Lalgudi Jayaraman and Lakshmi Devnath: Virtuoso Performer and Mediocre Biographer.

One of the best decisions Steve Jobs took in his life was the choice of his biographer. Jobs chose Walter Isaacson, former editor of Time magazine and author of two best selling biographies of Benjamin Franklin and Einstein. Isaacson asked Jobs, if, by choosing him, Jobs saw himself in the league of Franklin and Einstein. Nobel laureate V.S.Naipaul chose bestselling author Patrick French to write his biography. Churchill distrusting others to do justice to World War II and his role decided to write it himself. Of course, self-servingly.

Lalgudi Jayaraman, or just 'Lalgudi' to his legions of fans, who lacked any formal education, 'allowed' Lakshmi Devnath to be his biographer. Devnath's biography, decent, by half, may very well remain the only biography of a man who took his music across the globe and thrilled millions. That is sad.

When a biographer starts by saying how she admired the subject and refers to the subject as 'uncle' ('mama') a reader like me hesitates. Only my eagerness to learn about a man that many referred to as 'genius' compelled me to plod on. Devnath claims that she has been objective and that Lalgudi or his family did not interfere in any way with her book. They did not have to.

The biography is a labor of love and it shows. In a very unique gesture Devnath has made out a CD with Lalgudi's recordings to illustrate key points she makes. The book helpfully notes, without too much intrusion, places where the reader can pause and sample the recording. The choice of English as a language is made solely to reach a wider audience else this book would have probably benefited more by being written in Tamil. A very helpful glossary of Tamil words, for both vernacular usage and music terms, is nicely compiled. That the author is ill at ease in English is apparent when she writes "she was kind to the core and strict to the hilt". As proof of Gopala Iyer's (father of Lalgudi) abilities beyond music we are offered a summary, "he sawed with precision, nailed with mastery and glued with finesse". Reading 'coachile vandhirukkaaaar' is grating to my senses instead of "கோச்சு வண்டியிலே வந்திருக்கார்" or 'vango' instead of 'வாங்கோ'. 

Lalgudi amongst all musicians has the rare privilege of claiming to descend from a direct disciple of Thyagaraja, the most revered amongst the Carnatic music trinity. The introduction of the violin to Carnatic music and such a rare musical heritage opens up many avenues for a skilled biographer to write a magisterial sweep of music history alongside the subject person. Devnath barely manages to race past the musical and biographical heritage.

The greatest disservice a biographer can do to a man millions called genius is to attribute his genius to astrology and make it appear that he was destined to be great. Devnath gushes about Lalgudi's horoscope and how his impending greatness was foretold. This obsession with unscientific mystery strikes a jarring note  when Kandasamy Bhagavathar dies of cancer despite his wife's 'knowledge of indigenous medicine and mystic powers'.

In my past blogs on music I've written about how Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner were widely read and how their intellectual pursuits impacted their creativity. When Lalgudi's teacher punished him by caning his fingers Gopal Iyer stopped his son from going to school. Most Carnatic musicians have little or no education until recent times. Even then it is a cursory education. T.M. Krishna has a degree in accounting and, by his own admission, 'dabbles in reading'. Gopal Iyer arranged private tutor to teach Math, English, Telugu and Sanksrit. Telugu and Sanksrit, we are told, 'would help understand the meaning of the songs'. It did not even strike the biographer as odd that Gopal Iyer did not think it fit to tutor his son in Tamil. He probably thought there was nothing worthwhile in Tamil to be taught requiring a tutor. That brings to mind a sore controversy about the Tamil music versus carnatic music shenanigans.

Music and caste are intertwined in an unholy nexus in India (as in America too), especially in Carnatic music. Gopal Iyer takes Jayaraman to listen to a performance in a Mariamman temple. Devnath lists the artistes. All of them are from the 'Pillai' caste. Not a single Brahmin because its the Mariamman temple. The very next paragraph details the artistes at a function in the temple at Srirangam. All are Brahmin artistes. Not a single non-Brahmin. Devnath, probably Brahmin herself, does not bat an eyelid at this dichotomy.

Carnatic music is vocal music with no tradition, for decades, of having accompanying instruments especially one like the violin. The place of instruments and its players in a performance is a still debated one. As violin evolved to be more than 'just' an accompaniment Jayaraman wanted to see violin solo performances. This rubbed vocalists and other, hitherto, solo instrument players like veena players.

Madurai Mani for whom Lalgudi used to accompany ensured that only the vocalist had a mike. Semmangudi, the ever irascible vocalist, would push away the mikes in front of a violinist. Jayaraman's own protege singer T.N. Seshagopalan took to the print and snidely complained that the violinist does not 'his' place. Veena Balachander confronted Jayaraman that his demand for solo performances was upsetting veena players. Brahmins, the chief practitioners of carnatic music, are famously vigilant about caste hierarchies and owe their social pre-eminence to a rigid caste structure entrenched in the name of tradition. It is little wonder that such practitioners were livid about upsetting 'tradition'. Check this link about Semmangudi (http://www.carnaticcorner.com/articles/semmangudi.html). A young Semmangudi is performing with accompaniments but only he and the violinist have the mike. An older Semmangudi then performs with mikes for mridangam and the violinist too.

Jayaraman ruffled many a feather with his venu (flute)-veena-violin concerts. Apparently he even composed music for such concerts. It is this composing that is often spoke of by his admirers as setting him apart from other violinists who were only virtuosos. That and the unique and legendary 'Lalgudi Bani' (Lalgudi way of playing) are collectively referred to as his genius. Devnath does a decent explanation of those.

The only place in the biography where Devnath attempts objectivity and balance is in giving quotes from those who did not think high of Lalgudi's compositions. But the biographer rescues her 'uncle' by rounding off with counter quotes and gentle brushing away of criticisms.

A biographer with wider knowledge of music would have used this to illustrate the differences with Western classical and bring out how western classical, written for instruments by a composer, contrasts with a vocal tradition. I'll not be surprised if Devnath thinks there is no music beyond carnatic music. A non-Brahmin author might have taken a broader view.

Indians enjoy the recognition that Indian philosophy, literature and music receive from Westerners, that too Whites. I've only heard of Beatles swooning over Ravi Shankar or Yehudi Menuhin swooning over Lalgudi or U Thant introducing MS at the UN. We never hear of John Coltrane or the Jazz musicians interacting with Indian music.

Lalgudi was very warmly introduced by Yehudi Menuhin. Menuhin instructs his audience not to judge carnatic music with their customary paradigms. He gently lectures that in carnatic music the instrument 'follows' the singing. Carnatic musicians who performed abroad were often feted back home. They had grand send off's and equally grand welcome back functions like conquering caesars. Often such functions were organized by Sabhas. Strangely none of these Sabhas thought it fit to invite a Zubin Mehta or Leonard Bernstein to India. Smugness. No carnatic musician would have done what Menuhin did for Lalgudi. Indians only love to boast of what they taught the world. Never interested in learning.

The carnatic music world is incestuous with a clique like mentality. Music Academy and The Hindu (a newspaper of dubious quality but loved by Brahmins on par with their worship of carnatic music) have an unholy nexus. Brahmin controlled news magazines and their so called critics formed a relationship with sabhas and performers. There was (and is) no professional critic. The Music Academy itself has a clique mentality.

Devnath dwells, justifiably, on the politics of the 'Sangeetha Kalanidhi' award fracas. Jayaraman had taken great efforts to renovate the house of Thyagaraja and organize annual festivals in his honor. Inaugurating a Thyagaraja Aradhana G.K.Moopanar addressed Semmangudi, MS, Lalgudi etc with the prefix 'Sangeetha Kalanidhi'. Semmangudi barked on the stage "he is not one". Besmirched thus Lalgudi next day visited Semmangudi and told him that even if given he would not accept the title 'Sangeetha Kalanidhi'. Photocopies of press clippings with English translations give these pages a racy flavor.

Carnatic music has always been accused of reeking with casteism. Thats a blog for another day. I was surprised to learn that the Kanchi Mutt had taken ownership of the homes of the musical trinity. Carnatic music and Hinduism are inseparable. They need not be torn asunder but when music is sheltered under religion it does not augur well. Compiling the Pancharatna Kritis of Thyagaraja Lalgudi, Devnath writes, takes the help of Kanchi's mutt's then reigning pontiff Chandrasekarendra Swamigal. That pontiff would not even see a non-Brahmin. In a famous rendezvous with Gandhi Chandrasekarendra pleaded "dont destroy hinduism" referring to Gandhi's attempts  to eradicate untouchability.

Lakshmi Devnath herself bares her biases ever so subtly. She is scrupulous in quoting the names, even an Assistant Collector, of whose quotes she is using or whose views she is sharing in relation to Lalgudi. Striving to drive home the point that everyone in the Lalgudi lineage, including Guruswany Iyer (grand uncle of Lalgudi who died young) is musically talented Devnath reaches to 'a book'. In the 'compilation of notable vidwans of this period, published as part of a book, talks about Guruswamy Iyer'. 'Guriswamy dyer sings well in strict adherence to rules. He is also an excellent vidwan'. Devnath, not accidentally, annotates the reference in the 'notes' as the book written by Nadar Christian Abraham Pandithar (possibly backward community then). Pandithar's book 'Karnamirtha Sagaram' is considered a definitive text and well researched material on the origins of Carnatic music. Contemporary Tamil writer Jeyamohan wrote of how Pandithar, being Christian, was studiously eclipsed by the Brahmin establishment. Even the Dravidian parties that emphasized non-Brahmin influence in music chose to ignore Pandithar because he was a Nadar Christian and not an 'Isai vellalar' the caste of Karunanidhi.

Devnath ignoring the caste dimensions in the Pillai versus Brahmin artistes depending on the kind of God in a temple is a telling lapse. Quite interestingly another book by Devnath, titled 'A class apart', is about Rashmi Parthasarathy. Mrs Parthasarathy, naturally, a Brahmin, is feted as an 'educationist'. She is no such thing in reality. The PSBB schools are notorious for their Hindutva emphasis and blatant promotion of Brahminism in the name of promoting Indian culture. I am sure Devnath would recoil with horror before writing of Thulasi Vandayar who is running a well regarded arts college in a villlage, without a penny in donations, for decades. If Mrs Parthasarathy is an educationist then so are Jeppiar and Wodayar, two bootleg manufacturers turned 'educationists'.

As I closed the book I certainly knew of key events in Lalgudi's life. The controversies, particularly the solo performance issue, were illustrative if the reader has prior thoughts in that regard else it was only gossip. A biography must delve into the mind of a subject and recreate the life in a composite manner, including a portrait of the era, for the reader. Lalgudi still remains distant to me. I still do not know the man. The book did leave a respectable impression of Lalgudi in my mind. But I am afraid the lack of an intellectual flavor could also be because the subject person lacked it too. Here is no Wagner wondering about why not use Buddhism. No Beethoven flinging a condemnation at an emperor. A biography of Ilayaraja might have more drama in it. Raja, as film musician, had more freedom to experiment and push the horizons of what people thought of as music. Lalgudi born into a family steeped into music for generations takes to it like fish takes to water. Raja hailed from a very low caste with no musical heritage. Sadly Devnath succeeds in a way she did not perhaps want to succeed. If the reader thinks at the end 'great man. Admirable principles and decent man. Yet, we can only admire that instead of frittering away his advantages he built on it'.

Jobs commenting on what he thought as the reason for his famous rival's, Bill Gates's, reason for not being as creative as himself said "if only Bill had dropped acid in college or went off to an ashram". Lalgudi the ever obedient, eager to please, role model son scaled heights on the shoulders of a storied family and capitalized on a very stratified art form that prided itself on 'connections'. Maybe someday a better biographer will do better justice to a talent that readers could understand better.

Stravinsky At Harvard, T.M.Krishna At CII And 'Semmangudi Mama'.

An angry reader, a self styled writer/translator, commented on my last blog that I had not explored the 'why' of how music developed differently in two continents, Europe and India (Asia). I had, indeed, mentioned how classical music in India, by virtue of being exclusively religious, was otherworldly and therefore with no interest in the contemporary issues. Taking the reader's comment seriously I shall explain with greater detail on the 'why'. A disclaimer, this blog is not a criticism of the musical or singing abilities of any musician or singer. In fact singers like T.M.Krishna and Sanjay Subramanian are highly talented singers whose talent and craft passes my understanding and ability to appreciate.

The reasons behind the divergence of what is considered philosophy in India vs the West is relevant to understanding the divergence of why the musical cultures of the two traditions differ. Much of Indian philosophy, not all, is justifiably looked at by westerners as more of 'theology' than 'philosophy' in the classical sense of the word 'philosophy'. This is not a trivial 'lost in translation' difference. Indian philosophy and music is more concerned with the unknowable beyond. In fact both philosophy and music were seen as paths to rise above the daily tumult of earthly life in India.

Prodigy and legendary violin virtuoso Yehudi Menuhin writes in 'Music of man', "For the Indian, the individual note, with all its inflections and colors, equates with the idea of personal salvation, of resignation and acceptance. India once entertained the idea of counterpoint, but while they could have developed it, their philosophy was alien to it".

The Renaissance and Reformation movements completely remade the intellectual life of Europe giving birth to the most important contribution to mankind, the modern university. The Carnatic music trinity are contemporaries to each other and to Mozart and Beethoven. I don't know what Thyagaraja, Dikshithar and Syama Shastry read. There are no records. Their lyrics are purely religious showing religious instruction and nothing beyond. To be fair, education in then India was nothing like what the universities of Germany, the cradle of Western classical music.

Bach had a 6 volume edition of Luther's writings. Mozart was well read in classics. Beethoven had a thirst for classics and we have detailed, albeit partial, records of what he read (see link below). "He had complete editions of Cicero, Euripedes, Goethe, Homer, Schiller and Shakespeare". "Travel books, Italian and Latin dictionaries, French grammar book" too were among his vast collection of books on music theory, compositions of Mozart, Haydn and more. A German composer had acquired by books of his contemporaries, Greek and Roman authors, an English playwright, dictionaries of an alien language and more. The collection also shows his wide interest in drama, poetry, theory of music and traveling. This is the modern European.

Mozart uses material from Shakespeare and Ovid to write his ribald opera 'Cosi fan tutte'. Beethoven uses Schiller to write the immortal finale in the 9th. When we come to a composer like Wagner the connection between philosophy, music and intellectual wandering takes on a different dimension.

Wagner was deeply influenced by the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer and who in turn was influenced through Kant by Buddhist philosophy (and through Persian translation of Upanishad by Dhara Shikoh, the Mughal Prince, which found its way to Germany). When Liszt proposes to write Dante's 'Divine Comedy' as opera Wagner writes to him. Wagner rejects Judeo-Christian theology in favor of Buddhism and asks Liszt to consider that when he writes his music. Here are two German composers talking about writing an opera based on an Italian writer's work and discussing Eastern philosophy. Paul Schofiield, Wagner afficionado, lectured about the influence of Buddhism on Wagner in Boston recently. Completing the ring was Wagner's influence on Nietzsche. We should note that Bach's son and famous composer C.P.E. Bach, Goethe, Wagner, Nietzche all went to the university of Leipzig.

Europe which laid the precursor of modern university education laid stress on graduates learning philosophy. If one lived in Germany in that era one breathed philosophy. Indians take great pride in crossing oceans and conquering distant (by then standards) countries but little is known of what kind of literatures they brought home from abroad. This gap in our knowledge of Indian history, now given more to taking pride in what Indians taught the world than what they learned, is a serious impediment.

Whether it is a musician like Wagner or a mathematician like Leibniz or a literary giant like Goethe or a sculptor like Michaelangelo or Da Vinci a deep knowledge of philosophy is a common feature and the philosophical predilections of the creator is manifest in their respective forms of creations. America's educational system, a child of the Renaissance and Reformation, continues to lay stress on knowledge of classics and liberal arts for any graduate.

A westerner seeks the best from every corner of the world and tries to alloy them to his or her craft. Thats why we have John Coltrane and Leonard Bernstein drawing inspiration from Indian music. That why Herman Hesse and Schopenhauer and Goethe study Indian literature. Indians are smug about Goethe's admiration of Kalidasa or other such influences. Rarely have Indians asked "what can we learn from the west".

Russian composer Igor Stravinsky revolutionized western classical music with his 'Rites of the spring'. Opera houses in Paris witnessed bedlam when it was performed. Harvard University invited Stravinsky to deliver the 'Charles Norton lectures on Poetics'. Its a high honor for anyone. Stravinsky starts his first lecture on 'poetics' (not poetry) by drawing on Aristotle's definition of poetics. An American university had invited a Russian music composer to talk on 'poetics' and he in turn opens the speech with a definition from a Greek philosopher. Stravinsky delivers 6 lectures of such intellectual class about music. He does not talk about notes, modes, scales. He delves into the higher 'philosophy' of music. It is a trite cliche to say that a bird cooing is music. Stravinsky says no and outlines why only human beings can make music. Thats just the icing.

A journalist interviews Leonard Bernstein over dinner for nearly 7 hours and publishes 'Dinner with Lenny'. Bernstein races over Freud, Hindustani, Blake, Mahler and much more and gives a veritable feast to show that a great musician draws on every art form to instruct his craft. Thats why I consider T.M.Krishna, Ravi Shankar, Sanjay Subramaniam etc as 'performers'. Amongst them somebody like Ravi Shankar is a genius in that frame of analyses.

T.M. Krishna addressing CII leadership meeting tries to be a different carnatic musician from what we are accustomed to seeing or hearing. He is very articulate, charismatic and has enthusiasm. He also has some worthy ideas like the archiving effort he is doing (which is very contrary to the 'oral' tradition of Indian culture). The West excels in record keeping. Mozart's birth record, Shakespeare's marriage record, Beethoven's book list, details of when and where Wordsworth wrote a poetry are all meticulously researched and maintained. Whereas we have only sketchy details of even a recent person like Bharathi. Where Krishna fails miserably is in his attempt to be an intellectual defining what is culture and what is classical music. His lack of reading is evident. His complete lack of any philosophical background is obvious. The worst part of the lecture was his brazen statement "I practice the most sophisticated art (i.e. carnatic music), we are all geniuses". Thats it. No explanation or divination on that. There is no semblance of anything intellectual in the speech. He is a typical carnatic musician. I can bet that even today if one walks into the home of most carnatic musicians, so called doyens, one would not find half the books that Beethoven read 200 years ago.

Even if I were to take Krishna's assertion at face value I'd have liked to see him educate the audience with a historical background of how the musical trinity come to be contemporaries in a sleepy souther town. He could have fleshed out a narrative of the historical setting, how they changed music forever, state of music before and after, what did they build on, whose shoulders they stood on etc. But he is no Bernstein. This is not something that is missing in just Krishna alone. Its the typical smug Indian attitude of "I've nothing to learn from the world and the greatness of my culture is axiomatic".

Contrast this with what Yehudi Menuhin writes: "I think sometimes that we should establish such exotic interludes in our own concerts. It would encourage people to become aware of what is in not their own while strenghtening their sense of what is theirs". I do not believe that Carnatic music cannot be improved upon. Nothing in this world is like that. Carnatic music has indeed changed and adapted. Particularly in the use of instruments. Specifically the violin. But the music itself is still fossilized.

Compare and contrast the curriculums of music colleges in Tamil Nadu with that of Juilliard, New York. In USA one cannot become a music graduate without adequate grounding in liberal arts and classical literature. In the west too we have musicians who are not philosophical. Michael Jackson comes to mind. Yes he redefined a genre but he had no intellectual ability to philosophize like Beethoven. And thats why in 200 years Jackson will live in the archives of some university library for students to research a period but Beethoven's 9th will still echo in Lincoln center in NYC.

Dialogues between Western classical musicians do not dwell just on techniques. They talk of proximate issues. Sometimes the dialogues are heavy philosophical discourses. Daniel Barenboim, musician and conductor, meets the orientalist and philosopher Edward Said. The discourses become an intellectually delightful book "Parallels and Paradoxes" thats a tour-de-force.

Sanjay Subramnian spends a day with Semmangudi 'mama' on the occasion of going to receive an award in Mumbai. Sanjay is thrilled at Semmangudi's power of observation because, as the flight entered Dharavi, he recognized the place and asked if it was the same. After the function Semmangudi calls Sanjay to ask if the award Sanjay had recieved was in the form of a cheque or a demand draft (Semmangudi too got the award. He was just cross checking what the other guy got) and it is a draft then 'we have to lose bank charges'. These two, Sanjay says, were significant things in that trip. God save Carnatic music.

Sanjay alludes indirectly to some unflattering rumors of Semmangudi. Writer Jeyamohan narrated an incident in his blog recently. Another Carnatic musician, GNB, had prostrated at hte feet of Hindustani singer Bade Ghulam Ali Khan. Semmangudi had asked GNB "அந்த   துலுக்கன் காலில் ஏன் விழுந்த". T.M.Krishna embarrassingly glides over the topic of casteism in carnatic music.

Balamurali Krishna is considered a genius in the theory of Indian classical music and a genius as a singer. My quarrel is with the valuation of his knowledge of music. I am unqualified to speak or pick faults with his knowledge of raga etc, the techniques, of Indian music. But check his interview in Sruti here. The same irritating smugness of "I've nothing to learn from the world". His idea of what makes a music 'classical' is pathetic. He is hoist on his own ideological petard when he complains that his experimentations in music, introducing a hindustani snippet in a carnatic song, is frowned upon by purists. 

Let us even agree that Carnatic music as such may not need any infusion from any other musical tradition. How about the performances itself? In a western classical performance when a soloist performs the rest of the orchestra will be still, their instruments placed in order (not plonked on the floor), the conductor will stand with his hands folded and still. Others will not be fidgeting or picking nose or drinking coffee. When the performance ends the conductor takes an encore and then introduces the key players for individual encores. New York Times reviewed a performance of Chitraveena Ravi Kiran. Kiran was fidgeting in a distracting manner when the soloist was playing. Forget about introducing members of his troupe for individual encores.

At some level I've found Ilayaraja's fans to be more open minded than carnatic music fans. Try asking a carnatic music lover if something can be changed. You will get a sanctimonious lecture "why should we? Who are the westerners and why is it what they do the better? Why should we change to somebody else's tradition of performance? we enjoy our music being performed this way and in fact all of that is what makes carnatic music our own".

The term genius is very loosely used by all. In daily usage we can be lax. But as a matter of judgment we should be careful. I'd say any day that Ravi Shankar and Yehudi Menuhin are virtuosos on the instrument. Impressed by Lalgudi Jayaraman's playing of violin Yehudi Menuhin gifted a violin. Jayaraman used that violin till he died. But do I expect Jayaraman or Shankar to write a book like 'Music of man' like Menuhin (actually it was a TV series made into a book)? 

If this is what T.M.Krishna, Sanjay Subramanian, Ravi Shankar etc are then what can we say of a film musician like Ilayaraja or A.R.Rahman. Ilayaraja has a talent to speak foolishly without any thought. He embarrassed himself when he said, trying to praise fellow film musician MSV, 'what we are today is  courtesy of what he spat out. Even his spit is pure". Ilayaraja is a power house of talent in the technique of music. But what is his 'idea' of music? In that same speech Ilayaraja would deride a beutiful lyric written by Kannadasan. Raja made it a fetish to make lyricists write lyrics to his tunes. Not even Mozart did that. Mozart in fact uses the best libretto writer to give heft to his operas. Thats because Mozart knows and understands music at a level far beyond what Ilayaraja even grasps.

That angry commenter had also said that Ilayaraja had a 'revolutionary impact' on the common Tamil. A lack of philosophy incapacitates the commenter too. Yes Tamil Nadu adored Ilayaraja as much as it adored his predecessor and his successor. Tamils love film music and Raja provided fodder for 10 years. When Rahman came Raja was promptly dethroned. Nothing changed in the way Tamils understood music or appreciated music because of Raja. If anything modern technology like concerts on youtube and wikipedia based info has made Tamils appreciate Raja today better than they did 20 years ago. Raja played no role in educating Tamils to appreciate music. Again, that is something that Leonard Bernstein did with his 'Young People's concerts' 40 years ago. A good comparison for readers would be to see Bernstein's lecture at Harvard and Balamurali's remarks at 'Swanubhava' (an attempt by TMK to be Bernstein). See link in references.


References and Links:

Poetics of music in six lessons -- Igor Stravinsky
The philosophy of Schopenhauer - Bryan Magee
Dinner with Lenny - Jonathan Coot

San Diego Opera Talk with Nick Reveles: Cosi Fan Tutte http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=4009

Library of Beethoven http://www.beethoven-haus-bonn.de/sixcms/detail.php?id=59120&template=&_mid=59114

Paul Schofield's lecture "Wagner and Buddhism" - http://www.the-wagnerian.com/2012/10/video-lecture-wagner-and-buddhism.html

T.M.Krishna at CII meet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3p2TL8V1Uw

T.N.Seshagopalan interview with Mano http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhd0toOtr9M

John Coltrane and Indian music http://depthome.brooklyn.cuny.edu/isam/Newslet%20F07/Clements%20F07.htm

Leonard Bernstein at Harvard - The unanswered question "The 20th century crisis" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0UU9sYp7uA

Balamurali's remarks at Swanubhava http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_Cr3Te3wDU

Bach, Beethoven And Berlin Wall

Tamil film music icon Ilayaraaja performed to packed houses in Canada and US in February of this year. Auditoriums that seated thousands filled up with tickets priced at $75-$500+. I did not even notice that he was coming until my cousin told me. Many of my friends who attended the events posted running commentaries on Facebook and twitter. Arguments ensued. Questions about what is music, when does music become art and even why not consider Ilayaraja on par with Mozart (yes, please trust me) and more were asked. Confession, just yesterday I bought 10 of Raja's songs on iTunes to add to my existing collection of several hundreds that I listen often while I drive or read. I love music, in my own way. So why did I choose not to go and enjoy Raja? Do I not love music enough to seek an evening of film songs that I grew upon in the 80's and 90's? Can somebody love Beethoven and Ravi Shankar and ignore a Raja event? Would that be proof of 'feigning' interest in music for a snobbery value? I've gathered ideas for several blogs which I shall write in the days to come. 

A further confession. Though I learned to play violin for nearly 5 years (carnatic) I'd not call myself a musician. I cannot and will not speak of music in technical terms like raaga or notes or scales. There are many ways to talk of music. 

Defining what can be called 'classical music' is a contentious task by itself. Julian Johnson, author of 'Who needs classical music, offers some ideas. A music is not called 'classical' owing to its antiquity. When music transcends the immediate across ages and is capable of transmuting itself to various meanings it acquires an eternal relevance earning the label 'classical'. This is easier for instrumental music since there are no words to tie it down to a context. Does that mean a symphony has no meaning? Does music have a meaning?

Legendary conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein posed that questions to kids of New York City in his 'Young People's Concerts' that he conducted to familiarize a generation of children, that he felt, did not take a fascination for classical music, the cornerstone of Western civilization. Bernstein would play a piece and ask the children to imagine what theme would fit that music. He offers 'Superman' flying to address a crisis as a suitable theme. The music was originally written to portray Don Quixote. Did Bach compose his immortal cello suites imagining that one day his music will be played when history's worst symbol of oppression, the Berlin wall, would fall? Did Beethoven envisage that his 9th symphony will be played to commemorate the first anniversary of Berlin wall being brought down? 

Bach was not a very political person. When I visited his home in Leipzig I saw the contract that he had to comply with at his employer's place, a church. He was contracted to write music almost every week for the students. In essence one could say he was no different from any film musician who produces music for money. Yet for over 300 years his music has attained an eternity for the genius that was poured forth in them. The fugues were composed in response to a challenge by Frederick the Great and we will come to them later. Bach's cello suites were actually lost and discovered accidentally by legendary cellist Pablo Casals. The cello suites were an architectural beauty with six movements per cello. It is here we must pause and teach Tamils who don't know Western classical what that feat means.

Unlike Carnatic music Western classical is written for specific instruments. Carnatic, written without notes, is purely vocal in its original form. The instrumental accompaniments we hear in Carnatic are all improvisations, a technique that is the soul of Carnatic music. A six movement suite is where a composer strains his compositional talent to write music that would tease out every musical capability of an instrument over 15-30 minutes for each suite. Bach was a genius in writing music for an instrument to showcase the instrument's musical capabilities. The Well Tempered Clavier Book 1 & 2 is almost two hours of music written exclusively the plumb the depths and scale the heights on one instrument, the keyboard in 24 major and minor keys. This is compositional genius of a different scale from composing music for a Tamil film song for 5 minutes of which the overture/prelude for less than a minute is really musical setting the stage for a 'melody' that the stanzas adhere to. Then come equally short interludes and postludes. 

Mstislav Rostropovich was a Russian cellist exiled from Soviet Russia for his support of Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Rostropovich was highly respected for the genius virtuoso that he was. One day while he was in Paris Rostropovich heard that the most notorious symbol of Soviet tyranny, the Berlin Wall, was being demolished. Rostropovich rushed to Berlin, pulled up a chair and started playing Bach's cello suite No.2 (watch here http://youtu.be/FiwXUJJjL6g) 

Crowds milled around Rostropovich. If Rostropovich had been a film musician or if what he played was from music score the moment would have been silly. Rostropovich's personal stature as a genius, his exile, his fight for liberty all compounded with Bach's stately cello suite to create a moment that speaks volumes about a society which respects such an artist and such art. Two years later while Gorbachev was under house arrest and the Soviet empire was poised to strike back at Yeltsin Rostropovich smuggled himself into Moscow. Rostropovich's arrival into Moscow to support Yeltsin and a nascent democratic movement electrified Russians unlike anything else could have done. Can one imagine Michael Jackson or even the Beatles at such a moment? Again the man and the kind of the music are an inseparable whole. Bach's music that speaks to the most sublime within every human being and a society that loved Tolstoy, Tchaikovsky, the ballet and more revered art so highly that Russian tanks paused. It is not exaggeration to say Rostropovich saved Russia that day.

Celebrating the fall of Berlin Wall an internal orchestra with musicians drawn from Russia, France, Germany, America etc was commissioned to perform under the baton of conductor Leonard Bernstein. Bernstein, educated at Harvard, would imbibe a multi-disciplinary approach to music. His lectures were a tour-de-force across disciplines. Bernstein chose to play Beethoven's 9th symphony, considered possibly the greatest composition in all of western classical music.

Beethoven, unlike Bach, was a deeply political person. He starting writing his 3rd symphony dedicated to Napoleon. When he heard that Napoleon had declared himself 'emperor' Beethoven tore the dedication away and composed a pessimistic symphony that he called 'Eroica'. Beethoven broke traditions when he composed the 9th. The 9th is also referred to as 'choral symphony' because it is the only symphony by a major composer to have a choral piece.

 

The 9th was grand architecture in 4 movements with the 4th movement being a mini symphony itself with smaller 4 movements and the electrifying choral section all amounting to nearly an hour (74 minutes) of music that would engulf and elevate a soul. The symphony was scored for 2 flutes, 2 oboes,   2 bassoons, 4 horns, 2 trumpets, 3 trombones, cymbals, soprano, alto, baritone and more. 

Carnatic music is 'melodic' in structure. The notes succeed one and another successively. The word 'symphony' means a harmonious sound when more than one instrument is played 'together'. The latter taxes compositional talent because one has to imagine how 2 instruments would sound together. Now extrapolate that to all those listed instruments played alone and together in places. Add the complexity of a song like Schiller's 'Ode to joy'. Finally consider composing such music for an uninterrupted hour. 

Bernstein, in a typical gesture, altered the choral piece replacing the word 'joy' with 'freedom' to signal liberty. The complete performance has been uploaded here. We have to appreciate that this is an orchestra drawn from across the globe and the conductor is a 70 year old who would die 10 months after the performance. Bernstein's 1979 performance of the 9th, which I am watching as I type, shows a conductor who pours forth phenomenal physicality into the act of conducting and at places he appears rapturous close to tears. The Berlin performance was 20 years later.

Beethoven never dreamt that his symphony would be played to celebrate the demise of an evil empire. Even before that Berlin performance and even before the fall of the wall Chinese students protesting in Tianenmen square in July 1989 played the 9th from loudspeakers to drown out government propaganda and to lift their spirits. Women taking out a rally in Chile protesting the murderous Pinochet regime would alter the 9th and play it. That's why the 9th is considered classical music. In an immortal music Beethoven had provided channels to express human aspirations from China to Berlin to Chile across centuries. 

I remember an article that I read nearly 30 years ago in Readers Digest. The author was asked to list historical events that he wished he had witnessed alive. Alongside a desire to see how Moses led his people from Egypt, the Exodus, the author had listed the first performance of Beethoven's 9th symphony.

Dmitri Shostakovich's violin concerto No.1 Op99 is another tale to be told when music becomes the vehicle for a tortured soul that suffers under totalitarianism. Art is not for the ivory tower. It speaks to and embodies everyday travails and triumphs. About that later.