While most of the singers and instrumentalists of Andhra today are young and probably under thirty-five, there is one distinguished figure who by age belongs to an older generation but by temperament and by his way of singing is as youthful as the younger singers. He has not, like Yayati, exchanged old age for youth, but has simply reused to grow old. His voice is well preserved and pliable and traverses nearly two octaves with effortless ease. His imagination is strikingly free from convention and has, besides, a quality of lyricism which communicates to every phrase and ‘swara’ the character of a rich personal emotion. In his style of singing he combines a medium tempo with an uncanny knack of linking phrases to present a soothing chiaroscuro of emphasised and slurred notes. There is a bare suggestion of diffuseness at times, but this is countered by the singer’s deft distribution of the accent on the most evocative of the phrases and notes, so that at all times there is strict sense of form. Moving with the freedom of a romantic impulse, yet controlled by a classic sense of restraint, the music of Dr.S.Pinakapani presents the dynamism and grace of a Greek statue.
Dr.Pinakapani is not a musician by profession. Yet the world of professional music stands indebted to him a great deal. He has inspired many of the younger singers of Andhra today with faith in themselves. He has, in Voleti Venkateswarlu, produced a disciple worthy of his art, and thus contributed greatly to the revival of interest in Karnatak music in Andhra. Above all, while enjoying the respect of younger singers and guiding them when necessary, he has not tries to steamroller their singing under dogmatic ideas of ‘sampradaya’ and sanction.
Dr.Pinakapani brings to his music the bold enquiring spirit of the profession to which he is wedded. It is of course true that everything of value in Karnatak music has been preserved and transmitted by generation after generation of musicians who were guided by precedent and prescription in developing the art. The logic of conditions in the past had demanded such deference to ‘sampradaya’ and sanction, and had also obtained it. But it is no longer enough to quote the precedents and prescriptions of the past if music has to be preserved as a living communion and not merely as an archaeological relic. The unchanging aspect of Indian music, like the unchanging aspect of Hindu religion, Indian philosophy, Indian architecture and Indian social life was till recently the reflection of a stable and self-contained society that knew little of the stresses and strains of life in the era of modern science and wars. But today such an unchanging aspect would reflect spiritual stagnation rather than social stability. To rule by precedent and prescription is a game played by men of limited vision at all times. But we need today men who can relate the arts to the conditions of life and to the conflicts within the individual psyche, and reinterpret the artistic vision in terms which the modern people can understand. It is here that artists like Dr.Pinakapani render their greatest service.
Let it not be understood that between the past and the present in Karnatak music there is a great divide and that innovation and change are forced by the fact of such a schism. The arts are not governed by quantum mechanics and do not change their state as radio-active elements do. Even in times of radical social change, the arts develop organically by readjustment of their functions rather than by a total change of functions. Innovation may be a necessity of such readjustment and if it is so it must be welcomed and encouraged. To quote precedents and prescriptions against such change will be disservice to the arts. To understand the nature of an innovation requires more than adeptness in the arts, it demands an intellectual freedom. It is in persons like Dr.Pinakapani that one can seek this kind of freedom, and it is in their sympathy and encouragement that the younger artists can seek effective guidance. The younger musicians of Andhra, are fortunate in this respect and that is perhaps why they have been able to forge ahead with the rich diversity of styles they display today.
We have already referred to the youthfulness of Dr.Pinakapani’s music. This youthfulness is primarily an index of the intellectual freedom of the singer. The spirit of freedom is eternally young; and an art which this spirit inspires must needs to be youthful. Dr. Pinakapani’s broadcast from the AIR Vijayawada on Monday last week amply demonstrated this aspect of his music. His natakurinji came out with the freshness of a mountain breeze. In Kambodi he sang with great assurance and abandon. The padam in Saranga was pitched in slower tempo and reflected the mood of the ‘sahitya’ masterfully.
With all his mastery of the art, Dr. Pinakapani has not been invited to broadcast in the AIR National programme. But it is no surprise when one remembers that even such a brilliant violinist as M.S.Gopalakrishnan has not been invited for a solo recital in this programme. Polonius while sending Reynaldo to Paris suggests a strategem to find out the reputation of his son Laertes there. He sums up the philosophy of his wisdom in the following words : “And thus do we of wisdom and of reach, With windlaces, and with assays of bias, By indirections find directions out”. The AIR too may be patiently trying to find out directions by indirections.
It is rarely that one gets the privilege of two good concerts the same evening. But it happened last week. On the day Dr. Pinakapani broadcast from the AIR Vijayawada, there was a gottuvadyam recital by Budalur Krishnamurthi Sastri from the AIR Madras, in the usual Monday night instrumental feature. Budalur is another musician who refuses to grow old with the passage of time. How else could one explain the sureness of touch, the infallibility of phrases and the ample sweep of imagination in the well-nigh septuagenarian musician? Budalur has had a raw deal from life until recently. Though now a recipient of the President’s award, and currently acting as the Principal of the Kalakshetra Music School in Tiruvanmiyur, Budalur was until a few years ago left to fend for himself.
Budalur’s mastery of his instrument would put artists much younger than him to shame. Gottuvadyam is a difficult instrument to handle because there are no frets which by practice can give to the fingers of the player a sense of position of the ‘swaras’ he has to handle. If at least the fingers are to come into contact with the strings, they can, frets or no frets, develop the sense of position, as those who play on the violin or the sarangi do. But no, the gottuvadyam player moves a wooden block on the strings to produce the ‘swaras’ he wants. Thus the music issuing from the gottuvadyam is mediate in a sense. The artist has to summon to his aid his visual rather than his tactile sense to get what he wants out of the instrument. But more than the sense of touch the sense of sight is demanding of the attention of the mind that controls both. If the gottuvadyam player is not a disciplined artist, the competing claims of ear and eye would leave him puzzled, and the result would be a fiasco.
Even at this age Budalur is firm in his control of the instrument. There is no weakness, no slurring in his playing. All his phrases have the sharp outline of an etching on glass. Some of his fast phrases in the broadcast had a clarity of detail seldom come across even in the younger gottuvadyam players. It is because of this technical mastery that Budalur’s imagination gets greater amplitude. He attempts and executes phrases of breathtaking charm which gives to his music a youthful quality. If Pinakapani achieves his freedom and his youthfulness through his intellect, Budalur derives it from technical mastery. There is no doubt Pinakapani’s vocal chords are as co-operative with his intellect as Budalur’s imagination is with his deftness. But if in the one the intellect and in the other technical mastery is emphasised it is only to pinpoint that element which is rare to come by in either case.
Budalur’s Madhyamavati and Saveri were of quite a high order. In Madhyamavati, for instance, the kriti ‘Palinchu Kamakshi’ expresses something between an entreaty and a demand. Correspondingly, the raga can also express humility and militancy. Budalur brought out both the aspects of this raga remarkably well. Saveri with its characteristic of plaintiveness comes off well usually in a whining instrument like the gottuvadyam. But if you did not take care the raga could easily dissolve into a formless mood. Budalur brought out both the inner core of softness and the outer shell of form in his rendering of this raga. The Danyasi Padam ‘Paruvam Parkka’ has a piquant theme. It was again the youthful element in Budalur’s music that captured the spirit of this padam.
Devendra Murdeshwar’s bansuri recital in the National programme last Saturday was flawless. From the beginning to the end there was not a single false note, not a single extravagant accent anywhere. Murdeshwar’s delineation of the raga Purya was marked by a sensitive handling of each vital note. Twice he reached down to the mandhara gandhara without any breaking of the note, and slowly and gracefully built up the whole of the raga from its foundations. The second half of the programme was a little crowded since Murdeshwar played three pieces in forty-five minutes. The Bhatiali folk piece was exquisite in its serene musing. After the Bhatiali, the Misra Kafi piece came as a false beginning. The serenity of the folk piece was disturbed by a cleverness in the final piece. However, these are very minor defects. Murdeshwar has all that goes to make an artist great and not merely famous. That touch of greatness will come in its own time, and cannot be hustled into existence.
AEOLUS, 23 March 1963
Aeolus - Articles and Critiques 