Letters to the Editor

``A genius all right...''

Sir, - ``A genius all right....'' which appeared in the Friday Review supplement dated December 24, 1999, seems to have been written with a preconceived jaundiced view which perfectly jelled with the yellow backdrop which the reviewer mentions.

If the reviewer is really concerned to see that ``Carnataka suddham'' is not mutated by the performing artistes whose performance she listens and reviews, I suggest that she write a column delineating the strengths and weaknesses of each artiste whose performance she attends and suggest ways and means to see that ``Carnataka suddham'' is maintained by each of them.

Hari Ganesh,

Mylapore

Sir, - This is with reference to the review in your Friday Feature, regarding the kutcheri of Balamuralikrishna.

Me and a lot of like minded people were sad to read such criticism.

Balamuralikrishna takes full advantage of his nectareous voice to emphasise both the science and sampradaya aspects of our South Indian Classical music, which is known to many of us as Carnatic music. It is nothing but mere ignorance, I can say, to make comments that it is a gimmick between the octaves. It is casually stated the Aarabhi kriti was based on Swathi Tirunal's krithi. With my very limited knowledge, I perceived that it is Balamuralikrishna, himself who had tuned the Swathi Thirunal krithi, so that, the beauty of the sahithyam was given more importance to suit both the pandithas and paamaras.

So, what is wrong in his composing his krithi in his own tune then? Your critic seems to be happy to point out that the singer has no originality, even after hearing the full rendering of the krithi!

Anything outside the knowledge and acceptance of your critic, cannot be termed as gimmick or wrong.

Whether your critic accepts wholeheartedly or not Balamuralikrishna is the rarest among the rare mahavidhwans of our period.

S. Srinivasaraghavan,

Chennai-19

Sir, - This is with reference to the bold observations made by Smt. Gowri Ramnarayan on Dr. M. Balamuralikrishna, under the caption ``A genius all right''. While agreeing with some of her views, I wish to share a fews of my thoughts.

In a recent radio concert, M. Balamuralikrishna in the light classical session included Jayadeva Ashtapadi in Kalyani.

Though it was alright, the sahitya is not all right. To my mind, the lyric should be ``Kesi madhana mudaram''. It cannot be ``Kesi madana mudaram.''

The required stress on `H' is missing. In doing so, the meaning is lost. In the first charanam ``madana manohara'' the stress is not required, since ``Madana'' means Sumasara or Manmadha. Pronunciation may vary/differ from district to district in any State.

If the required stress is not given, the lyric makes all the difference. I hope Balamurali will take my observation in the right sense.

J. S. R. Murthy

Chennai-106.

Gowri Ramanarayan writes:

The review of the concert in question was just that, a review of the day's performance. It was a critic's response to the music offered by M.Balamuralikrishna and party, as well as the ambience of the concert. It is the critic's job to expect certain aesthetic and technical norms to be adhered to in classical music, and to express an honest opinion on whether a particular concert conforms to them.

Unfortunately, criticism has been confused here with personal prejudice, or ``aversion'' - as one of the correspondents has put it - where none exists.

The reference to Swati Tirunal's composition was merely a statement of fact and not a value judgement. And nowhere in the review have I questioned the singer's originality, or indeed his genius.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Entertainment
Previous : Talent made the difference
Next     : Sincere, thorough effort