Friday Review
Bangalore
Chennai and Tamil Nadu
Delhi
Hyderabad
Thiruvananthapuram
Fluent and mature
|
Suguna Purushottam’s commitment and experience have strengthened her artistry
|
STRENGTH Suguna’s sang with amazing fluency
Suguna Purushotham sang under the auspices of Shri Rama Seva Mandali Charitable Trust as part of Ramotsava, accompanied by Nalina Mohan (violin), H.L. Shivashankaraswamy (mridanga) and M.R. Manjunath (ghata).
The senior artiste’s forte is her commitment, reflected in her subservience to music. Scholarship and experience have strengthened her artistry, with the result that the manodharma unfurls itself unhindered and unruffled.
Another strong feature is fluency, striking an optimum balance between rhythm and melody.
“Ennaganu Ramabhajana” (Kamavardhini-Bhadrachala Ramadas) may be cited as one of the examples, in which her maturity presented this as one musical whole.
The introductory phase of alapana aired the animating principle the raga inhered. The main body of the alapana, though not very lengthy, embodied the pith of it. Thus, the audience, in advance, was prepared to enjoy the lyrics that followed.
She started building her extempore from the anupallavi (“Rama Rama Enuchu”), and by the time she reached the second half of the charana (“Premamira Bhadradri”) she was all prepared for a disarming neraval. The neraval, spanning over madhya and taara sthayis, profusely poured out the expressions addressing the Lord.
Once again, the artiste returned to anupallavi to frame kalpanaswaras in a mellowed tone, which finally consummated the experience. The concert continued into Thyagaraja’s “Nanupalimpa” (Mohana) and “Giripai” (Shahana- featuring gamaka-packed pleasing alapana, swaraprastara and thaniyavarthana). The violinist’s melodic curves, along with imaginative additions, and the percussionists’ intuitive beats strengthened the artiste’s endeavours.
Other highlights were Thyagaraja’s “Shri Raghukulamandu” (Hamsadhwani) “Rama Ninne Nammi” (Huseni) and many more other compositions. Maybe, she could have reduced the numbers. ***
Sadashivam gave his recital under the auspices of Ramabhyudaya Sabha. Shrinivasa Rao (violin), B. Ravishankar (mridanga) and Shashishankar (ghata) accompanied him. “Chalamela Jesevayya” (Varna-Natakuranji-Shrirangam Malaivittu Rangasami Nattuvanar) brought to light the artiste’s confidence and grit. It also pointed out a lack of clarity in diction.
It was hard to follow the text even in the vilambakaala.
His voice has emotion, but the aggressive progressions hindered its clear manifestation, as in “Sundaratara Deham” (Panthuvarali-Thyagaraja). Both the expatiation of the raga and the narration of the lyrics did not harmonise well with either the melting mood of the raga or the depth of the lyrics that spoke of the divine ‘form’ of the Lord.
In “Samaanamevaru” (Kharaharapriya-Thyagaraja), the akaaras were quite deep and the flow fluent. The pace also supported the overall import. Yet, he could have advantageously avoided assertive ‘thumps’ (executed to suit the rhythm impacts) to create a melodic ambience.
Some more thought-provoking presentations: “Gajavadana beduve” (Hamsadhwani- Purandaradasa) and Muthuswamy Dikshitar’s “Kodandarama” (Kokilarava), “Maamava Pattabhiramam” (Manirangu) and so on.
Carefully polished artistic touches would have transformed the artiste’s scholarly drive, artistic imagination and genuine intentions into a convincing accomplishment.
V. NAGARAJ
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Friday Review
Bangalore
Chennai and Tamil Nadu
Delhi
Hyderabad
Thiruvananthapuram
|
