In conversation with TM Krishna
2Baradwaj Rangan: What is your general attitude towards the film song, because you know in your writings, and also in your book, you tend to kind of bring together, like light music and film music. You tend to kind of club these into one, one category or one basket, so one gets the feeling that maybe you’re, you’re kind of treated as a lowbrow art. How do you look at a film song?
T.M. Krishna: First of all, I think the word light music is not my creations, it’s a word that’s been around. But I think I get your point. Now that you’re saying this I get your point that maybe light music is not the right word actually, especially coming from a carnatic musician, it has a certain connotation. You have a valid point when you make that. I think it’s the Tamil Nadu scenario where light music and cinema music has a kind of cornflare in itself. You go to Kerala, you even go to Karnataka, you have a, so called again light music or Semi-classical kind of genre that is non-cinema. In Tamil Nadu, we seem to have completely lost that. So if you say, nonclassical, you’re either looking at what is folk numbers or what is cinema numbers. So I think there needs to be proper reassessment of that word. First of all, I agree with you. But, I think that cinema music by itself, is one of the most dynamic musical force. I think the greatest asset for cinema music, is that it doesn’t need to have one aesthetic shape. There’s no other artistic form in the world, that is so dynamic, so the whole idea of cinema music, is that the aesthetics will constantly change. I think that’s incredible if you think of it, the storyline, the director, the screenplay the context, the type, everything can change everything about the art and music. It can change the arrangement, it can change the idea of sound, there’s no other musical form in the world that can claim that and that I think is it’s greatest assets, so in a way to box it, in any other kind is probably wrong, just call it cinema music or film music. I think it’s the most dynamic musical tradition we could have.
Baradwaj Rangan: So I also get this feeling sometime that when a carnatic musician, branches out into, this dynamic musical form, that the musical establishment sometimes, looks down on them like they’re sold out or something. Do you get that feeling as well?
T.M Krishna: I think it’s probably changed a bit now, i’m just thinking aloud, but I think for example, when Unni started singing, and I know as an insight in the carnatic world, people saying all kinds of rubbish things and they were all rubbish Saying that somehow seeing the films,may have affected his music, but what Unni sang as carnatic musician before he sang in the film and after he sang in the film, as carnatic as it was and as it is. It’s just a perception issue, but there is an issue with the insider, that they somehow feel, that’s also where the word Light music plays a kind of detrimental role, because some of it is easy music, and I would also wanna say this, this presumption that if you’ve learned classical music, you can sing cinema music easily it is just rubbish. All classical singers can’t sing film music. Singing for music requires a different technique, a different headset a different annunciation, a different accent, the emotive capacity is completely different. So therefore, this is a completely wrong perception and It’s not just carnatic the classical world in the general is too stiff up thinking too much about itself. The fact is, in terms of its aesthetic depth or it’s technicality, in terms of its gravitas, film music has as many demands of a singer as carnatic does. Therefore, I don’t think we should have this feeling. But now I feel this thing has changed a bit. I’m wondering whether in 2017, there is a bit of change when compared to the 90s or the early 2000s in terms of carnatic singers singing for films. But at the same time I don’t think we should take anything for granted.
Baradwaj Rangan: So in the older days, one also used to hear that if one sang film song their voice would change, and you know, they would start singing different;y on the stage.
T.M. Krishna: I don’t think so. I think look, one thing is true. They require different productions, different voice productions. If your carnatic foundation for carnatic is fine, then irrespective of where you skip and jump and share, you explore. You can come back to this without a problem. If this isn’t in trouble, then you’re probably gonna get into trouble irrespective of sang another thing or not, at some point of time. So I don’t really think that it will affect this and all that, I think many times it’s perception. When a person sees somebody, they immediately decide so many things. At the same time there are people who only sing carnatic music, who have terrible voice production, so it’s got so many other factors, and blaming it on cinema music is a convenient excuse, for those who have highbrow feelings.
Other Videos By The Hindu
Other Statistics
Changes Statistics For The Hindu
There are 769 views in 1 video for Changes. His channel published less than an hour of Changes content, less than 0.00% of the total video content that The Hindu has uploaded to YouTube.