News - Views - Reviews
MADRAS MUSIC MELA 2001
RAVIKIRAN AND GANESH - MASTERY WITH SENSITIVITY
| It
feels odd when people continue to refer to Chitravina Ravikiran as a
child prodigy, for he truly deserves to be called a maestro now. He ranks
among the rare few in the world whose artistry in adult life has more than
fully lived up to childhood potential. He combines virtuosity and mastery
over his chosen instrument, the Chitravina, with sensitive and masterful
musicianship. One was left in no doubt about these musings while listening
to the morning concert at the Music Academy on 22nd December, which was
billed as one by the Asia brothers, comprising Ravikiran and his young
cousin, P Ganesh. The accompanists were Delhi Sundarrajan on the Violin,
Vellore Ramabhadran on the Mridangam and E M Subramaniam on Ghatam. |
|
The
choice of items at this concert was fairly good and featured a number
of rare compositions. Sankarabharanam, the oft rendered raga during this
season, thankfully figured only in the beginning, with a rendition of Chalamela,
the Ata tala varnam. Bagayanayya in Chandrajyoti, rendered at a very tepid
pace, seemed to enhance the almost dull and sober mood of the very cloudy
day. The concert
became more interesting in tempo only when Ravikiran took up masterpieces
such as Syama Sastri's Himachala tanaya (Anandabhairavi) and Padmavati
Ramanam (Poorvikalyani), and made them extremely interesting, by virtue of his
involved and soulful renditions. The latter kriti was announced as a
composition of Oothukadu Venkatakavi, in praise of Jayadeva, the poet who
wrote the Gitagovinda. Ravikiran also sang a few portions of this kriti,
to let the sahitya come through. It was a well-conceived effort, and was
correspondingly well received by the audience. The Dikshitar masterpiece,
Divakaratanujam in Yadukulakambhoji, was the highlight of the concert, with a good
deal of creative elaboration, followed by the Tani Avartanam. It was
rather surprising to see
slip-ups in Tala count by all artistes on stage in this piece as the Tala
was only the simple and basic Chaturasra Eka.
Ravikiran
took up Kannada for his Ragam Tanam Pallavi, and kept the raga alapana
short and crisp, perhaps to avoid overly repeating the limited set of
prayoga-s in this raga. Instrumentalists usually prefer to play a ragamalika
Tanam, featuring the five ghana ragas popularized through the Tyagaraja
Pancharatna set. Ravikiran chose to handle ragas which he announced as
'close cousins' to
these, by playing Chalanata, Gowlipantu, Devagandhari, Vijayasri and
Manirangu. It was an interesting exercise, but cannot be said to have
succeeded completely. The Tanam kept slipping into short raga alapana-s in
each raga. Is this perhaps due to inherent difficulties
in playing Tanam in ragas like Kannada, Gowlipantu and Devagandhari? If
so, Ravikiran would do well to plan differently and select more
appropriate ragas in future, for audiences generally look forward to the
instrumental artistry that is possible on plucked stringed instruments
while playing Tanam. The Pallavi (Samanama Sabhapati Sadasiva Trilokame
unakku sari) was well crafted, using Swarakshara patterns, and the laya
variations traditionally involved in Pallavi exposition were executed with
good clarity and a high level of originality. Particular mention must be
made of the creative manner in which these were also woven into the
kalpanaswara-s played in turn by Ravikiran and Ganesh.
Delhi Sundarrajan’s violin accompaniment was barely average, perhaps due to his very scratchy and tentative bowing. In contrast to the smooth sound of the Chitravina, it seemed even intrusive. Even musically, he seemed off-colour in some portions but rallied round soon enough. The percussion accompaniment was unobtrusive, but not very imaginative or anticipatory in nature.
A major drawback of the concert was the poor sound balance in the hall. For quite some time in the first half of the concert, one could not hear the Chitravinas fully well, and this problem persisted throughout the concert for Ganesh’s instrument. The portions that he played were barely audible above the accompanying instruments, although he acquitted himself fairly well.
General
remarks:
-
More time could have been allotted before the concert, for instrument tuning and a proper sound check.
Ratings:
Sruti
- 85 % (Ravikiran's was right on the dot, but the two Chitravinas could
have had better sync)
Kalapramanam - 70 %
Rendering of Compositions - 80 %
Sahitya - 80 % (If one knew the songs, they could follow the sahitya well
through the instruments)
Raga alapana - 70 %
Kalpanaswara - 75 %
Sowkhyam - 80 %
Overall
Concert - 70%
Estimated
audience ratings:
Audience
in hall - 75 % downstairs; 15 % in the balcony
Response - Appreciatively received
- Nisshanka
