It seems that the forms of music collectively known as art music, be it Western, Hindustani, Carnatic or otherwise, have now come to be known as ‘classical’ – in a niche seperate from mainstream music. Is this good, or bad?
The growing association of art music with musical archaism, and in many cases, snobbery, has left the various forms of this art music out of the main musical stream. In fact, it has now come to the point that art music is considered completely distinct from mainstream music so that mainstream music is considered ‘pop’ while art music remains out of this spectrum altogether.
This is a mixed bag for the musical community. Musicians composing art music, be it a piano sonata or a contemporary jazz-flamenco-electronica fusion, are undoubtedly less shaped than ‘pop’ musicians when it comes to composing and catering to their various audiences. It has become a stereotype that ‘pop’ music has an audience consistently in flux, jumping from hit to hit, while the art music crowd (which was, of course, once ‘pop’ and contemporary itself) is static in the overall echelons of music but freely explores the massive niche that is art music. This, of course, is untrue. Due to the sheer scale of art music, those that appreciate some areas are completely oblivious to the existence of others, or simply do not care about them. In a sense, the contemporary musical audiences are far more adventurous than the art music audiences. The various areas of contemporary music are usually appreciated by more than one group. This is usually due to the nearly infinite malleability of the contemporary music listener’s tastes. The listener ‘likes’ more than one form of the music – be it hip hop, hard rock, dance, or any other form of modern music. The listener explores and appreciates.
Because of this, contemporary music is blossoming at a faster rate than art music. Art music has left the ‘pop’ music scene – as is being made obvious in India. India is a nation with one of, if not the most classical musical heritage. However, the classical music and art of India is uncared for, as the Indian public prefers Western pop and so called ‘Indipop’ music. In fact, many major Indian classical musicians (like Ustad Zakir Hussain) have moved to the West, where the classical heritage is being appreciated far more than in India. It is bizarre indeed that America appreciates Indian art more than India itself. This is not the case everywhere – in Europe, classical arts are promoted as an integral part of culture – something that the state is not exactly doing in India. The arts seem to be dying in India. A good example is Carnatic music, the music of the Dravidian South. Chennai is the hub of Carnatic music. However, the only people who seem to care about Carnatic are robe-clad Brahmins and the elderly, while the youth don’t really give the classical music a chance. Of course, Western youth are typically uninterested in Western classical music. However, what is present in European nations that is not in India is the mentality that the people need to support the artistic heritage of the nation. In Europe, museums of culture, opera houses, and music halls fill cities, and are regularly attended by flocks of patrons. In India, a similarly grandeuse classical heritage is unsupported by the government, with the only notable musical centre being the National Centre in Mumbai – woefully inadequate for a land with two distinct streams of classical music and thousands of outflowing genres.
In its rush to modernize, India may forget its roots – and abandon its classical heritage. It would be a pity.
