction in any universal manner.
One may not look for much of appreciable help in that direction from the
average professional experts, who constituted as they are with varying interests
and obsessions, cannot be expected to care for or properly and generously
estimate one another's art and much less speak out fairly and frankly about it.
Even if they or other discerning people were to do so, it is doubtful whether
all professionals have as yet sportsmanship enough to relish or take it for
what it is worth with equanimity. It will be a great thing if they would only
realise that the body public to which their art is offered for enjoyment and
patronage has with all its limitations got some right to express its own
impressions about them provided of course they are fair and honest.... It so
happens, that, more than the professional artist, it is the disinterested
layman of understanding who is able to view and appreciate things with proper
perspective and less of personal equations. A critic need not necessarily be a
creative artist. Again if artists require less of personal obsessions, critics
require more of tolerance and better understanding. Difference in viewpoints
need not necessarily lead to the decrying of each other. It is not uncommon
that an artist is more tolerant of friendly criticism than one critic of
another. A captious critic and a blind admirer are more factious that the
artist himself.
In short, factions and favouritism, strong likes and dislikes, sentimentality and prejudices without much of a justification for the same are not likely to improve matters. Perhaps there would be little room for these, if one were to proceed on the assumption that no artist is perfect and that each notable one has got something of his own to contribute to the art and appreciation thereof even in these days. Some attention to the essentials of good art, combined with an open frame of mind, frankness and sympathy, may go a great way in helping music-lovers to fairly understand and appreciate our art and artists.
E. KRISHNA IYER