A critique of critics and criticisms

Mightier than the sword as it has come to be widely acclaimed, the pen should, in all fairness, oblige its wielder to exercise a level of impartiality and objectivity and, more importantly, charity and restraint similar to what may be demanded of one who is to be trusted with a sword. Since the subject of criticism has rarely a chance to rebut or will, upon rebutting,  only appear defensive, it behooves the critic, whenever in doubt, to prefer the eloquence of silence to the venom of verbiage. Most critics of repute do indeed observe these norms most of the time if only to maintain their own credibility with the reading public and respect among performers. However, it is not rare to see transgressions of these unwritten norms, and it may therefore be worthwhile to review the role and responsibilities of the critic in the performing arts. 

The role of the critic in the arts is one of significant importance. The critic is a cheerleader for talent and, when expert, knowledgeable and articulate, can help to define and clarify the standards for excellence in the art. To live up to that role, the critic must, as Oscar Wilde says, have “a temperament exquisitely susceptible to beauty, and to the various impressions that beauty gives us.” The statement of McLuhan that “it is critical vision alone which can mitigate the unimpeded operation of the automatic” is also applicable to performing arts where the gem of creative talent is often unearthed by judiciously sifting out the more ubiquitous imitation, the “operation of the automatic” that can at best only mimic and turn the crank. Indeed, as rightly observed by Arthur Kael, “what we ask [of the critic] is that he should find out for us more than we can find out for ourselves.” 

A good critique is one that edifies, and not one that vilifies. Its purpose is not to ridicule and slander either the art or the artist, but to challenge all practitioners of the art to rise to ever greater heights. Just as the best speech is almost always the one wherein the topic assumes the dominant position and not the speaker, so also the best critiques are those in which the critic is relatively less visible than the subject. Attempts to impress through excessive jargon, irrelevant autobiographical information, or strong language when pointing out alleged slips and inadequacies are counterproductive in that they often turn the discerning reader off and distract one from one’s main thesis. The following quote from Margaret Fuller eloquently summarizes the differences in styles: 

“There are two modes of criticism. One which … crushes to earth without mercy all the humble buds of Phantasy, all the plants that, though green and fruitful, are also a prey to insects or have suffered by drouth. It weeds well the garden, and cannot believe the weed in its native soil may be a pretty, graceful plant. There is another mode which enters into the natural history of everything that breathes and lives, which believes no impulse to be entirely in vain, which scrutinizes circumstances, motives and object before it condemns, and believes there is a beauty in natural form, if its law and purpose be understood.” 

In short, what is asked of the critic is no less than some of the qualities included in the description by the Lord [Bhagavat Gita, Ch. 12] of the wise as one who is without hate (adhweshtaa), is friendly and compassionate (maitrah karuna eva cha), and one who neither oppresses the world (yasmaan no dwijathe lokah) nor is distressed by it (lokaan no dwijathe cha yaha). 

The critic must constantly bear in mind that art is ipso facto highly subjective, and that no two individuals’ enjoyment of it need be the same. Thus a good review should reflect the humility born of the realization that what is written is but one person’s point of view, and what is produced 

as review is “at best ephemeral and superficial reading. Who thnks of the grand article of last year in any given review?” [Lord Byron]. Nor can everything be brought down to a set of rules and precedents. “Art is not the application of a canon of beauty, but what the instinct and the brain can conceive beyond any canon. When we love a woman, we don’t start measuring her limbs” [Pablo Picasso]. Imagine how popular and important Shakespeare would have become had the grammarians had the final say in his merit as a dramatist and poet? Luckily, the most read Shakespearian critics are those who glorify his flights of imagination and imagery and certainly not those who gloat in their own ability to find faults with his use of the language. Critics of the latter type are the ones S.Y. Krishnaswamy correctly described as “an inspector of drains in a mansion …. (whose) profession carries with it its own punishment.” Their writings often degenerate into an exercise in cynicism and a vain attempt at self advertisement. Such a critic “is always evaluating instead of enjoying. He is also thinking of what to write.” [SYK].  What a terrible way to approach the Shakespearean “food of love” which, in the context of Carnatic music, is love in its highest form as bhakthi (devotion) towards the Divine? 

None of the above is a call to abridge the prerogative of the critic to criticize, for, “culture is only true when implicitly critical, and the mind which forgets this revenges itself in the critics it breeds. Criticism is an indispensable element of culture” [Theodore W. Adorno]. Without critical analysis, a review will inevitably degenerate into empty platitude. The essence therefore is one of maintaining a constructive tone, a decent level of sensitivity and decorum, and avoiding the pitfalls of pretentious pedantry. “Good critical writing is measured by the perception and evaluation of the subject; bad critical writing by the necessity of maintaining the professional standing of the critic” [Raymond Chandler]. The review should not be antithetical to the purpose of art, namely, to uplift the human mind and to provide enjoyment. 

The effect of insensitive reviews is to stifle talent and to impede the natural expression of the artist’s creativity. It certainly can dissuade experimentation which is key to growth, not only of the artist but also of the art form. The statement, “Praise or blame has but a momentary effect on the man whose love of beauty in the abstract makes him a severe critic of his own works” [John Keats] unfortunately does not represent the mindset of most artists who through their art must also satisfy certain mundane needs and personal ambitions. Contrary to popular opinion, it is often the senior, well established artist who reacts more negatively to criticism than younger and upcoming ones who have much greater stake in favorable reviews. In Carnatic music, this often manifests itself as a refusal by them to allow the recording of one’s concerts, and this results in the loss of opportunities to capture permanently for posterity the flights of spontaneous creativity on the stage in response to an enthusiastic audience. Such moments can rarely be repeated in the stale atmosphere of a recording studio; nor does the finite amount of space in a commercial tape allow for extempore explorations that truly bring out the best of the music and the musician. Given that a good Carnatic music concert is an extempore expression of manodharma (mental prowess) and not a well-rehearsed recital from a pre-written score, there should be a total ban on writing reviews based on recorded music. The critic, who is “but an artist with his wings clipped” [SYK] may have the luxury of playing back the music ad nauseum until he can tear it apart, but unfortunately its creator does not get a corresponding chance to correct his occasional slip. Nor does he get the opportunity to retort as did the great violinst Thirukkodikaval Krishna Iyer, who said, “The purpose of your coming has been served, and you may now leave, for, I don’t intend to make another slip,” to a critic who shouted an inconsiderate sabaash (bravo) at one of the violinist’s rare uncomfortable moments on the stage! There should be a ban on critiques of concerts based on listening to their recorded version if only for the lack of the ability to capture in the recording the total experience characterized by the participation of both artist and listener. So also, verbal reviews at the end of a concert by dignitaries are to be eschewed, for, they are often nothing more than platitudes that tax the patience of the audience. 

Perfection may be a desirable goal for a performer, but that alone does not guarantee aesthetic beauty; nor need an occasional imperfection take away the overall splendor of an otherwise enjoyable performance. Consider the following story narrated by Dr.. D.E. Knuth, the reputed Professor of computer science at Stanford, a pioneer in the field of computerized text processing, whose hobbies are computerized calligraphy and computer music. With considerable effort he had conquered the difficult problem of mathematically defining accurately the curves through which one could typeset the calligraphic alphabet S and had proudly implemented it in software only to find that the `perfect’ S produced by the machine was pathetically unappealing relative to the `imperfect’ S that typically comes out of an old fashioned letter press. Exploring further into this, Prof. Knuth discovered that his computerized S became significantly more pleasing to the eye upon the addition of random errors in the computed coordinates. Dr. Knuth claimed that his experience with computer music has also been similar, and that the machine producing perfect frequencies is no match to the human, however imperfect the latter may be. If that is so with Western music, it must be infinitely more so for Carnatic music whose essence is improvisation. [In this context, I must paranthetically note my own lack of enthusiasm for such things as the use of a contact microphone for veena and fiber glass constructions of the mrdangam which are attempts at perfection at the cost of unappealing sounds that the tonal qualities of wood do well avoid.] So much for the critic who cannot forgive anything less than total perfection! 

In summary, critics and criticisms are necessary ingredients in art and therefore in Carnatic music. Both the artist and art form can gain from their contributions, and it is entirely in the hands of the critic to rise up to that challenge of uplifting. To challenge the critic to meet this lofty objective is not only the onus of the artist but also of the listening public who must not hesitate to either praise a fair review or to express dissent towards an unfair one. Indeed, the vedic prayer of the teacher and the taught 

“Tejaswinaavadheethamasthu, maa vidwishaavahai” 

(May we become enlightened, may we not wrangle) 

is one that both critic and artist will do well to adopt in their quest for greater enjoyment in the field of creative arts. 

Note: This author also wrote the books 'Innovation by India for India, the Need and the Challenge' as also 'Bhaja Govindam - A Topical Exposition'  besides writing and editing several books in his fields Applied Probability & Telecommunications.  He is a former President & Secretary of CMANA, the Carnatic Music Association of North America under whose Presidency its Sangeethasagara award was instituted.  He has penned over 40 compositions in Carnatic music.  A probabilist by profession, he has been a serial inventor with many patents, and among his positions was one as Chief Scientist at Bellcore.  He was named a Distinguished Science Alumnus by Purdue University, an honor given to a very small percentage of its graduates.

TRADITION AND CARNATIC MUSIC

The word tradition refers to “long established or inherited ways of thinking or acting” and “the handing down of statements, beliefs, legends, customs, information, etc., from generation to generation.”  Groups, nay even nations and peoples, often distinguish themselves through their so-called unique traditions and hold many of their unwritten rules to be inviolable.

Part of the reason people value tradition is because it does play an important and useful role in society.  In a world that is fast changing, it provides an anchor for guiding social norms and behavior.  Individuals and groups view their traditions as important components that define their very identity and group membership.  Traditions have helped preserve generations of empirical wisdom, social etiquette, and many time tested practices and principles.  Often, a practice or belief is elevated to the level of tradition simply because it has been in vogue for a long time.  Once it gains recognition as tradition, its survival is assured since going against the collective (supposed) wisdom of the elders and ancestors who gave birth to it is a difficult task.

Yet, does age alone make something sacred and sacrosanct?  Even as early as the fifth century, Kalidasa responded to this question by claiming,

             puraanamityeva na saadhu sarvam , na caapi kaavyam navamityavadyam,
             santah pareekshanyataraa bhajante, moodah parapratyayena buddhih

All that is old is not good, nor is a piece of poetry bad because it is new.  A man of discernment will critically evaluate both and select the good, but the fool will select on the recommendation of others.

Tradition is a double edged sword, which when blindly followed can become highly regressive hindering progress and denying even justice and fair play.  One can find ample examples of this, for instance, in the realm of religious practices.  Equally (in the sciences for instance) one can cite numerous examples to show that real progress and paradigm shifts occurred only because some erroneous traditions were defied.  Both religion and science provide many examples of the high resistance to violating tradition, and the perils and persecution to which reformers are sometimes subjected.  No area of human activity is exempt from the operation of these features, however.   On the other hand, allowing tradition to be flouted by anyone at will may usher in total anarchy and result in such unacceptable levels of individualism that could violate the very ideas of society, social consciousness, and social ethos.  For millennia, societies have continually faced this dilemma of wanting to uphold tradition and at the same time give into modifications leading to positive and constructive outcomes.

As a field of human activity, Carnatic music has had its share of its issues and controversies with tradition.  First of all, Carnatic music is steeped in traditions that range all the way from the very concert format to some inconsequential ones related to how musicians seat themselves on the concert stage. Tradition dictates how to render various ragas and the admissible phraseology associated with each raga.  However, the music itself has evolved as a result of many pathfinders challenging its traditions.   Examples from a not too distant era illustrate some of this evolution.  For instance, Ariyakkudi Ramanuja Iyengar stepped away from prevailing tradition and established today’s concert format, the female musical trinity - and D.K. Pattammal in particular - ended the male monopoly on the Carnatic concert stage, and G.N. Balasubramanian made briga laden singing in a fast tempo as well as many novelties like grhabhedam not only acceptable but highly popular.  However, the task of implementing these changes was not always easy.  Often, the challenges faced by the trailblazers were daunting as exemplified by the skepticism GNB had to endure from his own father, a venerable and powerful figure in the Music Academy.

Fortunately, the Carnatic music fraternity has managed the transitions admirably well.  This is due in part to two reasons.  Firstly, the ones who successfully pushed the changes were extremely qualified and knowledgeable people with pristine motives, and even as they brought in some needed changes, they had great respect for tradition and the need to preserve traditions at large. They were not motivated by the need for sensationalism or notoriety, but by some higher goals not alien to the cause of the art.  Secondly, like the scientific community that refuses to accept new theories without vetting them and putting them to serious tests, so also has the hard core Carnatic music community not rushed to adopt a change simply for the sake of change, but with considerable caution based on considerations of aesthetics and acceptance by the audience.  These two are worth emphasizing today when challenges to tradition in Carnatic music are initiated not necessarily by experts and are being arbitrated by the media and the masses.  All of us bear a great responsibility to ensure that any breaks in tradition only lead to the betterment of the music and greater benefit for all its stakeholders.

Carnatic music thrives in the Hindu milieu whose philosophers consider everything in this world as ephemeral (mitya) and subject to constant change.  It is therefore very surprising that there are fanatic, die hard sticks-in-the-mud within that community who resist any change without regard to whether they are needed, will be in the best interest of the field and profession, and will enhance the enjoyment of music and increase its support base.  An example of this is the opposition to Tamil Isai, concerts of exclusively Tamil compositions, which appeal to those who do not understand other languages like Telugu or Sanskrit and may have the effect of increasing the overall support base of listeners among Tamils.  More recent examples include the initial reactions to the introduction of various western instruments like the mandolin and saxophone.  There are also extreme fanatics who aver that no composition other than those of the Great Trinity deserve to be sung or performed and denigrate any attempts by those who compose new pieces, although sometimes this is a convenient ruse used by musicians who lack creativity in that dimension.  Such positions are as ridiculous as saying that everything that is needed has been invented by Newton and no new discoveries are needed or should be considered. The absurdity of this is heightened upon reflection that beauty in music is indeed in the ears of the listener and not in the pedigree of the composer.

Much controversy is engendered when a musician violates long accepted traditions related to concert formats and even more so when hard core musical technicalities impinging on raga lakshana (the grammar of the raga) and the like are involved.  In an environment where there is a paying audience with pre-set expectations, it is important to be careful in experimenting on the stage.  In the least, the musician or organizer needs to let people know ahead of time if the concert would depart significantly from what one normally expects so that people can make an informed choice on whether to attend or not.  As for technical aspects, each musical system is defined by its own unique grammar and conventions, and their modification should be undertaken only by experts.  The likelihood that even the slightest modification in these can lead to debates that may last for decades is high, as can be seen in the ever-lasting one on whether the Mohanam of the GNB school traverses an extraneous note and if it should be allowed. 

I like to end this article by highlighting some aspects of tradition that are becoming extinct and could pose a serious threat to the very profession and art.  In olden days, Carnatic music was supported by kings and very wealthy landlords through munificent grants based often on their love of the art (and sometimes snobbery too) and their access to unimaginable resources in money and man power.  Musicians who made it to the courts were exceptionally talented and were afforded enormous respect comparable to the best from other professions.  Many of the musicians also approached their art not just as a means of living but as a spiritual pursuit (recall Saint Thyagaraja’s Nidhisaala sukhama) and could care less about the size of the audience or for the clout of the patron.  The patrons were too wealthy to have to care about the expenses involved, and decisions were highly centralized and almost individual.  That environment certainly fostered a climate of sycophancy and a culture of entitlement in the music community with members of it acting as though the world owed them all just because of their talent, and some of that attitude continues even today.  The larger pool of available patrons and other revenue sources like recording revenues, marriage concerts funded generously and often by black money, and movie singing have simultaneously diminished even more the respect of the musician for the stage, the audience, and the organizer.  That is not a healthy trend particularly in an activity for which patron and audience involvement is a discretionary choice, almost for a luxury and not a necessity, and much support is needed from volunteer organizers and paying listeners who have no personal material gain from the activity.

Today, the main patrons of music are music organizations which depend on audience and volunteer support by way of donations, ticket revenue, time, and work.   Decisions are also made collectively by committees that have to accommodate diverse tastes.  The need to please a large number of people has thus become essential for the success of the art and the artist.   Spheres of human activity have exploded reducing the amount of time and energy of the average individual for the performing arts.  Unlike the pre-independence days of India when opportunities for Indians were limited and professions only a few, there are many Indians who have risen to being prima donnas in many diverse fields.  Some of them who adorn the seats either as organizers or audience have little patience for antics based on any sense of entitlement, for such antics are not acceptable in their own professions.    Along with this, the availability of music in the form of recordings in various forms has rendered attendance at a concert ever more discretionary as a means of enjoying music.  In this scenario, can musicians cling on to expectations that their predecessors were lucky to enjoy by citing tradition?  Will escalating demands based on musical merit and popularity alone (alas, sometimes as perceived only by the musician or a small coterie of fans) continue to get satisfied when they are not validated by corresponding box office collections, or would it accelerate the rush to a tipping point catastrophically turning away support?  Shouldn’t the entire profession become more professional in the way it does business today?  Which of the “traditions” in this arena should give, and how should they be molded?  These are interesting questions indeed.

Let me hope that this modest foray into a difficult and vast topic will generate much more discussion related to Carnatic music traditions and their evolution, and even more importantly that such discussions shall be in a constructive vein enriching all aspects of the music and enhancing the happiness of all stakeholders.

 
_____________________________

This author, Dr. Vaidyanthan Ramaswami also wrote the books 'Innovation by India for India, the Need and the Challenge' as also 'Bhaja Govindam - A Topical Exposition'  besides writing and editing several books in his fields Applied Probability & Telecommunications.  He is a former President & Secretary of CMANA, the Carnatic Music Association of North America under whose Presidency its Sangeethasagara award was instituted.  He has penned over 40 compositions in Carnatic music.  A probabilist by profession, he has been a serial inventor with many patents, and among his positions was one as Chief Scientist at Bellcore.  He was named a Distinguished Science Alumnus by Purdue University, an honor given to a very small percentage of its graduates.

BOWING OUT ON TIME AND WITH GRACE

     Bowing out on time and with grace - the equivalent of Vanaprasta in Hinduism - is one that few get to embrace.  It is one where a person, recognizing that one's time is past and passe, voluntarily steps aside without either any self-assumed level of higher competence or importance, delusion that the world may come to end without oneself, or simply being compelled either by a cause, person or persons, or relationships, and does not go on, and still on, like a gerbil on a treadmill. Most important is yet the willingness to cut one's bonds that tie one to people, groups, and environment of various types.

     The importance of the above is all too pertinent in the US today where corporate culture that walks one out with a security guard with not even a note of courtesy despite years of service or contribution,  can easily seep into personal and social lives as well.   People have become expendable in the throw-away culture permeating the world today.  One must be thankful if one has been spared of it  - in my case and my cohort who left with me a few years ago, the result of a better culture that prevailed in our own research organization that defied practice elsewhere even within the same corporation.

    In this environment, lucky are those who do not have to find themselves validated just by one environment or activity - be it a job, an elected office, social club, or whatever.  But even there, the sense of a betrayal of trust is often unavoidable, leaving a bad taste.  Thus, the wiser ones should 'hedge their bets'  and prepare to quit before that day comes or, in the least, be ready for it.  But like in everything else, one should also remember that there is  a great healer called TIME.

AUDIO BASICS FOR CARNATIC MUSICIANS

BHADRAM KARNEBHIH SHRUNUYAAMA DEVAAH!

Oh Gods, May we hear only the good with our ears!    

This post, addressed at (Carnatic) musicians, is a sequel to  earlier blogs of mine
 (http://veeraam.blogspot.com/2016/09/carnatic-music-audio-engineering-for.html AND http://veeraam.blogspot.com/2016/10/carnatic-music-additional-pointers.html) for amateur audio engineers who man systems for Carnatic music and Bharatanatyam programs.  Since no one starts a concert with a prayer that includes the line "Maa vidvishavahai (let us not wrangle)," I thought it worthwhile to record some lessons I have gleaned from over three decades at the mixer board, at least for the benefit of those musicians who  may want to improve matters.  My post is a set of requests/suggestions with some explanations on why and for what. 

     The quality and fidelity of the sound that is heard in a hall depends not only on the audio systems, the hall acoustics, and those managing the audio, but even more importantly on the musicians and their cooperation with those managing the audio. While it is  certainly desirable that musicians learn at least the rudiments of audio, the unfortunate reality is that there are but very few (Indian) musicians who understand them, and their  partial knowledge often makes things worse. (Sorry for my being blunt, but it is a comment that most discerning listeners and knowledgeable technical people will agree with.) Also, even if they were experts in audio,  there is no way a set of people sitting on stage can manage the sound quality heard in the hall since that is not necessarily what they hear on stage. 

1. Please plan your day so that sound checks can be done and adjustments made at least 20 minutes before the allotted start time.  Nothing annoys your (paying) audience more than being made to wait for inordinate amounts of time outside a concert hall for the fault of organizers and musicians not doing what should be obvious to all.  Be also considerate of the fact that your audience may include quite a few who cannot stand for extended periods of time.  (We honestly can't wait for the day when Indian programs will start punctually at announced times with the audience already seated.)

2. Please maintain, as much as you can, a constant distance from the microphone.  Understand that getting closer to the mic increases the bass of your voice while being too far way makes you sound hollow and not clear.  Occasionally at least pay attention to how you sound.  If you see that your volume has dropped down, check to see if you have moved too far away from the mic and readjust your position.  The audio guys can compensate with an increased gain, but that is more risky in terms of feedback etc.  If the audio people are in your line of sight, at least occasionally look towards them in case they want to alert you that you need to move closer.

3. Please do not keep your sruti box volume too loud as to drown everything.  Audiences find it annoying.  It also makes any adjustments to the sound very hard and nearly impossible.

4. Compared to what passes in India, Western audiences, including NRIs, like to hear classical music at a comparatively lower volume, being used as they are to the low ambient noise environment and overall lower volumes even in normal conversations that usually obtain in the West.  So, it is a good idea to leave the level of volume heard in the hall to the audio people and not to ask them to raise the master volume.  In addition to that, when volume levels in the hall are set too high, the same sound waves get reflected on the walls multiple times without adequate attenuation with the result that the audience hears multiple versions resulting in much degraded quality of sound. (Someday, organizations like CMANA may have their own halls designed with good acoustics and sound absorbing walls, but we just don't have that luxury now as we operate in whatever is available.)

5. With typical organizations not having a permanent venue of their own and with obvious cost constraints, they do not run separate systems for the hall and for the monitor.  So, kindly be judicious in making requests to the audio folk in increasing your volume or making repeated adjustments of bass and treble etc since these alter the sound not only as you hear it on the stage but in the hall itself.  Also, don't throw jargon like "give me more reverb" without knowing what it is all about and how it will really affect for different types of hall sizes, configurations, reflection properties, etc.  You are also better off if these advanced controls are not employed by non-experts without formal training, as I have seen in many performances that could have been much better had they been done without an improperly set reverb. (If you are worried about recording, don't worry; a good studio or technician should know how to add reverb during post-processing.  You could have performed in a dingy school library, but we can make it sound like you performed in a grand theater.)

6. It is important that you hear yourself and your accompanists well, and reasonable audio people do recognize the importance of that.  Insist on a stage monitor, and make sure that it is set at a level that you are comfortable and yet  does not cause problems for the feed to the hall.  With regard to the latter, please understand that there is considerable risk in increasing the monitor volume in that the sound emanating from them can create a feedback effect.  At higher volumes of the monitor, the monitor sounds get fed back into the microphones, get re-amplified again, and create both a distortion due to multiple signals and even more importantly the possibility of those terrible squeaks from an overload.  Just making sure of that and not being concerned about the hall related issues will also help you concentrate more on your music.

7. Please avoid injecting your own devices like contact microphones,  amplifiers etc into the system.   The small amps used typically on stage by individual players do not have the high fidelity needed for a concert hall. Similarly, each microphone has  response characteristics of its own and reshapes the sound offered to it.  When these characteristics are not matched to the desired frequency responses appropriate to your instrument, what results is often extremely sub-optimal.  When amplified, the imperfection sounds even worse.  Particularly, for various Carnatic instruments, where the materials from which they are made accommodate necessary attenuation of the frequencies generated to create continuity (particularly with respect to gamakam, nadam, etc.), these mismatches make you sound unnecessarily worse while even a moderately good non-contact microphone would do much better.  But, if you insist on using a contact microphone, please buy a high end one suited to your frequency range, test it well before purchase, record some of your own music and listen to it, and, furthermore, make sure that it is properly maintained and frequently serviced professionally.  As for using your own amplifiers, consider that it may appear rude towards your own team mates on the stage, and sometimes when more than one has it, it even leads to a competition in cacophony.  In addition to all the above, you cause the risk of a system failure if your own device happens to be defective or not to have the right impedance etc.

8. The time to let the organizer know of any special needs like an adapter for instance is not five minutes before the concert but a few days ahead of time.  Sometimes even sourcing the right piece takes time.

9. Good audio people recognize that it is your concert and you want to sound the best and will work with you to achieve the best results.  Establish some sign language with them so that if you think something is not okay (e.g., the mrdangam left is creating too much of a boom) you can let them know in an understandable way.

Someday, I am sure Indian communities and organizations as well as our audiences will evolve to a point where you can have the kind of quality obtaining in Broadway or great concert halls of the world in our programs too.  We realize that we are imposing on you various sub-optimal systems of our own and are highly appreciative of your understanding and cooperation.   But, let us also remember that compared to the Golden Age of Ariyakkudi and others, today's systems (including the ones used by many Indian organizations) are much more advanced and sophisticated and aiding the musician a lot more.  (The problem often may  be too many choices and controls, really.)   In any case, together, let us make the best of what we have even as we constantly improve.  That is the spirit underlying this blog, and do pardon me if you find anything offensive or strongly worded.

Your informed comments and suggestions to improve this piece are most welcome.
======
Dr. V. Ramaswami is a former President and Secretary of CMANA, the Carnatic Music Association of North America.  He is also a composer with three setss of CD "Swarabharanam" and "Sadaa Namaami" performed to by Sri Sikkil Gurucharan, the former with V. Sanjeev and J. Vaidyanathan, and the latter two with Sayee Rakshit and K.V.Prasad.  He is thankful to the great audio/video scientists who invented many of the systems of today and with whom he has had the privilege to work in addition to the experience as a volunteer doing audio.

Saint Thyagaraja as a Poet

 

    “A man should hear a little music, read a little poetry, and see a fine picture every day of his life, in order that worldly cares may not obliterate the sense of the beautiful, which God has implanted in the human soul,” so said Goethe.  For those blessed with an ability to enjoy Carnatic music, Saint Thyagaraja’s compositions give an easy opportunity to engage in all these three recommended activities in one shot through active listening with understanding alone.

  Much has been written on Saint Thyagaraja, the most venerated composer of Carnatic music, with most authors emphasizing mainly the musical and devotional aspects of his work.  However, many of the Saint’s compositions also constitute poetry of the finest kind, exhibiting a high level of scholarship, literary merit, imagination, and imagery.  They abound also in beautiful rhymes, alliterations, and onomatopoeia.  Sri T.S. Parthasarathy is one of the few scholars to have taken a special effort, albeit in a very small section, to mention this aspect of Saint Thyagaraja, and here is a translation of a passage from his book in Tamil (“Srī Thyāgarāja kīrthanaigal,” Higginbothoms, 1967):

“Saint Thyagaraja, who composed nearly 675 compositions, shined also as a poet and creator of many musical dramas.   Among Carnatic composers, with the exception of Kshetragna, Swami Thyagaraja is the only one who deserves to be noted as a poet.   His compositions appear like poems set to tunes.”

Even though T.S. Elliot may assert, “Genuine poetry can communicate before it is understood” and although that statement is verily true for Thyagaraja kritis, we must, however, acknowledge that comprehension does add immeasurably to both communication and enjoyment.   So, please treat this as an invitation to move on to a higher level as a connoisseur if you are not already there.

     If you agree with Simonides of Ceos,  who described poetry as “painting with the gift of speech,” then Thyagaraja was indeed a deft painter - and especially so in describing  Rama.  Even his simple words like “Lāvanya rāma, ati lāvanya rāma” captivate us – one must especially listen to the beautiful way Sri D.K. Jayaraman used to sing this line.  The phrases Thyagaraja has picked to describe Rama, not only in that composition but elsewhere, such as “dina mani vamsa tilaka lāvanya” are particularly imaginative.  Survya vamsa, the lineage of Rama is, by itself, illustrious due to his ancestors like Ikshvaku, Bhagiratha, Raghu, Harischandra, and many others; note the specific choice dina mani (jewel of the day) for surya (the sun).  According to Thyagaraja, even to the adornment of the very crescent of that lineage, Rama adds even more glamor!  A special favorite of mine is the kriti “Sundarataradēham” (one with a handsome body) in Pantuvarāli and particularly its highly poetic anupallavi,  “kuntaratanamāpta kumuda sasāngam, kandarpa satakōti kāntimatī nishkalangam,” where Rama is described as one with teeth resembling beautiful jasmine buds, who makes his dear ones bloom as the moon does of the water-lily, and pure and lustrous like millions of Cupids rolled into one.  Yet another kriti demonstrating the prowess of Thyagaraja as a poet and also as a Sanskrit scholar is the one in Sāvēri, “Rāmam bhajēham;” the first stanza of its charanam goes as,

   “Sundaramukhamaravindanayanam,

   Agabrnda parvata purandaram,
   Anakasananandananutam ānanda jaladhi mahi

  Brnda   subhūshana vandita charitam”

(With a beautiful countenance and lotus like eyes; like an Indra in smashing mountains of sins; an ocean of happiness; worshipped by great sages like Sanandana and even by Shiva adorned with serpents.)  Imagine the clear and detailed picture in Thyagaraja’s mind that should have empowered him to make such a beautiful canvas of words, not only in this kriti, but in so many others.  A favorite set of lines in Telugu with beautiful alliterations noted by Sri T.S. Parthasarathy is also a favorite of mine and is from “Vandanamu Raghunandanā” in Sahānā:

“Sritamā nātō vātamā ne bhēdamā idi mōdamā

Srīrāmā hruchchāramā brovabāramā rāyabāramā rāmā”

Many of Thyagaraja’s compositions are filled with incredibly imaginative conversations with his Lord like the one above asking, “Oh one who gives wealth, is this a debate with me? Are you and I different? Does this give you pleasure? Oh, the one residing in the heart of Sita, am I a burden to you?  Do I have to send you a messenger?”  He also creates many an imagery that form some of the finest exercises in virtual reality to a discerning and imaginative listener, through phrases describing Rama such as “janakajā shringāra jalaja bhrngā” – the honey bee that hovers around the lovely lotus born to King Janaka - (in his composition “kshīrasāgara vihārā” best heard from Sri Balamuralikrishna) - and “srī nārada nāda sarasīruha bhrnga shubhānga” – the honey bee that hovers around the lotus  naada (tonal sound) of Sri Narada’s lute in his kriti “Sree Nāradanāda” (best heard from Sri Semmangudi Srinivasaier).  In fact, these two kritis are highly notable for the mellifluous words and phrases specifically chosen by the composer all through.

    The king of mellifluousness was equally capable of other types of usage of the language as we see in some other compositions.  Thus, if one listens to the words in the kriti “Sarasasāmadāna,” one experiences an entirely different Thyagaraja, now picking harder consonants appropriate to describe a valorous king who will not hesitate to escalate force as needed.  The imagery he can create also does not stop at the beautiful and can transgress into the most morbid, as for example in the descripton “prānamulēnivāniki bhangāru pāku jūtti, ani vajra bhūshanamuramandu petturīti” in the kriti “Bhakthibhikshamīyavē” wherein he asserts that without devotion, the ability to give great discourses on religion is only equal to a gold head gear and diamond necklace on the chest adorned on a corpse.

     If you were touched by the self-deprecation and humility of the great poet Milton as exemplified in his sonnet, “When I consider how my light is spent,” be assured that there are many compositions of even the self assured Thyagaraja that will touch your heart even more.  An example is the kriti “Entuku pethalā” where the same poet who eloquently demonstrates his grip on philosophy and devotion in “Dvaitamu sukhamā, advaitamu sukhamā” grieves for the grant of wisdom by his Lord – despite his knowing the scriptures (vēda sāstra tatvārtamu telisi) and knowing the mystery of tones and sound (nāda vidyā marmambulu telisi).  Yet, he is not conceited and cries that he knows not the right path in teliyalēru rāmā bhaktimārgamu.

    Among poets, those who can glorify the simplest pleasures of life that most are given to enjoy and bring back in  our‘mind’s eye’ some of the precious moments of their own past joys are even more special.  They are the literary equivalent of the Norman Rockwells who can make one marvel at a canvas of even simple scenes.   Thyagaraja is one of them.  In that regard, a favorite composition for me is “Srī rāma jaya rāma” in Yadukulakambōji.  Musically, it is one of the finest (the best rendition I have heard is by Sri T.K. Govinda Rao in the style of his own guru Musiri Subrahmanya Iyer).  In this, Thyagaraja asks what all penance did various people, starting all the way from Kousalya and Dasaratha to Sita, do to enjoy Rama in various ways. (I can’t but wonder if that is what inspired Papanasam Sivan’s ‘Enna tavam cheitanai.’)  Each couplet in it is a gem, and let me cite just a pair.  Ask yourself what dad, when hearing the lines “Dasaratudi srīrāma rā rāyini piluvamuni, tapamēmi jēseno teliyā” (what penance did Dasarata do to be able to beseech you ‘Come, come, Sri Rama’),  will fail to be reminded of the first time he called his little toddler to walk up to him?  Or who will fail to recall his own joy at the wedding of his daughter, when listening to the lines “Tana tanaya nosaki kanulāra kanajanakundu, tapamēmi jēsenō teliyā” (I don’t know what penance Janaka did to have the pleasure of seeing his daughter’s hand being taken by Rama)?  If words can do a dance, Thyagaraja’s compositions indeed do and display all types of human emotions without any visual aid, just through words and sound.

    I will conclude this brief foray into Saint Thyagaraja’s poetry by recalling some lines from his kriti “Paripālaya” in Rītigowla.  What does a mendicant like Thyagaraja, with no possessions other than his Lord’s idol, have to offer to his Lord?  The poignancy of this poem is also filled with so much imagination and imagery all through.  Here are some example lines: “tanuvē nīkuvaina sadanamoura, raghunātha” (may my very body be a seat for you); (“harināma smaranambulu viruloura raghunātha” (may my utterances of the name of Hari be flowers for you); “nē jēyusu pūjaphalamu bhōjanamavu raghunāthā” (the fruits of my prayers are my offerings to you).  Everytime, a priest or a devotee creates a decoration with those simple things like flowers and fruits, I cannot but be reminded of this wonderful poem that probably was intended to reinforce in our own minds the great teaching of the Lord in Bhagavad Gita that all He desires from his devotees are simple things like flowers, fruits, and holy water, and most importantly total devotion.  Saint Thyagaraja was not just a poet, but a poet inspired by his deep devotion and pouring out in simple words the highest of truths in a way they are woven into the best of poetry.

=========

This article was written for the 2017 souvenir of the Indian Fine Arts Association of San Diego.  Dr. V. Ramaswami is a past President of the Carnatic Music Association of North America (CMANA) and the author of the book, “Innovation by India for India, the Need and the Challenge.”  A set of ten compositions of his in Sanskrit, Hindi and Tamil, rendered as a collection called “Swaraabharanam” by Sri Sikkil Gurucharan, Sri V. Sanjeev, and Sri J. Vaidyanathan, is being released.  All proceeds of that project are dedicated to the support of Kanavagam, an orphanage in Tamilnadu for destitute children; kindly support this charity.

--> -->

BOOK REVIEW: “Fighting to the End, The Pakistan Army’s Way of War” by C. Christine Fair.

Book Review by V. Ramaswami

“Fighting to the End, The Pakistan Army’s Way of War” by C. Christine Fair.  Oxford University Press, ISBN: 978-0-19-946707-5.  Printed in India by Replica Press.

     This book provides an in-depth examination of Pakistan’s evolution to its current status as a greedy, revisionist state engaged in an eternal war with India, conducting “Jihad under a nuclear umbrella” using Islamist militants, blackmailing for Western support with nuclear threats and repeated misadventures that could escalate to a full scale war, and becoming increasingly in conflict with the international community.    Based on extensive research of Pakistan’s own military literature, the author lays the blame unequivocally at the doorsteps of the Pakistan army for its doctrines based on theocratic notions of a state founded on religion, delusional non-acceptance of recurrent defeats, existential paranoia not justified by facts, and a self-destructive and impossible quest for equality with India.  It paints a dismal picture for Pakistan’s future based on the military’s control of foreign policy, a military officer corps comprising mainly officers from Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkwa (KP) whose theocratic beliefs are intolerant - if not inimical - even towards other Pakistanis, and its successful brainwashing of the population by control of education, the Press, and the media.   Nullifying any hope of change is Pakistan’s dependence on the terrorist group LeT and its closely allied militants, which is necessitated to keep at bay the hard core Pakistani Taliban, which has turned against the Pakistani government.  The book unequivocally declares US sympathies placed on Pakistan and the belief that addressing Pakistan’s security and economic concerns will change its course as misplaced and deserving to be stopped.  The unstated conclusion of the book appears to be that the only option available now to India and the USA is to suffer until a generational change occurs in Pakistan over decades, or to diminish its nuclear and military capabilities drastically.

    Had the author used a pen name, some – particularly in Pakistan and the USA - may brush it away as possibly written by an Indian for propaganda.   The author is, however, a reputed Professor of Security Studies in the USA affiliated with a top-notch university, and her work is based on extensive research and careful study of the writings that form the core of Pakistan’s military playbook.  These facts make the book an important document worthy of study by policymakers particularly in India and USA.  For years, I have expressed the view that the US has allowed itself to be conned by Pakistan, and the latter has been emboldened by it to a point where it is becoming a threat not only to India, but even more to the US and the greater international order.  The book comes at a critical juncture when Pakistan is forming an increasingly stronger alliance with China, an emerging threat to the USA and world order.  How ironic that Pakistan now offers a land corridor to the sea and naval port resources to China, the nemesis of the USA, after deriving so much support from the USA which gave it much probably based on fears planted by the UK that Pakistan may grant Russia such access to the sea!  The book would have been more complete had it included some details of how USA and its other Western allies failed to see the facts objectively for nearly seventy years and abetted Pakistan to become such a threat at the expense of a flourishing democracy respecting international commitments and order. Perhaps, the author considered the US folly all too obvious and immediate from the facts put forth.

     A fact that stands out from this carefully done research is that Pakistan’s use of Islamist militants and terrorists is not forced upon it as an act of desperation by a weaker state with any real existential threats, but one chosen by its military establishment from the very inception of Pakistan due entirely to its need to bypass civilian government’s impedance, its own theocratic ideology, and lack of touch with reality.  Many specific references are cited from Pakistan’s Green Book along with many pertinent quotations from many who have had major influence on Pakistan’s policies.  The impotence of the civilian government of Pakistan and the absolute control of the army of the nation’s foreign policy and defense are delineated carefully in an authentic manner.  The characterizations of Pakistan as a revisionist state (i.e., as one constantly in need of challenging status quo and disrespectful of international order) and as greedy in the sense of  being “fundamentally dissatisfied with the staus quo, desiring additional territory when it is not required for security” are made in an unarguable manner.  The delusionary aspects of Pakistan’s military that characterizes even major defeats as success (to have stopped India from overrunning the nation) are enumerated and asserted to be essential for the military to maintain its power.

      

    Without mincing words, the author states: “The United States, India, and others should abandon their hopes for transformation that have often undergirded engagement strategies.”  Not only does the book repeat observations by noted writers like Tellis that “…(Pakistan) simply cannot match India through whatever stratagem it chooses – it is bound to fail” and the obvious fact that “Pakistan should have come to some accommodation with India long ago,” and  “the longer Pakistan defers this ultimate concession the more costly its eventual concession will be.”

    So far, America has conducted its foreign policy in this region oblivious or in total disregard to these realities and creating unintentionally the risk that Pakistan, a state in total disarray, may become a threat to the US and its ability to contain China and its ambitions.  It remains to be seen if the US will persist in its failed policies or will listen to its real specialists and alter policy in more constructive ways to strengthen itself and a fellow democracy that is a more dependable and responsible force in the world.   Be that as it may, the author of this book has much to be proud of in producing a document of great value and merit that effectively negates the continuing erroneous recommendations of various think tanks and politicians.

I recommend it strongly for both Indian and Western analysts and policymakers in addition to those interested in the subcontinent.

====================

Dr. V. Ramaswami, a retired scientist  who has served as an Adjunct Professor at several universities, is also the author of the book, “Innovation by India for India, the Need and the Challenge.”
====================