THE CRAFT OF REVIEWING THE ARTS

Writing on the Performing Arts is prone to be a tricky activity. The writer is ever torn between tackling the sensibilities of a diverse readership whilst bearing the burden of having to give an objective account of a performance. Essentially a process of translating a largely subjective enterprise into a commercialized product, it bears the risk of tainting or distorting the simulacrum.

Besides, it seems a tough prospect for a writer of the Arts not to allow the writing to spiral into a splish-splash of colourful adjectives and hollow, interchangeable phrases. It sometimes seems as though the writer is trying to compete with the singer themselves in bringing out equally charming creativity. They tend to sound very mesmerizing, but quite often a phrase seems overburdened with inapt synonyms dredged up from a thesaurus. Often the writer may be tempted to write on music as though they were doing a 5th grade prose writing assignment – full of poetic platitudes and verbal exuberance. While it is fair to assume that the writer hopes to drench the piece in the atmosphere that the performance created in the auditorium, when one writes in that nebulous way, it sometimes sounds unrelatable.

For instance, SVK writes in his December 22 piece titled ‘In a reflective mood’ about Bombay Jayasri – “Her gentle, elegant voice blended seamlessly with melodic harmony, creating an amicable aura.” It is commonly known that harmony is the distinct opposite of melody, so this phrase sounds like an attempt to juxtapose contradictions to create and avail of a resulting shock value. Another phrase ran – “She used silences between sancharas and cadences in the tara sthayi to make the raga a rhapsody of sound.” This is ambiguous in that it asserts that silence added to the total sum of sound in the performance. It is hard to ascertain whether this is a poor use of language, or whether the author referred to an actual, tangible phenomenon.

At times, the writer also tends to forget that the reader might not appreciate being patronized by being force-fed a certain opinion as gospel. The readers of music and art reviews in themselves tend to be quite proud of their personal judgements, and would resent the absoluteness of a statement that contradicts their opinion. For instance, on December 25, G.Swaminathan writes on Sikkil Gurucharan’s performance, “With his pliable and attractive voice in good control, Gurucharan mesmerized the audience with his delineations of a rare kriti.” Such a statement might well evoke complaints such as “speak for yourself!” Also the reader might object to being collectively bunched as ‘the audience’ like a pack of sardines.

Furthermore, polarized pronouncements such as those cannot do much in the way of conveying the performance to someone who had not been present for the programme.

“Kalyani normally stimulates the artist to go for fast paced brigas and akaras than finer karvais and loaded pauses. But Gurucharan comprehending the potential of the great Kalyani, utilized his vocal prowess to bring the best encompassing both ragas and brigas.” This stands as a classic example of verbosity detracting from the otherwise valuable point. While the writer sensibly gives a backdrop to the point being made, the mention about the singer’s prowess seems an unnecessarily banal commendation that renders the point a prosaic platitude in the end.

When dance reviews are not saddled with dispensable terms such as ‘footwork’, ‘fluency’ – and other such fixed notions upon which to judge an innovative, expressive art form – but are rather analysed on their representations and articulation of ideas, they tend to work better.

In a refreshingly interesting read, Vidya Saranyan’s piece titled ‘Power-packed presentation’ explores the nuances of Suryanarayana Murthy’s performance based around body language and eye movement. It goes further to unravel the articulations in the dance and the ideas represented in its choreography – “..he distinguished the walk of Rama from the swagger of Manmatha and the story ....with tones of remorse and sorrow, were moments where the dancer sidestepped conventional sringara interpretations in favour of devotion.” This seemed to have a relevant understanding of a reader’s intention of picking up a review to read. It gave the reader an idea of what unfolded in the performance rather than simply condemn it or confer accolades.

In contrast, Rupa Srikanth writes in ‘Fine footwork, vibrant style’ on December 22, “Her [Sailaja] footwork on the whole was clear and precise, except the footwork on the brass plate that left much to be desired.” It can be sensed that the only reason one doesn’t throw up one’s hands and demand to know by whom the performance left much to be desired is because the pronouncement is made by an esteemed connoisseur. The expert’s role could be better played out if they analysed the structure and efficacy of the performance instead of sitting back on the arm-chair and doling out polarized judgements. Not many must read reviews to simply keep track of what the expert opinion is on a certain performer, unless they are interested in the art for the sake of dropping names and borrowed opinions in elite circles.

A polite eavesdrop into the conversation between seasoned rasikas would reveal a myriad aspects of music that a lesser being would struggle to comprehend. Yet, there is the unmistakable air of snobbish cooperation between them wherein each member strives to uphold the credibility of the House of musical aristocrats, and their collective claim to be able to judge a subjective art in an absolutely objective manner. In the end you just have to lay down arms and accept that you might be dealing with a realm which is beyond your comprehension, and thus one which you are not qualified to have critical thoughts about. Maybe this is the very same disabling culmination that the art critic relies on every time they advance an opinion in the public forum.

INDIA SHINE AND RISE TO THE TOP

Proud papas and mammas
Originally uploaded by mihirbee

At long last, Test cricket received a stimulus shot as India clinched the top spot in the ICC Test team rankings for the first time, following its series victory over the visiting Sri Lankan team. Overtaking South Africa, Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s team became the third team, since the Test championship was introduced in 2001, to occupy the coveted spot. This augurs well for the languishing Test Cricket arena. Hard graft, teamwork, balance and discipline are some of the labels attached to this team, which has only come to benefit under the youthful maturity that Dhoni has brought to the table with his serene captaincy.

India can boast one of the most balanced batting and bowling line-ups in today’s teams. The stability of the starts Gambhir and Sehwag construct does not diminish their freedom. Riding on their work, a massive middle order comes to surfeit. Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman have made sure that Ganguly is not overly missed, with consistent contributions. Yuvraj and Dhoni have hung back at the end to provide the quick runs to take targets out of reach for the opposition.

Tendulkar, resident Grandsire of the Indian One-day outfit, finds time to exult over what must be a long-cherished dream. His Test career has spanned two decades, in which he has played among several Indian greats like Kapil Dev, Srikkanth, Shastri, Azharuddin, Ganguly, Amarnath and more. In all these years, the Indian team was subjected to the labeling of being a “home bully‘- “away bunny”. Finally, Tendulkar can be part of the team which, even though bereft of one of the Fab Four, touched the summit.

Dhoni too graciously acknowledged the entire gamut of contributions by the coach, personnel and whoever had been part of the side in the last 18 months. While this hard-earned achievement is to be celebrated at the moment, it could well be short-lived, as India will not have the chance to protect its new-found title in the coming months. It plays only two tests in the next six months. The next Test India is scheduled to play is against Bangladesh, beyond which there will be a dry spell. During that time, their fate as the top-dog would be vulnerable and defenceless. Dhoni, ever the optimist, decided to play this susceptibility down and asserted that this was a time to savour the remarkable achievement rather than worry about something they could not control. Maintaining this position would be an unsteady prospect, notwithstanding the lack of upcoming matches.

Harsha Bhogle brings attention to the fact that while this achievement is a remarkable one by Dhoni’s team, the cash prize awarded to the current set of players ignores the sizeable contribution that past teams and players have made to this end. Sourav Ganguly built India up to the point where they were no longer pushovers outside their backyard. Under Dravid’s captaincy, the team ended several winless droughts overseas – in West Indies and England. Anil Kumble generated the team discipline that won India the Perth Test in 2008. Therefore, it has been an honest ascent to the top for India, and not a patronized placement as many might like to believe.

Geoff Boycott never fails to strike the dissonant, albeit astute note. In his inimitable wont, he has pointed out that the Test ranking system bears flaws and is unreliable in instating a particular team at the top. He notes that unless there is an equitable distribution of matches with and against each team, a fair judgement cannot be made as regards the best team in the world. Perhaps his famed grandmom could come up with such a system, Haroon Lorgat might offer.

BAT AN EYELID AND ANOTHER CENTURY

…Well, as it turned out, not only did Sachin successfully save the first Test for India, but he managed to use the occasion to add one more century to his towering stockpile of 87 international centuries – as an afterthought. Does the man have no mercy? Any more moot centuries and the skyscraper might topple over and damage the wicket!

The last day of the first Test between India and Sri Lanka saw India needing to bat the day out for a draw, with 8 wickets in hand. Mishra – night-watchman for namesake – had just succumbed to a sharp cutter from Matthews. Enter the Maestro.

He looked busy from the start, cutting Matthews to the point boundary and driving Muralitharan against the turn with experienced ease. Building a solid partnership with fellow centurion Gambhir, Tendulkar inched his way closer to his 43rd Test century. Then with VVS Laxman, he carried his bat through till stumps, on the stroke of which he scored his hundredth run of the innings. He also crossed the 30,000 mark somewhere along the line. It was refreshing to see Dhoni and Sangakkara allow Tendulkar the century before calling off the match as a desultory draw.

Give Tendulkar a rampant Aussie team and 50,000 clamouring fans in Sharjah and he will give you a hundred. Give him a dead, even strip such as the one in Kanpur and he would be hard pressed not to score you a century. With Laxman for sedate company, the restful outing he got in the middle seemed the perfect gift from the Cricket Gods to commemorate his strenuous 20 years in international cricket.

What he does not need is the untimely flak he is getting now from Bal Thackeray on what was an absolutely secular comment made by him. Perhaps Thackeray means well. Perhaps he simply wants to use Sachin’s occasion to get some personal leverage. But it is still in bad taste, if you ask me. Even Marathi actors like Atul Kulkarni, Madhur Bhandarkar and Sonali Bendre feel it is a non-issue that is being unnecessarily politicised. Maybe the great man should be allowed to have his achievement untainted.

Meanwhile, Michael Atherton has come out and doused the festivities a bit by drawing attention to the fact that Tendulkar has built his vita opus in the age of helmets and other protective paraphernalia, where the batsman can play without fear of death by leather. He cautions that calling Tendulkar the best ever would be blinding oneself to what the ancient cricketer like Bradman had to negotiate. Sadly this makes it impossible for die-hard cricket enthusiasts to ever declare anyone The Greatest. Technology – ironically something that Tendulkar recently came out denouncing – has struck out at his title. But in Tendulkar’s defence, he has had to contend with something which the great Don did not – bearing the weight of a billion plus hopes upon his spine every time he dons his gloves.

BCCI plans to honour Tendulkar with special mementos during the Annual BCCI Awards Ceremony on December 6. It will be another resonant note in the glorious symphony that is Sachin Tendulkar’s cricket career.

FIRMLY REFORMING THE INFIRMARY

The silver-tongued oratory of Barack Obama plays a dominant role in maintaining his popularity. His rousing words speak to the depths of the American citizen’s heart. Obama comes off as a refreshingly sensible leader compared to his immediate predecessor, George Bush. Yet, his Bill on US Healthcare Reforms has met with not a little discord and debate. His reform policy is based on universal health care for US citizens. In contrast with the Republican McCain’s capitalistic health care ideology, Democrat Obama vouches for a publicly funded medical insurance coverage paradigm wherein medical insurance would be rationed without discrimination to all sections of society.



In addition to the non-discriminatory administration of health insurance, it would be made compulsory for everyone to buy medical insurance, as Obama proposes to penalize all those financially able persons who refuse to buy it despite being able to afford it.

The proposal for the creation of a National Health Insurance Exchange seemed like a fool-proof way of pleasing all, given its complete lack of prejudice based either on pre-existing medical condition, economic or social status. Yet the debate over US healthcare policy seems destined to continue. It has resulted in incensed fathers disrupting Town Hall meetings in Michigan, demanding to know whether their cerebral palsy-afflicted son would be covered under Obama’s new plan.



The proposal has been a victim of adverse propaganda, to which Sarah Palin has contributed in no small measure, that indicates that the US healthcare system would recede into Nazism – with the terminally ill having to knock on Obama’s “death panel” to await judgment on whether they are deserving of healthcare. That the Bill has successfully obtained approval from the Congress despite such detractions speaks well of Obama’s rescue operations. Indeed it speaks quite badly of Obama’s enemies that they would resort to kindling the basest paranoia of Americans in an attempt to discredit him.

There is widespread disbelief that the Obama reforms will retain their promise of equality. Such outbursts as that of the father from Michigan seem the product of paranoid citizens with a penchant for a “secret truth” that is being withheld from the public and a staunch defiance of bureaucratic doublespeak, which Obama’s reform bill is said to be brimming with.

Ironically, it is the bureaucracy of insurance companies that the Bill seeks to obviate. The competition they will face from the public funding of medical insurance is supposed to keep them honest. With there being no scope for a judicial review against government monopoly of price fixing, private insurance companies would be severely set back if not crushed.

The plan is supposed to reduce the costs of healthcare and increase coverage for seniors. It is also a way to mitigate the skyrocketing wastage in the US healthcare budget. Insurance companies are said to spend unnecessary amounts of the budget as “loading fees” – which comprise non-medical expenses of paperwork and other marketing overheads.

It is also ironic that Democrat Obama would seek to employ capitalistic measures of competition to keep insurance companies in their place. Sometimes, one must eat one’s own ideologies to meet the demands of reality.

TWO DOWN. MORE TO GO...?

Sunil Gavaskar regarded him to be “the closest thing to batting perfection.” Sachin Tendulkar is a human vessel whose every sinew, nerve and neuron impulse was honed to generate the optimal way of meeting a ball with a bat. If Michael Jackson acted as an agent for threading rhythm through the body, Tendulkar has answered nature’s bidding to send billions into quasi-religious frenzy using a combination of wood and leather – for twenty years now.

When it comes to appraising Tendulkar’s contribution to the game of cricket, the usage of clichés seems unavoidable. For the greater part of two decades, adoring fans and celebrated experts have heaped singular praise on Tendulkar as the Messiah of Cricket, to the point where it sounds hackneyed. “Little Master”, “Master Blaster”, “wiz kid” and “The Master” are epithets that renowned exponents of the game attach to the great man. “Cricket is my religion; Sachin is my God,” runs the phrase on many a fan-made banner in the stadiums.

But while all these titles glorify Tendulkar the artiste, it is Gavaskar’s simple nickname for him that truly reflects the love and adulation an entire nation has for him – “Tendlya.” Rhythmic cries of “Sachin, Sachin” fill the stadium when he is on view. These chants bear the expectations of a country of cricketing fanatics. And perhaps the greatness of Tendulkar lies in how he has remained grounded stolidly on earth despite them. How he has evaded the ever-present risk of letting the constant blandishments go to his head betrays a tad more skill than his ducking of a seething bouncer. Modest to the bone, his feline squeak of a voice retains the innocence of the 16 year-old, while bearing undertones of immense maturity.

However much aficionados set Tendulkar up on a pedestal, many are not blind to the fact that his knocks have not been instrumental in winning India many matches. I grew up with the saying that “if Tendulkar scores a century, India will not win.” Kapil Dev has been known to criticize Sachin for not playing with the team’s cause in mind. Several of Sachin’s great knocks have not forged an Indian victory. The most blaring example of this is the famous “desert storm” innings of 143 against Australia at Sharjah, in 1998, while the 175 versus the same team earlier this month is the latest reflection of the sad phenomenon – in both instances, Tendulkar’s sensational batting failed nevertheless to get India over the line. Kapil Dev recently wrote that he felt disappointed that Sachin had not sustained the ruthless destroyer persona of his first eight years but had turned, instead, into a record breaker along the line.

Then again such criticism is based on sour outlooks. It needs to be pointed out that most of those inningses for which Tendulkar is condemned for not having taken India through have been solo efforts. He has borne the lone torch amid a sea of corpses in a failing batting line up. Even in the recent innings in Hyderabad against the Aussies, his single-handed effort is sidelined by the fact that he did not manage to exert his 36 year-old lungs that bit more to win India a match it deserved to lose.

An absolutely non-controversial stint as a media specimen has won him the loyalty of his immense fan-base. However, less enamoured Indian supporters are liable to pounce on him in the event of a rare failure. It should be interesting to see reactions should he fail to secure India a draw against Sri Lanka on the final day of the current Test.