ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

The Rediff Interview/Pandit Ravi Shankar

'I thought all the acrimony was over. Now, I find, it is back again!'

But the written down media is today the most ephemeral? Today's written down banner headline is in tomorrow's dustbin.

That may happen in music also. Instruments will change. Electronic instruments may take over from strings. But the content of the music will remain because that is absolutely fixed. In our music, things will also change. We are not singing Vedic hymns any more. We are not singing Chhanda Prabandha or Sanskrit songs or Vidyarthi Sangit. But the changes here are so slow that only the radical and tremendously talented people like Mian Tansen survive. Tansen was so badly criticised during his own time. It is only towards the end that he got the recognition he deserved.

Baba Allaudin Khan is another example. He too belonged to that elite band of extremely talented people who brought out new things within the framework of our tradition. All these people were very badly criticised. Later, people realised their contribution. They were then accepted and people forgot all about the past criticism. The only difference is: Today the changes are very fast. Satyanash ho gaya. Too much commercialisation. These are the usual charges.

But you faced these charges years ago? Charges of commercialisation, going to the West, sleeping with pop....

Over the past ten years or so, all these had quietened down. The critics were starting to even acknowledge and appreciate my experimental compositions which had, earlier, gone over their heads. I thought all the acrimony was over. Now, I find, it is back again!

Is that the fundamental difference between you and your contemporaries like Vilayat Khan and Nikhil Banerjee? That you took risks with your music? That you explored new frontiers, did more radical experiments, attracted more ire?

The difference between all of them and me is actually a very simple one. It is my double identity. When I play the sitar in the traditional gharana learned at the feet of Baba, I am very orthodox. On the other hand, when I compose original music, I am daring, radical. I use non-Indian instruments. I experiment. People often confuse these two identities of mine. They think because I am experimenting, I am no more pure, I am gone.

I do the same thing even in my programmes. If you hear me in the first part, when I begin, you will find me an absolute purist. But in the end, like Fayyaz Khan, who used to sing ghazals and thumris after the dhrupads, I also play a few popular numbers. In fact even Baba did that. He played kirtans and bauls. That was his greatness, his playfulness. The fact that he did not trap himself in his self-image.

Do you think that in the era of Indipop and filmi geet, of MTV and Channel [V], the Indian public retains enough stamina for enjoying pure classical music?

Non-classical music is getting so much exposure these days that, you are right, I sometimes wonder. Film music, fusion, hard rock, remixes. I am not sure it is all that good for all those people who live in the villages and the small towns of India. It may be fine for the big city people. They are like anyone anywhere else in the world. They get everything in real time. But the rest of India is confused by this huge invasion. Particularly the visual aspect of this kind of music. I find it, frankly, terrible. The pictures more than the music.

But the difference between classical and pop music is slowly getting blurred as the Pavarottis of the world span both universes? He sells as much as any pop star and attracts as huge an audience, if not more, than Madonna? How do you explain this?

I don't. But the critics are up in arms when Pavarotti sings arias chewing gum. They see it as an insult to opera. At least you cannot accuse me of doing something like that. I am far more conservative, whatever my critics may say.

Is music moving away from music-to-be-heard to music-to-be-seen? Do you think every musician will eventually end up being a performer if he or she wants to be heard?

I agree with you. With all these TV channels that is exactly what is happening. People want to see music. Not just listen to it. You are right. The nature of music is changing. I am also guilty. Thanks to my brother Uday Shankar, from the very beginning I was very particular about the look of the performance. The lighting; the stage; the dress; the décor; the atmosphere I created. I always believe that is very important for the audience to fully appreciate the quality of my music. It is no use having a great performance where everything looks tacky, where performers spit wyak thoo into a spittoon while performing onstage or boast about their khandaani lineage. In fact, I hate this I-am-the-Greatest syndrome. Or pulling down other artists.

Frankly, Pritish, this Ravi Shankar phobia has been always there. It is not something new. It is not unexpected. But, quite honestly, I did not expect it to reach such a level where they are ready to denigrate the highest award in the land just to pull me down!

Photographs: Jewella Miranda

The Rediff Interviews

Tell us what you think of this interview