TRIBUTE
MS Magic
|
With M.S. Subbulakshmi, there was no differentiating between the music and the musician, K.G. VIJAYAKRISHNAN tries to understand the...
|
THE HINDU PHOTO LIBRARY
MS. The word invokes a whole range of thoughts, emotions and musical impulses. Unfortunately, I had no acquaintance with her; I had been introduced to her briefly at a wedding reception in the late 1970s; I do not, as of now, have as religious a bent of mind as she is supposed to have had even from her early days; I, as a man of the post-feminist era, cannot fully understand her position and her submission to the mores of her societal set up.
Of course, I too, like most of us, do appreciate the tremendous impact her life in music has made on the world. But what disturbs me is that the tendency to eulogise her bhakti, "simplicity", "singing in a state of bliss" has an unstated implication, an innuendo about her creative abilities. That which appears simple may not really be simple and therefore should not be taken for granted.
Distinct style
It is all a matter of style, but in the sense of "style" that I will define as we go along. The fact that innumerable musicians (amateurs and professionals) who started their careers in the 1950s and 1960s tried to imitate her clearly proves that she had a distinct style.
Certainly a person without considerable innate creativity could not have forged a unique style for herself. It is ridiculous to suggest that her husband shaped her style. A style by definition has inner consistency. One cannot gather disparate practices and claim to have created a new style.
Her approach to all types of music making came under the same scrutiny and measured up to the same ideal-ability to immerse the singer, the song, the listener, the vibrant air around us in an "out of the world" experience. Every aspect of music must be experienced "totally".
In other words, she did not have different criteria for different aspects of Carnatic music. Be it a varnam, as alapanai, the singing of a kriti, sloka, niraval or kalpanaswaram, all of them had the same blend of the body, the heart, the mind and the soul expressed musically, in striking, emotional, dramatic phrases.
Total commitment
Let me explain myself. To be sure, Carnatic music means different things to different people; to some it is great mathematics; to others it is a vehicle to display virtuosity (vocal/instrumental pyrotechniques) and yet to others it is that planned event which would excite multitudes. But MS had no doubt what it meant for her — none of the above certainly. It was something she could immerse herself in with conviction, sincerity and total commitment.
The fact that she held on to her style unostentatiously speaks volumes for her as a person and also her mental calibre.
Especially so when she was under the tutelage of a mentor who was held in awe by a large part of the Carnatic music fraternity and married to another mentor. She selectively picked and chose those characteristics, which she wanted incorporated in her style, yet unobtrusively.
She sang with her body, heart and soul and what she sang was strictly supervised for the ring of sincerity to her own experience.
I remember she was criticised (in private, of course, in the 1950s) for being dramatic, emotional when Carnatic music was strictly classical in the strictest sense — "restrained, measured and balanced". She threw these "virtues" to the winds and sang with drama where she thought it required drama; sang with joy where she felt the music required that expression. The measure of her correctness had always seemed a mystery to me.
I used to often ask myself, "why is it that some renderings sound great when MS renders them but sound flat when others try them?" It was not just her voice, it was not just her presence on the stage and it was not even a matter of the difference between the original and the imitation.
She had, at least for me, forever set the limit to expression, not in absolute terms, but with respect to the performer. This much quaver on a note is admissible, not more. When I encounter artists exceeding this limit, it is the MS magic that tells me that the music and the feeling do not match in this instance; a limit had been crossed which musically means the mismatch of emotion and musical expression (in simple terms, faking an emotion). That was something her music never did.
Musical honesty
MS magic, once again, defines for me "musical honesty", "musical truth" and the singer and the song being one. In other words, MS magic defines the boundaries of the possibilities for an individual musician.
MS magic with its commitment to total — body, heart, mind and soul — immersion and the immersion of the listener and the elements around us too means yet another thing.
In a musical event, neither the performer nor his/her music is the object on display. There are musicians whose music expresses their personalities — masculine/elephantine/vigorous/ mellifluous /intelligent/profound and so on. And there are musicians whose music draws attention to the music saying "consider this; is my music not lovely/intelligent/clever/foot tapping/full of virtuosity/emotional?"
MS magic once again allows me the reply "Perhaps. But it is irrelevant. Neither the musician nor the music must draw attention to itself, while the former is nothing but a form of "egoism"; the latter is a kind of "exhibitionism". Both are instances of vanity.
The Magic can prevail if and only if the artist and the song can merge into an advaitic union. This is what MS magic means to me. Here lies her greatness for me; it is the touchstone of honesty, integrity and truth for an artist.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
