My paati (paternal grandmother) has been one of the deepest influences on my upbringing. She was no different than most other paatis that I knew in our community – in caste- and religion-important Chennai in the 1970s and 1980s. She was deeply religiously orthodox. She was traditional in attire, prim and had properness of familial situations and code of conduct. She had been hardly educated in formal schooling and had studied till grade four. Yet she was one of the most contemporary in thinking. And that is where my learning started.
She was one of the most warmest individuals that I have ever interacted with in my life. She was religious, but did not hold others’ religious beliefs against them or impose her ideas on them. People were welcome to our home, no questions asked. Just for the record, we had family and friends and relatives with various beliefs, behaviours, and obnoxiousities visit us. She was happy to welcome them with piping hot filter coffee and a snack, talk to them and, importantly, listen to them.
She had her personal favourites in Carnatic music. During my teenage, in an era in which film songs were seen as taboo in many a Brahmin household, I had a Samantha Fox poster and music tape as a foil to her Semmangudi Saar’s swaras. Paati understood that as my exploration of what was music. She did not brush it aside as a teen phase. There are many such examples of what she accepted as diversity in views.
There was upheaval recently in the world of Carnatic music. Many have questioned the decision of the Music Academy to award T.M. Krishna the prestigious Sangita Kalanidhi. Known for his controversial views and unconventional approach, Krishna’s selection has stirred up dissent among the traditionally conservative Carnatic music enthusiasts. Renowned classical musicians’ decision to boycott the upcoming Music Academy conference, citing Krishna’s presidency as the reason, raises several eyebrows. Their accusations of Krishna causing “immense damage” to the Carnatic music world and disrespecting revered icons like Tyagaraja and M.S. Subbulakshmi prompt us to wonder: why were these concerns not voiced earlier? If music legends were been disrespected, those who did not stand up for it in time must have added to such disrespect by being silent about it?
Congratulations to @tmkrishna for receiving the Sangeeta Kalanidhi honour. And thank you TMK for your service to music and society. And kudos to Madras Music Academy for this crisp & dignified rejoinder to some musicians throwing what I can only describe as tantrums. pic.twitter.com/OJC5JSPWqt
Advertisement— Kavita Krishnan (@kavita_krishnan) March 24, 2024
Could there be underlying motives at play, such as envy towards Krishna’s versatility, or the exploitation of political divides? Is this controversy merely a symptom of larger societal tensions, reminiscent of the ‘Brahmin versus Dravidian’ rhetoric? As the rift deepens within the Carnatic music community, one can’t help but question the motives behind each faction’s stance. Are we witnessing a genuine concern for the preservation of tradition, or is this merely a clash of egos and ideologies?
As a rasika (or one who appreciates music), is immaterial whether an artiste performs at Music Academy in Chennai or a wedding hall – except for acoustic advantages and probably the tiffin served at the canteen there. So then, where does the question about a ‘rich’ music academy come in ? If one does not like ‘rich clubs,’ one has the choice not to participate in them. Surprisingly, not a single musician has ever missed a chance to perform at such rich sabhas in the past.
The polarisation among rasikas begs the question: where does the truth lie amidst the cacophony of opinions? And as political undertones begin to surface, one wonders whether Carnatic music is becoming yet another battleground for partisan interests. I hope not, for as a rasika, I equally enjoy every artistes’ music, and the different styles of craft that they demonstrate. I don’t know any of these artistes personally, and in the spirit of the consumption economy, I consume their sound bytes and writings on various issues, as much as I do their music.
Also read by T.M. Krishna: Culture After Covid: Artists Cannot Be Tone Deaf in the Face of the Real World
One must be careful about using the word ‘Sanatana Dharma’ to controversies as this. When artistes start using it, it worries laypersons like me as to whether the phrase is being politicised or ideologically venerated. Are the original roots of Sanatana Dharma being bandied about as a fashionable hashtag or a badge, I then wonder. Let us hope that the richness of Carnatic music prevails over political agendas and personal vendettas, preserving its rich heritage for generations to come.
The new school of thought! #TMKrishna https://t.co/YQEKYBT2id
Advertisement— Satish Acharya (@satishacharya) March 24, 2024
Critics condemn T.M. Krishna for his outspoken views on caste, the environment, freedom of expression, political Hindutva, and myriad other topics. Adding insult to injury, he articulates these views with eloquence and conviction. Detractors insist that he should stick to singing and refrain from delving into contentious issues. Critics level accusations at him, claiming that he undermines the time-honoured traditions of Carnatic music. However, Krishna counters by asserting that Carnatic music transcends religious boundaries, functioning as an abstract art form rather than a religious practice. While this perspective holds merit, it often goes overlooked by many.
He challenges the entrenched Brahminical dominance within Carnatic music. His political beliefs are his own. As a rasika, I do not care, and I may not subscribe to his views. But one must accept that he engages with individuals across the political spectrum, confronting right-wingers, centrists, and leftists alike. Even detractors begrudgingly acknowledge his brilliance on stage, where his impassioned performances have the power to move audiences to tears and joy.
Another criticism on him suggests that he lacks bhakti (devotion), and therefore, must be condemned. However, this argument overlooks the essence of his performances. Whether or not he sings with true devotion is inconsequential; what truly matters is the depth of emotion he infuses into his singing. He sings with immense bhaava (feeling). Just having a mark of religion on one’s forehead does not define their human values or divinity. Nor does the need to flaunt one’s kalacharam (culture) by wearing designer-selected ‘traditional’ garments.
But then, most modern day purist Carnatic artistes also use marketing as mainstay to remain commercially relevant, despite their god-gifted talents. Did our ancient forefathers ever permit such sacrilege ?
An upcoming Tamil music director in the 70s was decried as sacrilegious as he had set Carnatic ragas to popular film melodies. Especially for the purists, he was seen as non-Brahmin and outside of the world of those who are allowed to use Carnatic ragas. But then the same genius musician is now sought after for collaborations, especially as he has done the hard work of popularising such music. To add, it is commercially viable to use his association. Where are the purists who damned him at first ?
On stage, TM Krishna is an innovator, fearlessly challenging established norms while maintaining the integrity of musical tradition. Whether it’s reimagining seating arrangements, allowing accompanists to take the lead, or experimenting with ragas, Krishna’s bold approach reflects a deliberate departure from convention. Just as few artists had recently sought to demystify Carnatic ragas in collaboration with a renowned music director; Krishna had embarked on a similar demystifying journey over a decade ago. If artistic license allows for creative exploration, then it extends to the entire cohort of musicians.
Also read by T.M. Krishna: Those Who Talk of Plagiarism in Carnatic Music Know Not About the Tradition
Offstage, Krishna is recognised for his progressive ideals and efforts to leverage music as a catalyst for social change, a commitment that earned him the prestigious Ramon Magsaysay award. Krishna’s inclusion as the Sangita Kalanidhi awardee may seem paradoxical, considering his criticisms of certain aspects of Carnatic music upheld by the very same institution – the Music Academy – that has awarded him. Despite ideological differences, the Music Academy has chosen to honour Krishna’s contributions as a musician, demonstrating its commitment to the craft. But if the larger narrative influences it to change its mind, it would have lost all its moral standing.
The fact that Krishna abstained from mainstream commercial music festivals, including the annual event at the Music Academy, for several years speaks volumes about his commitment to his principles. He utilised this time to experiment with various aspects of music, including audience engagement, performance formats, and settings.
“In the past decade and a half, I’ve charted a course that diverges significantly from that of most Carnatic musicians. It’s not just about the music; there are broader considerations at play,” Krishna had remarked.
His actions reflect his longstanding advocacy for a departure from the traditionalist mindset that has historically dominated the Carnatic music scene. Many Carnatic artists have wielded their influence to maintain control over aspects like language, culture, and tradition, effectively establishing a personal fiefdom.
It seems Chennai, colloquially used to refer to much of the conservative community, has not changed one bit. It loves its carpets and elephants. I am being sarcastic here. Does it live to brush what’s uncomfortable to discuss under a carpet ? And it does not want to recognise the elephant in the room? For example, years ago, rasikas knew of a brilliant and popular Carnatic musician who loved his tipple too much, and rumours abounded of his drinking before concerts. There have been rumours of misdemeanour by certain artistes in their conduct with women. Yet they have been awarded and felicitated, without a single question about their character or social behaviour ? Where were the questions about murai (tradition) then ?
Also read by T.M. Krishna: Kalakshetra Protests: We Must Empower Survivors to Speak Up
“You must start by questioning within the communities you belong to. You can’t simply walk away when you have the power to enact change. There’s a responsibility towards the art form you practice. You must critically examine its aesthetics, social dynamics, and culture, and have the courage to challenge the status quo.”
The world of Carnatic music can no longer hide behind the closed doors of intellectualised drawing rooms, steeped in traditional (or rather conservative) views. Not all traditional views are wrong, and not all modern views are blasé. Yet, this is where many artistes find discomfort.
Krishna’s assertion rings true: “I am a Brahmin by birth. I know many Brahmins who consume meat, including beef. So, what nonsense is this?” That is an uncomfortable truth we are scared of, and quite often use a louder rhetoric to brush the initial question.
Also read: What Is Sanatana Dharma?
Krishna’s unconventional perspectives unsettle the entrenched conservatism within the Carnatic music community. Rather than addressing these issues, we often dismiss dissenting voices and exclude those who do not conform. The trouble is that we expect our artistes to stick to performing their art, and not have a voice or a view around other societal aspects. We dislike being confronted about our double standards, where our actions contradict our professed beliefs. For instance, many acquaintances have their morning prayer rituals with as much fervour as they indulge in evening club activities including preference for specific brands of single malt. Without judgment or preaching, we rationalise this behaviour as akin to being a Roman in Rome. That is hypocritical, just to define the word for the few who have used it recently.
True tolerance and respect, as my paati taught me, lie in acknowledging that one’s beliefs do not inherently make one superior to others. This, I believe, is the essence of our Dharma. Music and creativity allow artistes leeway to have their own form, format and finesse. May the audience be the judge of what they like and what they do not. Similarly in a rich democracy that we are, I may not agree with the views of T.M. Krishna, but would happily hear them. I have a choice not to hear his art if I do not like it. But I would support him to allow him to voice his opinion, within the space of what our democracy norms permit – not what the society pretends to allow, for its own personal or ideological favourites.
Dr. Srinath Sridharan is a policy researcher and corporate advisor. He is co-author of the public governance book Time for Bharat, and posts on X @ssmumbai.
