|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Friday, May 18, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
State Elections |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Entertainment
| Previous
| Next
Only the best preferred
A study of the history of the Hindi film music industry reveals
that in the golden era (1940s and 1950s) so much talent was
available that music composers tried different singers for
various stars. Once the system settled down, certain groups
emerged and survived for years, observes V. GANGADHAR.
I AM also not sure about the third answer. But many people who
follow Hindi film music, associate not God but the Mangeshkars,
particularly Lata and Asha (Bhosle) as the creators of Monopoly.
Experts in the field had argued eloquently and also written books
on how Lata and to a lesser extent, Asha, through their
machinations, had kept down rival talent and played havoc with
the careers of budding singers.
But several keen followers of the music industry denied the
allegations against the Mangeshkar sisters. They did not want to
be quoted. ``This controversy is dead, so why start it all over
again'' asked a well- known music director from the past. ``In
every field, the best are preferred. It was the same with Hindi
film music,'' he explained.
Yes, monopoly in the world of film music did exist in the past.
But it did not apply only to the Mangeshkars. From the 1950s to
the mid-80s, Lata Mangeshkar and then Asha Bhosle cornered most
of the songs tuned in by talented music directors. At the same
time, can we deny that the 1960s saw the total domination of
Mohammed Rafi among the male voices and that he sang for
practically every hero, from Mahipal to Shammi Kapoor? The same
Rafi was subsequently eclipsed by Kishore Kumar. After the
resounding success of ``Aradhana'', Kishore enjoyed a golden
period which was even longer than that of Rafi. And if we
consider music directors, did not Shankar-Jaikishan have a
tremendous streak during the 1960s? They provided music to an
astounding 25 top films from 1960-65.
Yet no one talked of the Rafi, Kishore or Shankar-Jaikishan
monopoly. Why then single out the Mangeshkar monopoly? The
Mangeshkars are still alive and they have had the longest tenure
in the world of film music. When a singer or music director
passed away, details and controversies of his career were buried
along with him.
A study of the history of Hindi film music industry tells us that
in the golden era, between the late 1940s and 1950s, so much
talent was available that music directors experimented with
different singers for different stars. Thus, even Mukesh sang for
Dev Anand (``Vidya''), Rafi for Raj Kapoor (``Dastaan'') and even
Kishore Kumar for Raj (``Pyar''). Once the system settled down,
certain groups emerged which survived for years. Naushad saab
always chose Rafi for Dilip Kumar, Mukesh was the natural
playback for Raj Kapoor with Shankar-Jaikishan as music directors
while S. D. Burman preferred Hemant Kumar and then Kishore Kumar
for Dev Anand. Sometimes, there were exceptions, when Talat
Mahmood sang several memorable songs for Dilip Kumar (``Daag'',
``Babul'', ``Sangdil'' and ``Tarana''). Manna Dey did the same
for Raj Kapoor.
There was less competition among women singers and Lata asserted
her superiority. A singer herself, actress Suraiya preferred Lata
to sing for her. Shamshad Begum's slightly harsh voice did not
suit the emerging soft heroines, Geeta Dutt had to contend with
personal problems. Other singers in the field like Kamal Barot,
Sudha Malhotra, Meena Kapur and Suman Kalyanpur were no match for
the Mangeshkars. In the era of golden compositions, the music
directors and audiences wanted only Lata. It was not monopoly,
but the need of the hour.
Monopoly, in the field of music, is a harsh term. It implies
ruthlessness, putting down rivals in the field. While the media
speculated on the issue, there had never been clear proof of Lata
and later Asha, being guilty of doing this. Observed one of the
new wave music directors, ``Even today, given the choice, we will
run after Lata didi. Do you know that in the past, some of the
music directors wanted Lataji to sing for them so much, they
shelled out some extra cash from their own pockets, if the
producer was not able to afford her rates?''
The music world was unanimous that the other singers were not a
patch on Lata and Asha. ``Vani Jairam had a heavy voice with poor
diction. Runa Laila was too modern, Usha Mangeshkar had no voice
to speak of. Suman Kalyanpur came closest to Lata in voice and
range but lacked staying power. That was why she was called the
poor man's Lata'', explained a producer who had a string of
musical hits.
While talking about the Mangeshkar monopoly, we should also
remember that the rival singers were often the choice of music
directors who were not in the top bracket. Vani often sang for
Vasant Desai and occasionally for Ravi Shankar, who were not in
the rat race. Runa Laila, Sulakshana Pandit, Kanchan, Hemlata,
Indrani Mukherjee and others were chosen by music director who
really did not count for much in Bollywood.
How true was the allegation that Lata was not grateful enough to
producers and composers who built up her career? Some of her
immortal numbers were no doubt composed by Shankar-Jaikishan who,
however, dug their own grave when they opted for Sharada over
Lata. Then Jaikishan who was clearly not happy with the choice
died. Shankar lost his direction and blamed Lata for this
decline. This was not justified. Similarly, Raj Kapoor thought he
could get along without Lata, who was a lucky mascot for RK
films. Came ``Mera Naam Joker'' without Lata and it sank without
a trace. Raj saab quickly got back to Lata.
If the Mangeshkar monopoly, throttled talent in Hindi films, how
did one explain the success of music director Ravi, who while
scoring music for B. R. Chopra films, preferred Asha? Or take the
success of the inimitable O. P. Nayyar who, without ever using
Lata, scored dozens of hits in the 1960s? We cannot deny that
Lata split with C. Ramachandra and later with S. D. Burman on
personal issues. But such splits were common in the high profile
Hindi film industry and Lata and Dada Burman quickly made up.
Today, no one mentions monopoly in the world of film music. It is
open to anyone. Any song can be sung by anyone. The heroines do
not have their own favourite singers. If Alka Yagnik were not
available, the songs went to Kavita Krishnamoorthy and it went
the other way too. But music directors would be happier if they
had Lata or Asha sing their classical numbers. Thus Lata-Asha
sang for ``Utsav'' and ``Lekin''. Asha had the best numbers in
``Umrao Jaan''. Who can forget the soft, sweet numbers sung by
Lata in films like ``Henna'' and ``Nachhe Mayuri''?
As far as Lata is concerned, the argument that any singer could
sing any song did not work. Alka Yagnik was chosen to replace
Lata who was too ill to sing a particular soft number in ``Prem
Granth''. The song did not click. Most music lovers firmly
believed that no singer (new or old) could sing numbers like
``Ayega Aanewala'', ``Tandi Hawaiyaeen'' or ``Aaje Re Pardesi''
immortalised by Lata. Have Alka and Kavita sung numbers which we
feel could not be sung by anyone else? This is the test of a true
singer. Anuradha Poduwal, with the help of the late Gulshan
Kumar, re- recorded several Lata melodies, but the effect was not
the same. Let us admit it, Lata was incomparable. She was so much
better than her rivals that she did not need a monopoly.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Entertainment Previous : Caught in the formula trap Next : Accent is on novelty | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
State Elections |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|