 T M Krishna's piece on the attitudinal divide between
Hindustani and Carnatic music made for interesting reading. I have also heard Sanjay Subrahmanyan voice an opinion, during a television interview,
that employment of the term 'Hindustani' to denote Indian classical music, outside of the Carnatic system, is a misnomer.
The reasoning being that
Hindustani means Indian, and Carnatic music is equally Indian. But that is a matter of semantics, and while Sanjay makes a valid point, constant usage has made us accustomed to these terms being used to convey two distinct streams of Indian classical music.
However, T M Krishna's article raises an issue that has been debated endlessly for decades without any clarity emerging, namely, do followers of one stream of music genuinely appreciate the other? Does the rendering of three pieces in three hours indicate greater emotional and melodic content than 15 pieces performed during the same period?
Does a khayal in Malkauns, lasting 90 minutes, necessarily have more musical richness than a Hindolam delivered in 20 minutes? Then again, the votaries of Carnatic music speak of a greater "variety" inherent in a Carnatic music
concerts, presumably because of the greater number of ragas rendered. Hindustani musicians will tell you that you simply cannot plumb the depths of a raga if you do not explore its mysteries for a considerable length of time. And so the argument meanders on.
A time and motion study without end. Personally, I think all of us err when we try to compare the two systems of music. Simply because forms of music originate from the same
country we keep looking for common characteristics, and we feel disappointed when the so-called common links do not measure up to our tastes.
Despite the commonality of some of the ragas, I treat the two forms of music as being completely different. For instance, depending on my mood and the occasion, I can enjoy The Beatles, Bach, Dave Brubeck, Mohammed Rafi, Kumar Gandharva, T M Sounderrajan, or indeed, GNB.
The problem arises when I expect Kumar Gandharva to perform a complicated swaraprasthara in
kanda jaathi triputa tala! The expectation is unreasonable and displays ignorance of the
Hindustani system. I am, of course, stretching a point to make a point.
On the flip side of the same issue, I recently lunched with a musicologist from Mumbai who, somewhat arrogantly, expressed the view
that Carnatic music is too intellectual, obsessed with rhythm, and the musicians constantly endeavour to impress the audience with their tala pyrotechnics and improvisational histrionics.
A sweeping generalisation, if ever there was one. Again, a product of ignorance. He also gave as his opinion that; Carnatic music is not adequately, or indeed, imaginatively marketed outside south India. Even in the south, we pretty much take it for granted - a view I fully concur with.
This may be one of the reasons why more Carnatic musicians do not find their names in the President's honours list. A point T M Krishna also makes in his article.
In the ultimate analysis, I feel that supporters of the
Hindustani or Carnatic music systems should not be adopting combative or adversarial positions. If I find, as a hardcore Carnatic music aficionado, that I am unable to enjoy
Hindustani music, then that is a matter of personal preference. It is not intended, and should not be taken, as an indictment of the
Hindustani music system. Nor should it be so expressed.
Many Carnatic music followers find a 90-minute khayal rendition highly repetitive and boring, but that may be reflective only of their own lack of knowledge and exposure. The ear is not attuned. You cannot, therefore, throw the baby out with the bath water!
The real problem stems from the fact
that there are superficial similarities in the source of the two systems of music, namely, the raga
structure, which often leads listeners to look for similar executions. Big mistake.
If you must compare, then evaluate like with like. Compare a Carnatic musician with his or her own peers, even from different generations. That is an intellectual exercise and, allowing for subjectivity, you will be participating in a stimulating debate.
But, for saint Tyagaraja's sakes, do not compare Lalgudi Jayaraman with Ustad Amjad Ali Khan. One is an apple, the other, an orange - both equally succulent! Is it any wonder
then that I detest jugalbandhis?
Powered by
Sangeetham.com
|
The musical debate
