| Q. How did you become a musician (family background, etc)? How were you trained? |
|
Typically one learns through "total immersion", living in the guru's
house for years, in some cases decades. Most successful performers
of today have been trained in this manner.
I belong to a musical family. My father and elder brother were both singers, so in effect I stayed in my gurus' house till I got married. Both of them used to teach singing to a number of students at home. While teaching they used to play the Tabla. So I also learnt how to play the Tabla while I sing. That makes the relation between the tala and the singing (bandish and its development) very clear in one's mind. My father was a disciple of Pt Vishnu Digambar Paluskar, who systematised music education. In Pt Paluskar's method of teaching the disciples learned not only singing, but a number of associated skills such as writing and reading musical notation, care of musical instruments, composition, group singing etc. Pt. Paluskar even had a printing press in his music school. Another unique aspect of my childhood is that my father had founded a school of music to which he took me every day. I had access to all the classes going on there. I was very interested in dance and that was the first thing I learned at my father's music school. I think dance teaches one many things useful for singers, for example expressiveness and a sense of drama besides of course rhythm. My father also started an art circle where he regularly invited eminent artists from around the country. Most of them would also stay at our house. As a result I got to observe at a close distance a number of musicians - both singers and instrumentalists. |
| Q. What is more important in becoming a musician: talent, training, personality, hard work...? |
|
A modicum of each is needed. Different individuals have them in
different proportions. Without talent one cannot begin to learn. It
is only through proper training that the talent can be developed to
its full potential. Training must be complemented by hard work to be
effective. Good personality is needed for an artist to influence
their audience.
Apart from the four components you name, an important aspect, perhaps the most important aspect, is originality or freshness of approach. Every artist has to have some unique contribution to make. Talent, training etc are all necessary, but without that element of individuality they fail to make a lasting impression. Any given artist cannot hope to have 100% marks in all these. If one fully exploits ones strengths and learns to manage with ones weaknesses, one becomes successful. |
| Q. Who do you perform for, and in what contexts? What is the purpose of this kind of performance (entertainment, worship/devotion, etc)? |
|
I think music is the only art where the artist and the listeners
simultaneously share the enjoyment of the music being created. When
I am practicing in my room there are no others to listen to me. I am
singing for myself. But I also assume the role of a listener,
distancing myself from the music I am producing and evaluating it as
another person would. I think the toughest test for my music is to
satisfy me as a listener. Nobody else can be as critical as that.
In my opinion the word "entertainment" does not begin to describe
the effect of music on the listener. I expect my listeners to bring
some learning to my concert and also to take back some. Music makes
one open out and examine the innermost corners of ones personality.
Music is the clearest mirror in which I can see myself reflected.
On many occasions listeners have come and told me that listening to
my music was a deeply moving, almost religious, experience.
Speaking as an ethnomusicologist now, my concerts are secular events. I do sing a bhajan or two at the end of practically every concert, However, it is not a hindu ritual. In fact, throughout the history of khayal singing, both hindu and moslem musicians have sung praises of hindu as well as moslem names of God. There are temple musicians in India. The famous shehnai maestro Ustad Bismillah Khan was employed as a temple player for many years. However, professionally performed music does not have a place in Hindu worship. Group sing-alongs are however common. These are known as "arati". |
| Q. How do you feel about different performance contexts (concert hall versus baithak, home vs abroad)? |
|
I do enjoy a smaller baithak more. The audience is closer to the artist
and feels more free to respond in a baithak with seating on floor. There
is better eye contact so the artist gets more encouragement.
The signals from audience in a hall setting are more subtle (e. g. visual instead of audible). It takes more experience to be at home in a concert hall. On the other hand, halls are economically much better, and one sees a preponderance of hall concerts today. Concerts abroad can be divided into those for local audiences and those for primarily Indian expatriates. The latter kind are not very different from concerts at home. But western audiences naturally react differently. They remain very quiet during a performance as they are expected to do in their own music. They show their appreciation after the concert is over. Sometimes they ask questions which would not occur to an Indian. |
| Q. Whose opinion do you value most on the music: audience, critic, your own judgement? What role do critics and commentators have in Indian music? |
| Ultimately it is one's own judgement which must be the final word. Each artist has her own abilities and limitations. Nobody else can make a better decision than the artist herself. Audience reactions, especially those of the more experienced and knowledgeable listeners, are definitely valuable. Some performing musicians have written books in which they critically evaluate the music of their time. I have found some of these extremely valuable. |