Home   Forum   Wiki   Notes   Register   FAQ   Sitemap   About Us   Contact Us  

Ilayaraja's comments in Kumudam

Topic started by Karthik (@ 164.164.128.13) on Thu Feb 8 07:26:45 EST 2001.
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

IR has, in an interview in the latest Kumudam (also covered in the front page with his snap), said that 'He has wasted 25 years of his life in film music'.

I dont know how others look at it, but I see it as a very harsh statement of total disloyalty. Its tamil film music that has given IR all the attention and praise he is receiving now. If he's a genius in composing WC, that, in any way doesnt affect anybody in TN. What affects the common man in TN is how good IR has composed in his tamil films.

IMHO, it was a statement totally unwarranted and shows utter disrespect on IR's part towards his craft.

Karthik

---

Responses:

• Old responses
  
• From: cram (@ 206.103.12.102) on: Fri Feb 16 06:38:06 EST 2001
  
  wow wow
  
  this thread is evoking a lot more response than i expected.
  my main objection to people giving importance to subbudu's comments is that he is a classical music critic. he only looks at TFM as corrupting and diluting carnatic music, or as plain noise.
  for people like me, TFM is a genre of its own, it derives its roots from all streams of music. it's a wonderful creation that's constantly evolving, borrowing from carnatic, hindustani, western, pop, rock, blues and jazz, etc, etc. there's so much scope for experimentation, so much has been done. it has a character all of its own.
  have we heard subbudu say anything about ARR's reggae influences or IR's folk attempts? no. that's because he looks at everything from a carnatic perspective, which is natural.
  the point is he is not a TFM rasika like any of us. he's the kind who gets upset when Unni sings TFM, or when there is saydhaaram to kedharam in ARR's hands. he doesn't recognise TFM as a body of music that is part of the popular culture of this part of the world that has evolved over the past 50-odd years. why should we take such a guy seriously?
  note: don't ask me how i know what subbudu thinks. its plain as daylight from his utterances.
  
  
• From: Fliflo (@ 130.203.161.239) on: Fri Feb 16 08:40:08 EST 2001
  
  he doesn't recognise TFM as a body of music that is part of the popular culture of this part of the world that has evolved over the past 50-odd years. why should we take such a guy seriously?
  
  wow...wow..was good
  
  People take his comments very,very seriously (although they say they don't) and keep discussing....I lean from their writings...Lots of info. anyway.
  
  
  
  
  
  
• From: UV (@ 134.113.201.48) on: Fri Feb 16 09:39:16 EST 2001
  
  Guys
  In todays trend composing a song based on Carnatic is getting difficult with the so called youngsters prefering fast based style music
  Its only IR who is proving again and again even in these crazy times he can make people sing his songs the latest one being 'Nirpathuve' from Bharathi.
  
  
• From: rajaG (@ 208.24.179.208) on: Fri Feb 16 09:47:34 EST 2001
  
  Swamiji/Kiru: You too? Bombay theme layum, minnalE layum solo violin piece illiyaappaa?
  
  When a kid scores 95 marks in an exam, there are lot of negative minded people who ask him/her 'enna? muzhusaa 5 mark kOtta vittuttiyaa?' IMO, Subbudu is a typical example of such a person. When asked about ennavaLEy, did he use his above average knowledge in Carnatic music to say
  "Shanmugapriya vil sruthibEdham seidhu miga azhagaaga oru major scale kku vandhu kEdhaara saayalukku pallavi yai thodangi irukkiraar". No! He used his status merely to find a fault, when ARR was NOT even attempting to sell his product as Kedharam 101 in the first place. As cram rightly pointed out, Subbudu has carnatic music fixation and does not have what it takes to get out of it - an open mind.
  
  Nobody is saying that
  
  a) ennavaLEy should be certified as pure kEdhaaram and
  b) absence of such certification tantamaounts to criticism of ARR's efforts.
  
  BTW, namma ooru singaari is in hindOLam. Who cares? I did not see Subbudu saying "Balu, manmadhan vandhanaaaaaaa nu paadarachchEy, gaandhaaraththula swarasthaanam pidikkalainnu thONradhu" OR some such crap. (For the less than intelligent - used for example only, don't try to nitpick) yEdhO paattu konjam melodious aa irundhaa (ennavaLEy) udanEy raagam, thaaLam, janda varisai, prayOgam, puNNaakku nu ivaaLukku therinja limited knowldege use paNNi 'negative comment' adikka vandhudaraanga.
  
  
  
• From: rajaG (@ 208.24.179.208) on: Fri Feb 16 09:51:05 EST 2001
  
  UV: naduvula IR kku jaalraa vaa? I hear more people hum 'kandu kondEn kandu kondEn' in kadhana kudhoogalam, kaNNaamoochchi yEnadaa on naatta kurinji with shades of sahaana, engEy enadhu kavidhai (in sindhu bhairavi)---and all that from just one movie. What say you?
  
  
• From: Kupps (@ 192.6.126.74) on: Fri Feb 16 09:57:13 EST 2001
  
  but fliflo,
  i do take it(subbudu's comment) seriously. earlier if i had told that i was not then that was wrong. i still feel his comments are relevant and useful to TFM and any of its MD. he is a guy who did not say(if im not wrong) anything wrong about KJY for doing TFM. but he said to unni because he felt unni compromised his saareeram and was about to lose his status in carnatic world that which subbudu didn't like. it was of unni's fault (or might be his immaturity that time). but if he can sing well in both TFM and classical arena without compromising in either then subbudu will be one of those who applauding him.
  
  yes he tries to see everything in TFM thru the frame of carnatic whenever he felt that that thing is touching something in carnatic but not doing justice to it to a minimum level.
  
  now this minimum level is subjective that could differ to person to person. but that does not mean that one should not be a critic of TFM in that fashion.
  
  this is my opinion. so i welcome you to point out flaws in them so that i can get wide idea about this scenario.
  
  
• From: cram (@ 206.103.12.102) on: Fri Feb 16 10:05:03 EST 2001
  
  Fliflo,
  i didn't talk about subbudu's comments first. someone else did, followed by a few others, to which i responded, saying that subbudu shouldn't be taken seriously (i still stand by it). then cam a barrage of postings for and against, and some questioned my posting. the last one was just a clarification and my last words on the issue. u want to continue, be my guest.
  
  rajag,
  neengalaavathu purinjukitteengale, nanri.
  
  the discussion has digressed a great deal, but it has turned out to be an interesting one.
  
  
• From: Kupps (@ 192.6.126.74) on: Fri Feb 16 10:06:53 EST 2001
  
  rajaG,
  i repeat subbudu himself did not wanted to check whether it was pure kaedharam or not. when people were exclaiming that that was pure kaedharam the he refuted. if ur father says why did u miss that 5% you see him as a pessimist. but i see his love on you to make you ideal. see when we say somebody is a pessimist there itself we become pessimist because the word pessimist is a bad word and we tend to associate/find bad thing from/in one. take that criticism in positive way thats all.
  
  if those soora pulis(who claimed that to be in pure kaedharam) had claimed it as Shanmugapriya vil sruthibEdham seidhu miga azhagaaga oru major scale kku vandhu kEdhaara saayalukku pallavi yai thodangi irukkiraar then subbudu would not have come to the picture at all. I again repeat the rebutal of subbudu was not on ARR, it was on those who did wrong identification and trying to make their finding popular. ofcourse genius in ARR would have taken it in right perspective and it is we who are fighting over that.
  
  
• From: cram (@ 206.103.12.102) on: Fri Feb 16 10:09:46 EST 2001
  
  that whatever subbudu says is taken seriously is amply demonstrated by the fact that kumudam chose to waste precious space in printing his views. kumudam reaches 2 million people, and anything on IR is bound to be read by everyone.
  
  
• From: cram (@ 206.103.12.102) on: Fri Feb 16 10:17:11 EST 2001
  
  kupps
  
  have u read Srirangam Lakshminarayanan's Classical Ilayaraja series? that's a fine example of constructive criticism. he has taken the pains to analyse the finer points. at the same time, he has maintained as neutral a stand as possible by praising ("IR's has handled Sriranjani better than MSV") and lashing when needed ("What's so great about song without avarohanam). i respect this guy for his knowledge and more importantly, his passion for TFM.
  
  
  
• From: Fliflo (@ 146.186.113.254) on: Fri Feb 16 10:22:49 EST 2001
  
  cram;
  
  Regarding SLC's series, yes that guy has done an awesome job. I donno why he ended that after 15 vol. Being a scientist/physician, I donno how he was able dedicate so much time on this. I wish to know that secret.
  
  
• From: Fliflo (@ 146.186.113.254) on: Fri Feb 16 10:30:47 EST 2001
  
  The starting of Bombay theme music resembled the starting of a violin instrumental from How to name it/Nothing but wind. I don't remember exactly. But please do not get offended. Actually when the movie was released I played and demonstrated to many of my colleagues. I will post it here as soon as I get the tracks of both.
  
  Don't throw fires on me...please
  
  
• From: kk (@ 198.4.92.5) on: Fri Feb 16 10:33:06 EST 2001
  
  rajaG,
  I dont understand, why subbudu should'nt comment on 'Ennavale..'.
  
  The song goes like Hero sings on the stage, on for any common listner it sounds like a carnatic song. yes/no?. ARR may not have attempted kedaram to start with, but he did attempt to make a song that sounds carnatic. Can you deny it?. Once he attempts a carnatic song, he should play by rules yes or no?. This is what subbudu pointed out? whats wrong in it?.
  
  In early days, when asked about his fast beat dance songs ... ARR mentioned he also makes songs based on carnatic. SO why do you say he never attempts it.
  
  If ARR doesnt care about carnatic, why did he chose carnatic genre for this song? Because carnatic based songs will do well for such a romantic situvation. Why not Jazz and reggae?.
  
  Subbudu doesnt comment on mustafa mustafa or mr. ethirkatchi songs (I dont say they are not good), but when a carnatic song is "attempted and it comes out half baked", its his duty to comment. Otherwise we layman would think ARR makes great carnatic songs too.
  
  One thing I appreciate about ARR is he takes these comments and tries to improve. We all know what IR would say for such a comment!.
  
  
• From: kiru (@ 192.138.149.4) on: Fri Feb 16 10:48:56 EST 2001
  
  rajaG, I do know when ARR uses Strings/violins. The synth string argument I brought in was to highlight how ARR makes things sound 'different'. That is all. I am not categorically saying he is good/bad but just voiced my opinion.
  I think SL repeated my interpretation of Subbudu's criticism - One rAgam for one song. If you are saying that ennavaLE had two rAgams because of sruthibEdham then you should contest subbudu's comments in this regard.
  Though I am okay with more than one rAgam or medley for a POP/film song, IMHO, if the composer had stuck to one rAgam consciously I think they are good at 'elaboration of a pattern' which is an important skill in composition.
  
  
• From: rajaG (@ 207.43.195.201) on: Fri Feb 16 11:12:57 EST 2001
  
  kk: By all means Subbudu can comment on ennavaLEy, or for that matter 'Will the real slim shady, please stand up, please stand up'. But let him
  
  a) acknowledge the areas in which he has not accumulated expertise, if not expressly atleast by the general tone of his comments
  b) comment on the areas in which he has expertise with an open mind and within the pespective of the presentation (as an intentional 'light' version of a raaga).
  c) not try to give catch phrase comments like 'kEdhaaraththukku sEdhaaram' when in this particular instance, the presenter was NOT trying to present the ideal kEdharam
  d) if I, a gnyaana soonyam, can catch the clever sruthibEdham of shaNmugapriya, I expect Subbudu the 'doyen' of Carnatic Music to atleast mention it in his commentary. illainnaa perisukku puriyalainnu oru obvious albeit erroneous conclusion kku vara vEndi irukkum:-) :-)
  
  
  

---

List all pages of this thread

Post comments