Carnatic Music and Sanskrit .....
kisho...@hotmail.com
Recently I had listened to a melodious rendering of Muttuswamy
Deekshitar's "Santana Gopala Krishnam Upasmahe" by Bombay Jayasree.
Even though the quality of the recording was good and Jayasree's voice
was sweet, I could not enjoy the presentation. The lyric is in Sanskrit
and Apparently Jayasree did not take care of the words of the lyric to
bring out the mood and bhava of the composition. In the Anupallavi, She
sang :
"santAna sowbhAgya vidalana nipuna ghanam"
Which means in Sanskrit, "To the one, who is highly capable of
destroying the privilege of Progeny".
Where as the correct version is :
"santAna sowbhAgya vitaraNa nipuna ghanam"
Which means " To the one, who is highly capable of endowing you with
the privilege of Progeny".
This is just an example of how much we have been disregarding the role
of lyric in Carnatic Music. Of the current day's musicians, very few
seem to care for the lyric and present a mix of melody and the bhava of
the lyric. It is true that the lyrics are written in several languages
and no one musician can be good at all of them, but what really puts me
off is the fact that the musicians do not take an extra step to go
language experts and understand the lyric before they attempt to sing.
Perhaps this is one reason, why Carnatic Music is fast loosing it's
popularity among many so-called
'traditional' families.
Thanks,
Kishore.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
PRASAD
Most singers cannot distinguish between "maha (great) and maga (?)" in maha
ganapathim. And it is "raGHAva (the man from Raghu vamsa)- not raKAva in
marugelara O raGHava. It took me a long time to realize that "MANAVYALA
KIMPA RADA TE" is actually "manavi AlaKimpa radate"- a telugu song. While
former is a bunch of gibberish, the later means "why not come over to listen
to my request?"
The greatones like Subbulakshmi, Vasanthakumari, Balamurali take utmost care
in saying things right. I find MS SHEELA as another perfectionist when it
comes to pronunciation (Uccharana)
kisho...@hotmail.com wrote in message <7sgmfc$lb1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
, She sang :
>"santAna sowbhAgya vidalana nipuna ghanam"
>Which means in Sanskrit, "To the one, who is highly capable of destroying
the privilege of Progeny".
>
>Where as the correct version is :
> "santAna sowbhAgya vitaraNa nipuna ghanam"
>Which means " To the one, who is highly capable of endowing you with
>the privilege of Progeny".
>
>This is just an example of how much we have been disregarding the role
>of lyric in Carnatic Music. Of the current day's musicians, very few
>seem to care for the lyric and present a mix of melody and the bhava of
>the lyric. It is true that the lyrics are written in several languages
>and no one musician can be good at all of them, but what really puts me
>off is the fact that the musicians do not take an extra step to go
>language experts and understand the lyric before they attempt to sing.
>Perhaps this is one reason, why Carnatic Music is fast loosing it's
>popularity among many so-called
>'traditional' families.
>Thanks,
>Kishore..
PRASAD
If you can't pronounce correctly, it sound awful- any language and any music
Tamil- malayalam-telugu or any language.
Don't blame the Guru or your parents for what you do as an adult. After you
learn some from the guru, you are supposed to use your own intellect to
progress. If you don't know the meaning or cannot say 'ha' - then learn it
for god's sake!
I agree Manvi+ alakimpa is Manavyalakimpa. The singer need not make
"kimpa" as a separate word. Listen to Balamaurali's rendition of this song
if you wish to know how it needs to be done.
Great singers do pronounce correctly- or- make a sincere attempt at it! A
good example of an excellent attempt is a hindustani bhajan (sai ram) by
Sudha Raghunathan. She is tamil- How is that she can pronounce 'ha'
flawlessly. Or listen to the million Meera bhajans by Subbulaxmi who is
also a tamil.
I don't buy your argument that just because you are tamil- that you can't
pronounce certain sounds. That is simply not true.
Ravi Sivasankaran wrote in message <37EE7180...@ee.gatech.edu>...
>This is NOT a problem.
>The reason that 'most' carnatic singers (esp. if they are Tamil) cannot
>distinguish between
>maha and maga is that, while most other Indian languages have a sound as
well
>as a
>special symbol for the sound 'ha' (as in maha), Tamil does not. Of course,
>interaction between
>other Indian languages (esp. Sanskrit) and Tamil has resulted in symbols
being
>introduced for
>some phonetics which Tamil did not have originally, one example being a
symbol
>for the sound -ha.
>But there are quite a few other sounds which do not have special symbols in
the
>Tamil script, and
>the only way they are written is by mapping them onto the respective varga
>beginner. E.g.
>
>- The sounds Kha, ga, Gha etc.,. are mapped onto the symbol ka which leads
that
>varga,
>- The sounds Cha, and Jha are mapped onto the symbols ca, and ja,
respectively,
>and so on....
>
>In a similar manner, for all practical purposes, the sound 'ha' is mapped
onto
>the sound 'ga' and
>is written as 'ka.' Usually, the distinction is only context based. And,
>using the same logic, it is
>easy to see why the 'Gha' in Raghava becomes Rakhava (just a simple
stressed
>ka, or unstressed ga).
>
>This is not a problem. One just needs to realize that different languages
have
>different accents
>and stresses on different phonetics, and live with it. And another classic
>example of this would
>be the use of 'Charanam' (foot/feet) instead of 'Sharanam' (refuge/asylum).
>Such examples are
>aplenty if one considers all the vada-mozhi (northern language) words in
Tamil.
>
>
>
>> It took me a long time to realize that "MANAVYALA
>> KIMPA RADA TE" is actually "manavi AlaKimpa radate"- a telugu song.
While
>> former is a bunch of gibberish, the later means "why not come over to
listen
>> to my request?
>
>Sometimes this break-up or mixing of words do come about when someone is
trying
>to fit the
>lyrics in the talam. (Another example that I could think of is the
charanam in
>Seethamma Mayamma:
>Paramesha Vashishta Para
>Shara Narada Shaunaka Shuka, where the name Parashara has been broken in
the
>middle, because
>of the talam).
>
>I think, but I could be wrong here, that the sandhi of Manavi + Alakimpa
does
>indeed become
>Manavyalakimpa. Which then leaves us with the break up of radate, which
>happens in this song
>because of the talam, and all one needs to do to see why this is true is to
>take the lyrics and just
>hum it in the talam, and see where the break up occurs. Some singers may
be
>adept at holding
>their breaths longer than others and be able to complete a line with proper
>accent, but not everyone
>can do that. This is a common occurance, and I don't see why that should
>bother the audience.
>
>
>
>> kisho...@hotmail.com wrote in message <7sgmfc$lb1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>> , She sang :
>> >"santAna sowbhAgya vidalana nipuna ghanam"
>> >Which means in Sanskrit, "To the one, who is highly capable of
destroying
>> the privilege of Progeny".
>> >
>> >Where as the correct version is :
>> > "santAna sowbhAgya vitaraNa nipuna ghanam"
>> >Which means " To the one, who is highly capable of endowing you with
>> >the privilege of Progeny".
>> >
>> >This is just an example of how much we have been disregarding the role
>> >of lyric in Carnatic Music. Of the current day's musicians, very few
>> >seem to care for the lyric and present a mix of melody and the bhava of
>> >the lyric. It is true that the lyrics are written in several languages
>> >and no one musician can be good at all of them, but what really puts me
>> >off is the fact that the musicians do not take an extra step to go
>> >language experts and understand the lyric before they attempt to sing.
>> >Perhaps this is one reason, why Carnatic Music is fast loosing it's
>> >popularity among many so-called
>> >'traditional' families.
>> >Thanks,
>> >Kishore..
>
>I feel that this is too harsh a generalization. Just because somebody does
not
>pronounce one word
>properly does not mean that carnatic music has lost its popularity.
>
>It is not usually necessary to consult language experts to understand the
>meaning of verses in
>compositions. The way it is done, or at least it was with me, was that
>whenever we begin
>learning a new song, my Guru dictates the lyrics, we write it down, and
then he
>explains the meaning
>of the whole song, phrase by phrase to us before we begin to sing the
kriti.
>The assumption that I
>made at that point in time was that, whatever my guru said (for the lyrics
as
>well as the meaning)
>is correct. I feel it is this trust in our Guru that makes Carnatic music
>system a little special!!
>
>Regards,
>
>Ravi Sivasankaran.
>
>
Ravi Sivasankaran
> It is important to learn the pronunciation if one wants to sing any song!
> If you can't pronounce correctly, it sound awful- any language and any music
> Tamil- malayalam-telugu or any language.
My point is, music does not cease to remain good even if there are certain
insignificant phonetic abberations. I don't deny that it is important for one
to know
the lyrics properly, but the way one mouths the words are still heavily
personal, and
should not matter.
> Don't blame the Guru or your parents for what you do as an adult. After you
> learn some from the guru, you are supposed to use your own intellect to
> progress. If you don't know the meaning or cannot say 'ha' - then learn it
> for god's sake!
If this is a personal note for me, I never blamed my Guru. I have the utmost
respect for him. I am also not passing the buck onto someone else for my
flaws.
But, if this is a general observation, then I stick to what I said earlier. It
is NOT
possible for everybody to consult linguistic experts everytime he/she learns a
new
kriti. My contention is that substitution of a wrong word in a song is not
good,
but minor pronounciational errors should not matter.
> I agree Manvi+ alakimpa is Manavyalakimpa. The singer need not make
> "kimpa" as a separate word. Listen to Balamaurali's rendition of this song
> if you wish to know how it needs to be done.
> Great singers do pronounce correctly- or- make a sincere attempt at it! A
> good example of an excellent attempt is a hindustani bhajan (sai ram) by
> Sudha Raghunathan. She is tamil- How is that she can pronounce 'ha'
> flawlessly. Or listen to the million Meera bhajans by Subbulaxmi who is
> also a tamil.
Agreed BMK has probably one of the best akshara and Sahitya-Shuddham among
the present day singers. But, both he, Sudha, and MSS personify Carnatic music
as
much as any other performing artist of today. I could cite a few examples
where
even these musicians mentioned above have made errors in their prounications,
but
I still say that it is insiginificant as long as the words are still the same
as the
original.
Of course, the example cited by Sri Kishorehema where the original word has
been
replaced by a totally wrong one, that I have to say is probably not good!
> I don't buy your argument that just because you are tamil- that you can't
> pronounce certain sounds. That is simply not true.
>
Well, maybe I didn't say it right, but what I meant was that if a word appears
in two
or more languages, then the speaker (or, as in this case, the musician), would
tend to
pronounce it the way it is done in his/her native language. That is natural,
and sub-
conscious. One can change the way it is pronounced only with a conscious
effort, which
may not always be possible. Stresses at different places for different words
is gained
by a constant usage of a language and cannot simply be changed by consulting
encyclopedea.
E.g: Ask different people in India to pronounce my name, i.e., Ravi, and see
how many
different version you get. I could give you at least four:
Ravi - a majority of the people
Revi - Malayalis
Robi - Oriya, (parts of Bihar too)
Rabi - Bangla, Assamese and some NE languages.
So, my name does not change or simply does not stop sounding good, no matter
who
says it.
Regards,
Ravi Sivasankaran.
Shashidar Diwana
Prasad, I agree with you, it is a good point !
Thanks.