On Pandits and Ustad
V. Chandramouli
deny Pt. Ravis Shankar or Pt. Nikhil Bannerjee such titles, these days every
performing Hindustani musician goes around by this title (at least that is
what it seems to me). I can't find such titles in the Carnatic world.
Before it starts a net war :-) I don't say that Carnatic musicians are more
down to earth than their H brethren. Probably it manifests itself in some other
ways.
Also, I suppose, a Hindu H musician will call himself Pt. and a Muslim
artiste will call himself Ustad ? What is the corresponding "title" for women
artistes ? If this Pt. or Ustad criterion is applied as intended, when does one
earn a right to these titles and who confers these titles ?
Anyway, having performed on stage a few times and going by the recent trend,
I am almost tempted to sign myself as "Pt." Chandramouli. :-) :-)
--Chandramouli
ps: The last line was made in jest to drive home the point. I have no false
illusions on being a musician.
Atanu Dey
: Also, I suppose, a Hindu H musician will call himself Pt. and a Muslim
: artiste will call himself Ustad ? What is the corresponding "title" for women
: artists? ...
How about 'Devi' and 'Begum'?
Atanu
V. Chandramouli
I don't agree. It doesn't have the same connotation. If indeed there is no
precedent for such titles being confered on women in H. music, all the women
readers of rmic should thank me for raising this important issue !! :-)
--Chandramouli
Rajan P. Parrikar
>What is the criterion for being called a Pandit or an Ustad ?
Limiting ourselves within the context of Hindustani music, the titles
are "conferred" on those individuals who have, by their dedication and
fixity of purpose, ploughed deep into and established mastery over one
or more aspects of the tradition.
I put conferred in quotes because there may or may not be a formal
ceremony involved as in, for example, the way it is done for knighthood.
Typically (and traditionally) Pandit-hood or Ustad-hood is attained after
a collective societal consensus borne out of an awareness of the person's
redoubtable stature and maturity in his chosen specialty. Since it takes
time to achieve that state, it is not difficult to understand why most of
the bonafide Pandits and Ustads are of advanced years.
Pandits and Ustads are learned people and have traditionally served as
preceptors, thinkers and teachers. *Mere virtuosity and brilliance in the
art by themselves do not a Pandit or an Ustad make.*
Some of the names of true Ustads and Pandits that come to mind are:
Vishnu Digambar, Bhatkhande, Ratanjankar, Allaudin Khan, Alladiya Khan,
Abdul Karim Khan, Faiyyaz Khan, Khadim Hussein Khan, Vinayakrao Patvardhan,
Mallikarjun Mansur, Jnan P Ghosh, Radhika Maitra, Ginde, Bhaskarbua Bakhale
and so on. The list is big and I have cited but a few names.
>While no one can
>deny Pt. Ravis Shankar or Pt. Nikhil Bannerjee such titles, these days every
I might want to rethink the Nikhil Banerjee bit (note that I am talking
Panditry here and not musicianship).
>Before it starts a net war :-)
>I don't say that Carnatic musicians are more
>down to earth than their H brethren.
Of course they are more down to earth. They fly much less. Are you telling
me that the collective frequent-flier mileage of the C musicians is anywhere
close to that of the H punters? ONE Zakir The Flying Hussein is enough to
beat the crap out of 20 C musicians.
>Probably it manifests itself in some
>other ways.
>Also, I suppose, a Hindu H musician will call himself Pt. and a Muslim
>artiste will call himself Ustad ? What is the corresponding "title" for women
>artistes ?
"Tai" before menopause and "Bai" after.
>If this Pt. or Ustad criterion is applied as intended, when does one
>earn a right to these titles and who confers these titles ?
>Anyway, having performed on stage a few times and going by the recent trend,
> I am almost tempted to sign myself as "Pt." Chandramouli. :-) :-)
Chandramouli, you smile too much. One would think you are posing for
Colgate-Palmolive here on rmic.
I have implied above that there is no central Pandit or Ustad dispensing
authority. If you decide to call yourself a Pandit from today, no fatwa
can be issued on your head. Similarly, I cannot force you to call ME a
Pandit (although if you do, I won't be complaining).
You are quite right on one score - a great many pups these days insist
on being called Pandits or Ustads. In dealing with a thespian of this
sort, I have discovered that a condescending set of nods delivered at
appropriate moments followed by an addressal by his first name is the
optimal ego-deflating strategy.
> --Chandramouli
>ps: The last line was made in jest to drive home the point. I have no false
>illusions on being a musician.
You mean, as opposed to "real illusions"?
:-)
Rajan Parrikar
==============
email: parr...@mimicad.colorado.edu
parr...@spot.colorado.edu
Umar Khan
V. Chandramouli <vcha...@dip.eecs.umich.edu> wrote:
>In article <atanuD0...@netcom.com>, at...@netcom.com (Atanu Dey) writes:
>|> How about 'Devi' and 'Begum'?
I think these titles *may* equate to 'Sri' rather than either 'Pundit' or
'Ustad' actually.
Cheers!
;-{>}Umar
^----^
(- 0)
______________________oo0-(..)-0oo______...@spdcc.com____________
U --------...@DGS.dgsys.com--------
Albert Einstein, when asked to describe radio, replied: "You see, wire
telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New
York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you understand this?
And radio operates exactly the same way: you send signals here, they
receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat."
**************************************************************************
V. Chandramouli
|> Chandramouli, you smile too much. One would think you are posing for
|> Colgate-Palmolive here on rmic.
|>
[...rest deleted]
This one was begging for a reply. I won't waste the net bandwidth with
anymore non-sense like the one written below:
Well, I have nice shiny white teeth. So why not make some money out of it ?
Btw, I am a model for Crest and not Colgate though the latter offered me a
million dollars.
--Chandramouli
ps: Rajan, let us not carry this any further. I took your response in good
spirits and hope you do the same with this. I shall not respond to any more
witticisms however.
Ranjani Saigal
: I don't agree. It doesn't have the same connotation. If indeed there is no
: precedent for such titles being confered on women in H. music, all the women
: readers of rmic should thank me for raising this important issue !! :-)
On Pandits and Ustads..
I wonder if in the older times these titles were used by students
to address their gurus only?? I came up with this theory only because
that could maybe explain very well why women were not conferred with this
title. I do not know of many women teachers (please correct me if I am
wrong) in the older times.About raising an important issue on RMIC, I had
asked this question before and the opinions on the net seem to indicate
that since Pandit and Ustad's are meaningless women should not bother
about it. (And yet all great male musicians seem to always have this
useless title...:-)
Amongst carnatic musicians, I think in the older times the title
of Bhagavathar was of similar importance. Nowadays ofcourse it has been
replaced by "Dr" , the honorary doctorate conferred upon them...
Ranjani Saigal
Umar Khan
Rajan P. Parrikar <parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU> wrote:
>vcha...@dip.eecs.umich.edu (V. Chandramouli) writes:
>
>>What is the criterion for being called a Pandit or an Ustad ?
>
>Limiting ourselves within the context of Hindustani music, the titles
>are "conferred" on those individuals who have, by their dedication and
>fixity of purpose, ploughed deep into and established mastery over one
>or more aspects of the tradition.
>
>I put conferred in quotes because there may or may not be a formal
>ceremony involved as in, for example, the way it is done for knighthood.
>Typically (and traditionally) Pandit-hood or Ustad-hood is attained after
>a collective societal consensus borne out of an awareness of the person's
>redoubtable stature and maturity in his chosen specialty. Since it takes
>time to achieve that state, it is not difficult to understand why most of
>the bonafide Pandits and Ustads are of advanced years.
While, in principle I agree with much of what Rajan has written, I believe it to
be an outsider's intuitive definition and not an operative definition employed
by classical Indian musicians of the highest caliber. I have been honored to
meet many of these greats over the years, principally because I belong to
an organization connected with one of the music academies in Indian and we
exist to sponsor big name artists from the world of classical music to tour
the U.S. and Canada.
I seem to have received a consistent response from these Pandits and Ustads.
In addition to the laudable qualifications which Rajan lists, most of them
would never accept the use of the title "Pandit' or 'Ustad' with their name
until and unless they had been awarded one or more of the most recognized
and prestigious awards within the classical Indian community. Let us not
forget that classical Indian music has an old and rich tradition and is not
an informal institution totally. There *are* academies. There *are*
bodies comprised exclusively of the highest ranks of musicians which exist to
promote the music, to carry it on to the next generation, and to provide the
infrastructure for recognizing true excellence. This is no less in importance
or significance in that genre than the U.S. Academy Awards are in cinema or the
Tony on Broadway, for example. So, to continue the metaphor, no western
actor would consider himself or herself a "star" until and unless they had
been recognized by their peers with one of the more prestigeous awards. Since
anyone who has one box office hit under his or her belt these days considers
himself or herself to be a "star" it is easy to see how much more exclusive
and significant the titles "Ustad" and "Pandit" are within their own context.
Hence, the discussion later in Rajan's posting as to whether we, the public,
should somehow reconsider those titles when applied to the late Pt. Nikhil
Banerjee or to Pt. Ravi Shankar, are out of that context and hence irrelevant.
The public does not confer those titles, as Rajan noted, through any ceremony.
Neither does the government. They are earned through years of study and
dedication and typically -- repeat: typically -- are used for a person ONLY
after they have received the prestigious and considerable recognition of
the current ranks of Pandits and Ustads. Since classical Indian music is
a tradition built upon adherance to a set discipline, it is the masters of
that discipline which are most competent to judge when one has truly mastered
it... it is not simply a matter of what sounds good to the aficianados. This
is not unlike the "Doctor of Philosophy" system of old in the west where
a student was apprentised to a master, a Doctor of Philosophy, and only once
that Doctor believed his student to be qualified did the Master announce
that the student was ready to be called "Doctor" and recognition truly
came only once their peers accepted the use of the title of accomplishment.
IMHO.
Makarand A. Kulkarni
Chandra, this issue has been raised before, just to recap some of the
articles; in Maharashtra, women are given the suffix Bai, e.g. Hirabai,
Gangubai, Mogubai and the men are given the suffix bua, Bhaskarbua.
So there is a precedent.
I agree with you re. Devi and Begum. Pandita seems correct, IMHO.
Regards
Makarand
maka...@puma.larc.nasa.gov
Makarand A. Kulkarni
>
>"Tai" before menopause and "Bai" after.
>
>
Rajan, for whatever my opinion is worth, I think this is in very
poor taste.
Regards
Makarand
Sarvjit Goraya
: What is the criterion for being called a Pandit or an Ustad ? While no one can
[x]
: Also, I suppose, a Hindu H musician will call himself Pt. and a Muslim
: artiste will call himself Ustad ? What is the corresponding "title" for women
[x]
: --Chandramouli
IMHO, the demarkation of titles Ustad and Pundit on religious lines is not
strictly true. We are talking about the people for whom religion IS music.
Both titles and names are very deceptive in this arena. When I spoke to Mehdi
Hassan about his family tradition of music, the names that poured out were
both Hindu and Muslim; and these were his great grand uncles and so forth.
I think this intermigling of 'masters' from Hindu and Muslim religions perhaps
started from Akbar Darbar and continues to date.
-Sarvjit Goraya
Bhalchandra Thatte
Sarvjit Goraya <gor...@citecuf.citec.qld.gov.au> wrote:
>V. Chandramouli (vcha...@dip.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
>: What is the criterion for being called a Pandit or an Ustad ? While no one can
>[x]
>
>: Also, I suppose, a Hindu H musician will call himself Pt. and a Muslim
>: artiste will call himself Ustad ? What is the corresponding "title" for women
>
>[x]
>: --Chandramouli
>
>IMHO, the demarkation of titles Ustad and Pundit on religious lines is not
>strictly true. We are talking about the people for whom religion IS music.
Some years ago, Amjad Ali Khan was awarded the title Gandharva.
>
>-Sarvjit Goraya
>
>
Bhalchandra Thatte