Home   Forum   Wiki   Notes   Register   FAQ   Sitemap   About Us   Contact Us  

Western & Indian

Topic started by Bharath (@ 192.25.158.12) on Thu Aug 23 17:21:47 EDT 2001.
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

I have seen the following comments a lot of times in this DF.

"the instruments used are western" .... "This song is like "western music" " etc..

I want to know, what is the definition of tamil sounding music and what are tamil instruments? I asked this question to a well know lyricist and he asked me to look up "silapathigaram" for the answer. I dont think he was trying to answer my question.

Among the instruments that have been used in the last 4 decades by tfm MD's I think a majority of instruments were western.

So what is the subtelity that classifies music as "western" and "Indian"? Is it the instruments being used or the carnautic/tamil folk touch the song gets?

for e.g I wud say guitar, violin, flute, drums etc as western instruments and tabala as Indian (although i dunno if its tamilian) ------ to shatter some myths about the western/indian definitions.

so as an educative purpose it would be nice if people gave an account of how much tamilian has tfm been for the past 3-4 decades. and shed some light on what attribute classifies a musical score as tamilian/western.

I am more interested in tamilain than Indian.

---

Responses:

• Old responses
  
• From: kiru (@ 192.138.149.4) on: Wed Sep 5 16:04:03 EDT 2001
  
  I think we are getting somewhere. It is very difficult to restrict yourself listening to just the music of a different culture. Maybe Classical CDs are okay..but when you hear POP with its lyrics and video surely the influence goes beyond music. Have you guys listened to the lyrics of songs in more detail ? Do you know what is Mary Jane ? Do you what is Angel Dust ? Do you know what 'Hotel California' song is all about ? I have a Jazz vocals CD where the women is singing about here lover being nice/having affair with another woman. Mind you she is not angry, she is just sad and envious about the other women. Different culture, you see. Music is a reflection of the problems/issues/practices in a particular society (eg. pEttai rap :)). At times, I am happy this modern trend in music is okay ..as long as people dont get sold out full scale to western POP etc. atleast now they are singing someting which we can understand. I only hope the lyrics etc maintain our cultural ideals (BTW, what is this incest with machchini in that star song ??)
  
  
• From: Trend (@ 216.68.113.230) on: Wed Sep 5 16:22:04 EDT 2001
  
  Bharath,
  
  The magazine "gentleman"(a magazine in India) took a survey 2 or 3 years back among married couples.About 60% of them said they had sex before marriage with their marriage partner or someone else(!).
  
  So,Deepa Mehta didn't do anything wrong in that scene(IMO).
  Fire is more about not what the women are doing sexually but about what they are missing or have been denied.This is a movie which can easily be misintepreted as gross if not seen in the right spirit.
  Kiru,
  If you are talking about incest getting into our culture,there was a stronger influence of it in the pre-MTV period in a movie called "Indru Nee naalai naan".
  
  
• From: Bharath (@ 192.25.158.12) on: Wed Sep 5 16:37:05 EDT 2001
  
  //"The magazine "gentleman"(a magazine in India) took a survey "//
  
  the week reported that the "survey" taken by womens magazine like "femine" "womens era" etc cover the "elite" segment and traces of the others. It author unequivocally said that if the people who surveyed crossed .5 % of the actual population he would stop writing!
  
  I guess the same theory could be applied to this mag. also. also take into account the error factor of the survey and the "dupe" factor of the mag. to justify the topic they want to project.
  
  plus! deepa mehta was talking abt 1947. in riot stricken conservative muslim community area! ur question is more like "there is a theoritical possibility" so "it cud have happened"
  
  mine is more like. Its not typical and probabilistically negligible so why project the only couple u r dealing with to project an anomaly as norm!
  
  //"Fire is more about not what the women are doing sexually but about what they are missing or have been denied"//
  
  precisely "missed" and "denied" does have something to do wth what the are "doing". infact it has a lot to do. because it assumes that what they r "doing" is not complete. That is not true!
  
  the only "spirit" which will make this movie interesting is the one men consume before watching this movie in "jayapradha" midland theatre.
  
  When i went to this movie this absolutely had no women folk in it! and most of the girls i know think its some cheap adult movie...
  
  the word incest itself is so alien to the country that people will be rudely shocked to hera them
  
  my question is if think this new culture is fixing some thing. then why fix something thats not broken! what do we gain by these nothing.
  
  the concept of free world and free viewing has been narrowed down to adopting the sexual culture.
  
  rather than adopting the silicon valley that the west boasts of we have adopted only the sex part
  
  
  
• From: Bharath (@ 192.25.158.12) on: Wed Sep 5 16:38:46 EDT 2001
  
  errata
  //"When i went to this movie this absolutely had no women folk in it! and most of the girls i know think its some cheap adult movie"//
  
  When i went to this movie, the theatre absolutely had no women folk in it! and most of the girls i know think its some cheap adult movie
  
  
• From: KS (@ 165.122.128.128) on: Wed Sep 5 16:49:09 EDT 2001
  
  /*
  It seems very unconventional.I think one of the true virtues of culture is not condemning other culture even if we don't accept it.
  Why can't we think:Couldn't it be right for someone else?
  */
  Seems like u wanted to misunderstand me this time:) Illenna thamaashkku sonna adhayum criticalaa paarkanumaa!! Anyways, I was not condemning. I realize it has been existing even in our country but just that something like that should not become so popular and accepted that we celebrate it in such a grand way. I’m sure most of us would feel the same way (more Indian this!!:)) It is just that we don’t accept it as it is “quiet” unconventional (and probably more than that, discussion on which is not warranted in this forum)
  
  /*
  Why can't we think:Couldn't it be right for someone else?
  */
  Firstly, should it be? Even if such things (many other things) have to be so, then let us understand them as “something unconventional”, but not promote to “make them seem less unconventional” or “normal”.
  
  If u still feel “what is wrong with the above possibility?” then so be it:)
  
  Also, it is not that anything unusual/unconventional has not been accepted before in TFM/IFM. Which is again, probably, one of the reasons for deteriorating standards of TFM/IFM and movies.
  
  /*
  Does that mean you are under the conclusion that none of our lyric writers(Kannadhasan,VM and Vaali)are devotional/spiritual/religious enough ?
  */
  Once again, probably, wanted to misunderstand me:) (otherwise, why would u miss noticing the “…most of the time” in the sentence before?) I was referring to the rap musicians who indulge in it “most of the time”. Anyways, none of our lyric writers have been indulging in penning such lyrics or living that lifestyle “most of the time”. I also believe that one can’t be devotional/spiritual/religious enough, and still indulge in penning such lyrics or live that lifestyle most/all of the time.
  
  /*
  I think it's two separate parts of life.No links necessary.But we link it to relate to what society says to make our life easier.
  This applies to music too.
  */
  Our society is US (not USA:-)). Why can’t u think: if this link will make our life easier, then why not link it?
  
  I believe, when it comes to TFM/IFM, to become “great”, one needs to have devotional/spiritual/religious inclinations (one may not have such inclinations – but he will probably remain at the most famous, but not great). I have given names of such great people. If you still feel otherwise, give me names. I’ll try to comprehend.
  
  With me, u need not say IMHO:) (I’m quiet open and understanding I guess!!!:))
  
  
  
• From: KS (@ 165.122.128.128) on: Wed Sep 5 16:49:58 EDT 2001
  
  Trend,
  the above posting was for u.
  
  
• From: just for the heck of it (@ 12.5.10.130) on: Wed Sep 5 17:10:52 EDT 2001
  
  From the philosophical standpoint, Vedanta is non-dualistic, and from the religious standpoint, monotheistic. The Vedanta philosophy asserts the essential non-duality of God, soul and universe, the apparent distinctions being created by names and forms which, from the standpoint of ultimate reality, do not exist. Vedanta accepts all religions as true and regards the various deities of the different faiths as diverse manifestations of the one God.
  
  According to Vedanta, religion is experience and not mere acceptance of certain time-honored dogmas or creeds. To know God is to become like God. We may quote scripture, engage in rituals, perform social service, or pray with regularity, but unless we realize the Divine spirit in our hearts, we are still phenomenal beings, victims of the separative existence. One can experience God as tangibly 'as a fruit lying on the palm of one's hand,' which means that in this very life we can suppress our lower nature, manifest our higher nature, and become perfect. Through the experience of God, one's doubts disappear and the 'knots of the heart are cut asunder.' By ridding himself of the desires clinging to his heart, a mortal becomes immortal in this very body. That the attainment of immortality is not the prerogative of a chosen few but the birthright of all is the conviction of every follower of Vedanta.
  
  Vedanta asserts that Truth is universal and all humankind and all existence are one. It teaches the unity of Godhead, or ultimate Reality, and accepts every faith as a valid means for its own followers to realize the Truth. The four cardinal principles of Vedanta may be summed up as follows: the non-duality of the Godhead, the divinity of the soul, the unity of existence and the harmony of religions. On these four principles the faith of the Vedantist is based.
  
  
• From: Trend (@ 216.68.113.230) on: Wed Sep 5 17:14:47 EDT 2001
  
  KS,
  
  "I was referring to the rap musicians who indulge in it “most of the time”"
  Looks like you have listened to a rap musician comprehensively to make this statement.B'cos I haven't, so I don't know.So you win here.:)
  I understood your posting pretty well.But I still have to learn the usage of smileys I guess.:)Like what pun a particular posting intends.
  
  "I believe, when it comes to TFM/IFM, to become “great”, one needs to have devotional/spiritual/religious inclinations (one may not have such inclinations – but he will probably remain at the most famous, but not great). "
  Though there are no examples ,I believe even a atheist can become great.It's just that in India,the passion is there only for GOD or something religious and doesn't go in any other direction(not necessarily bad).Most of the musical successes have been either spiritualists or drug addicts.So,I think you're right.But I'm trying to understand why?
  
  
• From: Trend (@ 216.68.113.230) on: Wed Sep 5 17:19:51 EDT 2001
  
  just for the heck of it,
  
  Here most of them are talking about the religious practices and the pratices we should refrain from.From your definition isn't it possible to find God in anything(I believe that's true).
  Now don't ask me: does that mean I can find God in MTV music?:-)
  I don't know the answer to that.
  
  

---

List all pages of this thread

Post comments