UNIVERSITEIT VAN AMSTERDAM
Exploring ‘Musicology’ in Hindustani
Music Education
:
a 20th century case of problematic contextualization
Sanjeevani Jain8/8/2018
Thesis presented for the degree Master of Arts in Music Studies
11313048 Supervisor: Oliver Seibt Second Reader: Barbara Titus
ABSTRACT
Hindustani music, the classical music of North India, has been known not only for its musical characteristics, but also for the educational traditions and values associated with it. The following study is an investigation of music education in North India for a specific purpose to explore the position of ‘musicology’ as an academic discipline. It is grounded in the belief that education of music should not be limited to the teaching and learning of performance skills and
that it carries a wide scope of academic studies which should be leveraged and given fair attention. While the current system of music education in North India focuses mostly on the practical aspect only, continuous efforts were made in the past to mainstream scholarly aspects.
This thesis provides an examination of those efforts and a possible analysis of why they were short-lived, so as to measure the future possibilities in similar direction. The findings could also
be helpful in understanding the implications of colonial interactions on Indian music education and how they unfold in the postcolonial era i.e. mid-20th century onwards.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The course of writing this master’s thesis has been truly enriching where the involvement of numerous people in my research pursuit has played an integral role. I would like to express my
heartfelt gratitude to my advisor, Dr.Wim van der Meer, for encouraging me to perform this research and enabling its completion with required resources. Next I would like to thank my supervisor, Professor Oliver Seibt, for guiding me with detailed feedbacks and allowing me the
space to think differently, make mistakes, and learn from them, while being extremely trustworthy and patient throughout. I am also grateful to Professor Barbara Titus for being supportive and willing to help anytime, and the Department of Music Studies, UvA for funding
my research at the Fondazione Georgio Cini, Venice and to the Intercultural Institute for Comparative Music Studies of the Fondazione Georgio Cini for giving me the opportunity to access Daniélou’s archives. My sincere thanks to Nicola Biondi, the person in-charge of these archives for sharing her insights that acted as a valuable contribution to my project. I would also like to thank all the participants of the small survey I conducted during the research. Last but not
the least I am deeply grateful for all the consistent support I have received from my family despite being thousands of miles apart.
Table of Contents
Introduction ... 4
Chapter 1: Institutions for music learning ... 10
a. The foundation: guru-śiṣya paramparā ... 10
b. Continuing tradition: gharānā ... 14
c. Colonial addition: English scholarship and music schools for mass education ... 18
Chapter 2: The pioneers of musicological thinking ... 25
Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande (1860-1936) ... 26
Alain Daniélou (1907-1994) ... 31
Chapter 3: Sangīt śāstra: the Indian take of Musicology educators ... 39
Omkarnath Thakur (1897-1967) ... 40
Prem Lata Sharma (1927-1998) ... 43
Conclusion ... 55 References ... 60 Appendix ... 64 Photographs ... 64 Chronology ... 66 Questionnaire ... 67
Introduction
Twelve years ago, when I was introduced to Hindustani Music, I was told that the knowledge of Indian classical music was essential for a general understanding of music as an art form. As a child, I saw classical music as the foundation of every other musical form. Learning the seven notes- Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Dha Ni, meant mastering the skill to decipher, for example, a film song into a notation, which could later on be played on a harmonium. As exciting and as tempting the promised outcomes were, I used to dread going for the private music classes I was enrolled to. I never understood what was being taught in those classes. In class, my teacher would first make me copy down the lyrics and notation of a composition of a raga. Then she would sit with a harmonium and sing that raga, stopping after every line and asking me to repeat. It was a method of learning by copying and imitating. Nobody told me the meaning of the compositions or answered questions like why there were so many ragas, why they had to be sung at a particular hour of the day, or what the names of the notes really meant. In short, there were no classes on theory. But, there used to be examinations on it - written examinations that constituted thirty per cent of the overall assessment. The idea was to pass the exam by memorizing, two days before the day of exam, some mundane definitions of ragas and biographies of some musicians whose music I had never heard. I was told to focus on the practical part of the exam because that is what mattered the most. Even though I would end up scoring good marks, I had no idea of what I was learning and singing. Because I was learning only by rote (mechanical repetition), my conceptual comprehension of the music was zero. I could have blamed it on that particular teacher or the institution but this style of transmission was representative of a reality for most of the institutions.
Broadly, there are three kinds of institutions for Hindustani music education: First: universities. For example, most of the state government universities, like University of Delhi or
University of Bombay, have a Department of Music under the Faculty of Arts.1 They offer graduation
and post-graduation degrees, such as a Bachelor or Master of Arts in Music. The learning and assessment is based on practice and theory in seventy to thirty per cent ratio (in some cases an even half) and classes are held separately for both. Second: private institutions for performing arts. For example, Shriram Bharatiya Kala Kendra (Delhi), Gandharva Mahavidyalaya (Pune, Mumbai, Delhi), etc.2 These institutes mainly offer practical training in Hindustani music. The maximum
duration of training varies from eight to ten years, divided into courses of one to two years each. The assessment is based on performance skills and in some schools there are examinations on theory as well. Usually, there is no separate provision of classes on theory but major schools, like the ones mentioned here, have set up libraries that a student is free to visit anytime. Finally, the third type is more like an undefined network of musicians or teachers belonging to different music communities or schools called gharānā that offer private lessons. None of the institutions have individual programs that are dedicated to practice and theory separately.
As an undergraduate, I studied Philosophy as my main subject and learnt music by side. I was afraid if higher education in music would be enough to feed my intellectual capacity as there was nothing to read, write, or think about intellectually. Even when there was a section for theory, I suspected if it was given equal attention. In short, I was not ready to indulge solely in a non-academic pursuit. Hence, I tried to strike a balance between non-academic education in Philosophy and practical training in music. I went for Shriram Bharatiya Kala Kendra, the private institution in Delhi, which I knew was different for me as it did not have any examinations on theory. The focus was entirely on practice and the message was clear that one does not necessarily need to learn theory to be a great musician. By this point, I was convinced that classical music requires a great
1 “Department of Music”, University of Delhi. http://www.du.ac.in/du/index.php?page=music
“Department of Music”, University of Mumbai. http://mu.ac.in/portal/department-of-music/
2 Akhil Bhartiya Gandharva Mahavidyalaya Mandal. http://abgmvm.org/
level of commitment and dedication and my mind became occupied with practice of the skills I had newly picked up so there was no time to think of theory. If at all I had any theoretical questions, the teacher would answer them during the regular classes. I was unaware of the possibilities of writing about music until one day, when I started thinking about the abstract existence of music with regard to an academic paper I had to write for one of my philosophy courses. I decided to make my first visit to the library of the music institution and got exposed to different sorts of literature on music. This was my first encounter with the possibility of academically engaging with music. But sadly, there was no official platform where this possibility could be harnessed.
The situation was not just disappointing but also perplexing. If there was never a system of writing or reading about music, then where did all the books in the library come from? To find out, I had to dig into the past of Indian music education. The following paper, questions, and sub-questions are a result of this curiosity and primary investigation. To begin with, I rolled out a brief questionnaire (see Appendix) aimed at surveying the current status of music education in some of the institutions mentioned above. The participants’ responses reflected a similarity with my personal observation and experience that there is an imbalance between practical and theoretical teaching or that theory is implied in the pedagogy for practice. A common mindset is that music is a performance-centered art and therefore, non-performance aspects do not need to be given much importance. The optional use of libraries in the music institutions indicates a common expectation that the student himself would gather the motivation and take the initiative to explore the literature. If a student was so extraordinarily talented that he wrote a book or two, or contributed to the intellectual development of his music while being a successful performer, his biography will describe him as both musician and musicologist. But at the time of providing education, there is no such distinction made between music and musicology.
The question is why. Why is musicology considered a by-product of music education? A classical music, by definition, represents a standardized style that follows “long-established principles”3. To what extent is it possible to maintain this standard via performance only? How
important is verbal theorization and an education that furnishes it? While pursuing my research, I realized these questions have been asked by scholars in the past. Not only have they raised these problems, some of them have produced literature at their own independent level without having a well-established musicological platform to support them. Fortunately, there have been a number of self-motivated individuals who researched and theorized Hindustani Music, making it possible for other self-motivated students to make some productive use of the libraries. But, how long can this casual attitude sustain a long-established tradition of Hindustani music in the world of growing musicology? With the only department of musicology closing down (more about it in the paper) and the only organized Indian musicological journal being practically inactive for many years, in which direction is the musicology of India heading?
This thesis is a small attempt to answer some of the above questions. Transmission plays the most important role in ensuring continuity of arts, and for a classical art, the role of education becomes even more crucial in order to ensure the preservation of an old tradition. The following study presents information on the history of music education in India with specific focus on educational initiatives and interventions made by reformers to encourage theoretical and academic study of Hindustani music. It takes into account the interplay of traditional and modern education systems and the influence of colonial interaction between India and Britain. The process of formal institutionalization of music education began in the 1870’s as a part of the Indian nationalist movement against British rule. The first quarter of the 20th century witnessed an on-going
intellectual debate on classicization of Hindustani music when serious attempts were made to
situate theory as an important component in music education. Finally, starting from mid-20th century i.e. the post-colonial era, musicology as an academic practice entered the curriculum of higher music education at the university level. The following study intends to closely examine these events of change by giving an idea of the key players, their work, motivations, successes, failures, and future implications. The Department of Musicology, which was launched in 1966 and withdrawn in 2016, at Banaras Hindu University, acts as the centerpiece of the main discussion about musicology as an academic discipline in the sphere of Indian education.
The main body of the paper is divided into three chapters set more or less in a chronological sequence. To set the historical background, the first chapter presents a very short overview of the journey of Indian music from the time of its inception starting roughly from 1500 BCE until 1900 C when the history of music was being written as an outcome of colonial power relations and modernization. This journey is classified into three broad periods: the Hindu (1500 BCE – 1200 C), the Muslim (1200 C – 1700 C), and the English (1700 C – 1900 C) to get an idea of the three main transmission traditions that act as the pillars of today’s music education system. The discussion is intertwined with that on music scholarship in these three periods in order to inspect the relationship between the two. It will answer the questions “what did the process of transmission look like in those music cultures?” and “what role, if at all, did writings on music play in that process?”
The second chapter zooms into the first half of the twentieth century when a modern system of mass education that started in the late 1800’s had grown increasingly widespread and Hindustani Music was gaining its rank as a classical art form. A lot of activities took place during this period, and they act as a possible explanation for the currently prevailing mindset towards music education. The aspirations and ideologies of two scholars namely, Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande (1860-1936) and Alain Daniélou (1907-1994), will be analyzed in detail here.
The third chapter is about musicology officially entering the landscape of Indian education at the beginning of the second half of twentieth century. It contains information on the vision, mission, and contribution of two central figures in the field of Indian musicology: Omkarnath Thakur (1897-1967) and his disciple and successor Prem Lata Sharma (1927-1998). Along with the factual details, there is a critical assessment of their work as educators and musicologists. In 1998, the seminar called “Teaching of Indian Music” brought musicians, the so-called musicologists, educators and music enthusiasts together who addressed questions that are pertinent to today’s discussion on music education and hence, its details are covered in this chapter too.
Finally, in the conclusion, the most important ideas and information from the three chapters will be summarized, analyzed, and reiterated. This will also be the section that explores possibilities for future research and plausible resolutions for the very practical challenge of giving musicology the status it deserves in the sphere of education.
Before moving further, it is important to make two important clarifications. First, the classical music of India is divided into North Indian and South Indian music. For my research, I have focused only on the former, which is called Hindustani Music and hence every time I refer to the current education system, I do not take into account the education system of South Indian music or South India in general. Second, Indian music, by definition, refers to an amalgamation of song, instrument, and dance. But, due to personal knowledge and interest, and the limited scope of the paper, my denotation of the term ‘music’ has been narrowed down to song i.e. vocal music only. Lastly, for reader’s accessibility, the Indian language terms have been italicized and transliterated with diacritical marks wherever applicable, except for proper names. The diacritical marks are to be read as follows:
Mark To be read as
ā “a” as in “raft” ī “ee” as in “week”
ū “oo” as in “noon” ś, ṣ “sh” as in “shelter”
Chapter 1: Institutions for music learning
The music of India, in general, is said to have carried with it really old traditions and values. If this is true, it is worthwhile travelling back in time to catch a glimpse of what those old values and traditions looked like. The most common term that comes up in any conversation about Indian music education is guru-śiṣya paramparā (preceptor-pupil tradition). It, indeed, is a really old tradition dating back to the times of early Aryan civilization (1500 BCE–500 BCE) and has gained immense popularity among music historians. The second term that appears often in literature on Indian music traditions is gharānā. This chapter focuses on these two traditions and the Western concept of music schools that were applied in the name of educational reforms during the colonial period.
a. The foundation: guru-śiṣya paramparā
The genesis of Indian music is directly intertwined with the Hindu mythology and religion. As a part of the religious belief, Hindu worshippers carried out customary rituals which were meant to either please their “gods” or attain a “transcendental state of unison” with them.4 These worship
rituals entailed recitation of chants derived from the scriptures called Vedas. Vedas are a collection of four volumes of texts that were composed and orally transmitted over a period of 1500 BCE–500 BCE.5 The first volume called Rigveda consists of verses, and the second one called Sāmaveda has
4 Goswami 1957:3
chants, referred to as “saman” (loosely translated as ‘melodies’).6 Verses extracted from the Rigveda
were sung to the melodies given in the Sāmaveda. Notably, these texts were said to have been “revealed” to the “primordial seers” and hence the value of śruti (sound or “hearing”) is underscored indefinitely.7 The transmission and preservation of these texts became a need when
the hymns had to be uttered by a large group of people.8 Hence, the oral-aural tradition became
remarkably incidental to the teaching-learning of the exact syllables in the exact prescribed accents without a deviation from the original.9 As the manifestation of the texts grew more complex, “the
care and discipline of particular religious, or better, priestly schools”10 came into place. Here on, the
role of the priests as guru (the teacher) and as experts specializing in their religious practice became more systematized, and the traditional setup got its name as “guru-kula”.11
Guru-kula or gurukul means home or dynasty of the teacher. There is no specific date given
to the formation of such a system but there are a number of ancient Sanskrit texts written by the so-called “seers” in roughly first to fifth centuries that delineate the term and position of guru not only in the process of transmission but also in the society.12 These texts list different types and virtues of
gurus. For example, one who imparted knowledge by giving lectures or the one who made their disciple undertake pilgrimage or follow a particular lifestyle. And there are some texts that define guru as a “metaphysical father of a disciple who is ranked higher than the biological parents.”13
Because of the authority given to the gurus, they are always the dominant partners in their relationship with the students. Similar to the case of gurus, the ancient Sanskrit texts define the virtue of śiṣya, the students. They are understood as the ones who live under the guidance and
6 Jamison and Witzel 1992:7-8 7 Ibid., 5
8 Ranade 1998:8
9 Jamison and Witzel 1992:25 10 Ibid., 3
11 Ranade 1998:8 12 Ibid., 10-16 13 Ibid., 10-11
protection of the guru. They devote their lives to their gurus and hence there was no question of doubting the knowledge received in any form. However, some texts give the liberty to students to talk to the guru or deny obeying the commands if they noticed incorrect behavior.14
The gurus taught everything they knew and aimed for their students to do better than themselves. Conversely, an ideal pupil never thought of himself as higher than the guru. Traditionally, the students lived with the gurus and were treated as one of the family members. A thread-tying ceremony symbolized the initiation of the student into the formal learning of the Vedas for the duration of twelve years.15 After the end of the learning period, the students were free
to join their gurus in the performance of religious rituals. There was no system of any payment contracts and the gurus did not usually ask for fees but the disciples were expected to return the favor by either fulfilling other demands of the guru or by supporting them with food and general materials needed for survival.16 This entire value system of the gurukul later came to be known as
the famous guru-śiṣya paramparā. Thus, guru-śiṣya paramparā has its roots in the religious tradition where the guru was venerated and idolized by the śiṣya and the learning was spiritually motivated.
Apart from gurukul or guru-śiṣya paramparā, the earliest form of education is attributed to
vidyāpīth – an educational model that ran like today’s model of universities. Between 800 BC to
1300 CE, there were about nineteen vidyāpīth(s) which worked as centers for higher education in various subjects. Takshashila Vidyapeeth (800 BCE) - the very first and the oldest vidyāpīth - identified music as a subject in its own individual capacity separate from the Vedas. Unfortunately, there is hardly any literature on what was taught there as music and how. But, one thing that can be
14 Ranade 1998:13
15 Ibid., 12 16 Ibid.
ascertained is the idea of music as an art and a subject of study gained shape from this time onwards and helped moving away from it the necessarily religious or rather Vedic connotation.17
In terms of written scholarship, the first ever text that talked about performing arts was called Nātyaśāstra (100 BCE–100 CE) by Bharat.18 It “treated music along with the art of acting and
dancing” and not as a part of the recitation of Vedic chants, although, it had a chapter dedicated to religious verses or laudatory songs for the gods. 19 There were many chapters on the application of
those songs, ragas and meters, in which they were to be sung, and also rasa – the emotional or the aesthetic intent behind the songs.20 It is possible that this treatise was used as a reference for music
education in the vidyāpīth that came into being only after the treatise’s compilation. Over two hundred manuscripts have been identified dating from 1st century onwards, which entailed either
collections of songs or theories on music.21 The status of performance of music in those times is not
given clearly. Drama and music presentations were a part of the religious practices held at temples. It is not known whether the scholars who theorized music were themselves the performing musicians or not.
The largest treatise written solely on the subject of music was Sangītratnākara (1200 CE). Its author, Sarangdeva, was a court accountant. This work became the standard theory of Indian music for a long time.22 The fact that the theory designed by a non-performer became a work of
authority for future performers is quite interesting and puts the general argument that only a performer can theorize a performing art into question. By the end of the 13th century, the corpus of
music theory had grown large and with the vidyāpīth(s) running simultaneously until this time, I assume that these works formed a part of learning and discussion of musical knowledge by the
17 Ranade 1998:16
18 The compilation is said to have taken place sometime during this period, Nijenhuis 1977:5 19 Ibid., 5
20 Ibid., 6
21 Nijenhuis 1977 22 Ibid., 12
students. Since only little biographical data is known of these scholars, another assumption is that they received their education from the vidyāpīth(s) that perhaps encouraged written intellectualization of music. Moreover, the application of theory to the real time practice in those days is uncertain and unverified. There is no evidence, which could testify that theory and practice of those days were really aligned to each other and that the practitioners or, for that matter the theoreticians, were conscious of the developments in each other’s domains. Based on what has been passed down to the present generation in the name of Hindustani Music, the theory was never redundant, but its transmission did not take place in a continuous direction. The next period in history explains why.
b. Continuing tradition: gharānā
The pure Hindu music derived from the Vedas later on became hybrid due to the developments that took place between 13th through 16th centuries, also called the medieval period.
Due to the invasion by the Sultanate and the Mughal empires, the music of North Indian subcontinent became subject to many changes. Not only were new musical styles introduced, the orientation and purpose of performance shifted from temples to courts, from emancipation of the self to the pleasure of public. The growing complexity of music tradition would have had implications on the transmission process but, again, little has been documented about education during those centuries. Scarcity of independent literature on music from this period might indicate that there weren’t many written developments in the music theory and different singing styles such as khyāl have been passed down only orally. Invented in the mid-15th century23, khyāl is the most
prominent style used by musicians nowadays to sing any raga.
The transmission method in a gurukul was oral too but it was more formal. The oral transmission of khyāl and other such styles during the court culture where musicians thrived on
rulers’ patronage seems to be informal and close knitted among families that eventually developed their own collective musical identity. Such a system is known by the name of gharānā. For anyone studying Hindustani Music, this term, despite having Sanskrit roots, immediately paints a peculiar picture of a Muslim tradition. However, unlike guru-śiṣya paramparā, music historians have not been able to trace it back to a definite beginning point and hence, its association with the Persian-Muslim period i.e. 13th century to the beginning of 18th century broadly is more of a supposition.24
Notwithstanding the ambiguous origin, this concept gained popularity in the mid-19th century and
therefore, can be called rather modern.25 Several English and Hindi books on music try to define
gharānā but the following description, given in Oxford’s Grove Music Online, acts as a
comprehensive and fruitful illustration to begin with:
(Hindi: ‘household, lineage’). In North Indian art-music, a community of musicians, linked by ties of family and discipleship and identified by a distinctive musical style. In general use the term may be applied to a tightly-knit family (khāndān) of Muslim hereditary musicians, together with their disciples (often Hindu); or to a larger network of interrelated families, Muslim or Hindu, with a common place of origin; or more casually, to any group of musicians tracing their tradition from a common teacher or place of origin. To be recognized as an established and significant gharānā the community must have a distinct vocal or instrumental style (gāyakī, bāj), attributed to a respected founder and maintained by at least two further generations after him. Many gharānā cultivate a particular musical specialization: either one of the classical vocal styles (dhrupad, khyālāl, ṭhumrī), or an instrument, melodic (sitār, sarod, bīṇ etc.) or percussion (tablā, pakhāvaj). Other gharānā may combine a variety of vocal and instrumental specializations. The musical repertory of a gharānā often includes special techniques, compositions or rāg known only to its members.
Evidently, there are a lot of dimensions across which a gharānā extends but the common features that collectively come to define it can be listed as: a distinct style of music, a reference point- who or where that style emerged, and lastly the duration through which that style has been passed on i.e. at least three generations. All three features suggest that the purpose of this system was not to educate the masses but to ensure the continuity of a distinct identity: “Gharānās, however, are not
24 Meer 1980:69 25 Ibid., 128
‘schools’. Gharānās are more sectarian in their attitude and on the whole more akin to families of blood-relations because of the rather marked ‘family-pride’ that they exhibit.”26 At the same time,
the musical identity outweighs the family-name because if the son of a famous singer did not sing the same style of music, he was not considered the “rightful heir” to the gharānā.27 So, to maintain
the standard, the deserving non-family members as disciples were given rigorous training: “Each
Gharānā was a virtual University [sic]. It was considered very important in these gharānās to
supervise the pupils for all twenty-four hours of the day and give him personal training. It is because of this rigorous discipline that these quasi-Universities produced many able artists who made their mark in the world of music.”28
The use of the words “quasi-university” and “discipline” surface the idea that equates the education of music to tireless training of practical skills and that the goal of such an education is to produce “artists” who can sing up to the mark set by their masters. The method of teaching and learning within a gharānā was informed by discreet practices. For example, a very famous musician named Balkrishnabuwa Ichalkaranji (1849–1926), also the continuer of the very famous Gwalior
gharānā, taught his students without telling the name of the raga and the underlying rules. Students
were not supposed to ask questions, raise concerns, or make written notes; the learning was based on repetition and depended entirely on memory.29 It can be assumed that he himself had learnt
from his teacher in this manner and that such a method had also become a part of the legacy. Moreover, the gharānā were insecure entities that feared the flow of their special techniques etc. into communities they did not identify with.30 Such a trait, indeed, restricts musical knowledge,
access to which becomes a matter of privilege.
26 Deshpande 1973:8 27 Deodhar 1973:ix 28 Ibid., xi 29 Bakhle 2005:141 30 Meer 1980:129
The gharānā(s) also lay a lot of emphasis on voice culture: “the swara is the ‘singing voice’ as distinct from the ‘speaking voice’. This swara in the disciple’s voice has to be trained and cultivated by the guru with care and patience for years on end. This is called tālīm (training) in music parlance.”31 In another account on gharānā and its pedagogy, it is given that the masters told
their students to sing without worrying about nomenclature and matters of theory. They professed that the talent of a student “lay in their throats and not in their heads.”32 If such a mindset is at the
root of a gharānā system that is the closest to an institution of music knowledge then the question of music theory or any dialogue on music in those times was completely out of the picture. With a more complex music, one might have expected the transmission process to have become robust with more structural theory but it based itself deeper on ideas like ‘riyāz’ and ‘mehnat’: Urdu words which mean incessant practice and hard work.
There is a certain similarity between guru-śiṣya paramparā and gharānā but the intent and the values of both the systems seem to be radically different from each other. While in a gurukul or
guru-śiṣya paramparā, the scriptures forbid the guru for hiding any knowledge from the student,
the members of a gharānā are selective of what is to be taught and to whom. Despite ‘orality’ and ‘aurality’ being the only two correlates of the transmission plane, there was a fixed span of learning in the ancient guru-śiṣya paramparā. The teaching concept of gharānā does not have a definite time limit and cannot really be called a system due to the very unsystematic and purely subjective nature of its transmission.
Nevertheless, these two traditions qua transmission methods passed down a great variety of music. The history of Hindustani Music, however, took an interesting turn from these trends to a
31 Deshpande 1973:9
systemic institutionalization of music education starting from the late 19th century. The following
section briefly captures the essence of such an activity.
c. Colonial addition: English scholarship and music schools for mass education
Music of India received a lot of attention from the West even before the official period of colonization (1858 onwards) began. William Jones (1746-1794), an English oriental scholar and a philologist, studied Indian history and culture. In 1786, he discovered vast literature in Sanskrit language and its connection with European languages. As a part of this research, he also found out hundreds of manuscripts written on music. The scholarly interest of other Westerners also grew in these findings because it resonated with the intellectual literatures of the Greek and Latincultures.33 Subsequently, Jones wrote about scales, pitches, time and interval, and other features of
music given in the Sanskrit theoretical accounts, in his text called On the Musical Modes of the
Hindus (1792). The Western scholars examined and researched these accounts from the early
centuries to understand how Indian music was in the past.
Mainly two reasons can be assigned to such an investigation. Firstly, they were unable to understand the contemporary Indo-Islamic performance-practices as it was difficult to fit them into the existing paradigms of Western music such as staff notations. Secondly, as a part of a larger political reason, they were on a constant search for “Hindu antiquity” to be able to deem the Mughals corrupt and to overthrow their empire (and to later replace it with theirs). By 1870’s the British colonial rule had been established and music became one of the mediums through which colonizers sought modernization of the colonized. Due to the changed power relations, “Indian music was now to be collected not for curiosity’s sake or as a symbol of cultural inter-course . . . but as a scientific, ethnographic, bureaucratic enterprise, a facet of the scientific spectacle of Empire.”34
33 Farrell 1997:19
The project was now driven by “ideas of control and representation through theories of notation”.35
In the discourse that developed over examinations on music, the subject of notations gained more popularity and importance:
Notation, as a means of reproducing or representing sounds on paper, was the only way by which Indian music could be apprehended and placed in conceptual display cases alongside other artefacts [sic]. Western musicology in the nineteenth century was not only about the collection and comparative analysis of non-Western musics [sic], but also about the conceptual means through which the unfamiliar could be captured as scientific fact and made coherent to the Western eye and ear.36
Now such an enquiry was hegemonic in character. Indian music was not as easy to translate into Western conceptualization as the colonizers might have expected. They still could not gather all the “actual facts” related to ancient music theory and thus, needed help of the natives.37 They fostered
similar “intellectual” interests within the newly forming political and social groupings within the native Indian community through education. With the enactment of the English Education Act (1835), English education had become compulsory in Indian schools. Thomas Babington Macaulay, in his Minute on Education (1835) proclaimed:
“. . . of all foreign tongues, the English tongue is that which would be the most useful to our native subjects. The question now before us is simply whether, when it is in our power to teach this language, we shall teach languages in which, by universal confession, there are no books on any subject which deserve to be compared to our own, whether, when we can teach European science, we shall teach systems which, by universal confession, wherever they differ from those of Europe differ for the worse . . .”38
In Oxford’s Postcolonialism: A Very Short Introduction (2003), it is pointed out that:
35 Farrell 1997:48 36 Ibid., 49 37 Ibid., 50 38 Macaulay 1835 http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00generallinks/macaulay/txt_minute_education_1835.html
When an original culture is superimposed with a colonial or dominant culture through education, it produces a nervous condition of ambivalence, uncertainty, a blurring of cultural boundaries, inside and outside, and an otherness within.39
In the case of Indian music, the produced conditions can be perceived as ambivalent. The rapidly growing English-educated Indian bourgeoisie saw the revival of old texts and the music pertaining to that, as a potential symbol of nationalism. However, to propagate the nationalist agenda, they came forward with educational reforms such as music schools, which reflected a Western model of mass education in music. They wrote about Sanskrit theories and published several books to guide music instruction. Beginning from 1870’s, what also eventually arose was an intellectual discourse on the music of India, written by Indian scholars in English language, which marked the very foundation of a modern period in the history of Indian music and education.
The first ever music school based on a European model was Bengal Music School (1871), opened by Sourindro Mohun Tagore (1840-1914) in Calcutta (now Kolkata). Tagore was an activist during the colonial period, who wrote prolifically about and worked relentlessly for Indian music throughout his life. Having received English education, he was the first Indian writer to produce literature on Indian music in English.40 In addition to his main education, Tagore took lessons on
piano from a German teacher (name unknown) and his collections of Indian and European books and ancient manuscripts on music showed his particular interest in music theory.41 Much like the opinions endorsed by colonial writers from the West, Tagore believed that music of India had a Hindu origin and that the interaction with Muslims led to its downfall.42 In order to strengthen and validate this belief, he researched existing Sanskrit literature to revive concepts and information that was best understood as scientific. Simultaneously, he also identified and highlighted the
39 Young 2003:23
40 Bor and Miner 1997:14
41 Capwell 1997:288, Bhattacharyya 2016 42 Farrell 1997:50, Bor and Miner 1997:14
elements of Indian music which could easily fit into the relatively new but already existing “scientific” framework used by the Westerners to understand music in general:
Sourindro Mohun Tagore’s works represent a unique confluence of theory along with compositional and pedagogic work. It is only during his era that the modern musical consciousness began to assume an ideologically coherent form in India— one that was placed within a framework of scientific knowledge, supported by a body of theoretical terms for disciplinary needs.43
Based on the theory of music found in the old Sanskrit literature, Tagore and his Indian music teacher Kshetra Mohun Goswami (1813-1893), developed and promoted a unique system of notation that could be considered equivalent to the Western staff notation.44 In fact, they claimed
that the notations could be found in the ancient texts and it was not something new. So, instead of fitting their music in the Western framework, they worked on the old Indian framework and brought it to the notice of interested scholars:
Goaded by the awareness of how the English saw the ease with which European music could be represented graphically as a mark of its rationalized and scientific basis, they desired to demonstrate that Indian music was capable of the same mark of distinction. But rather than taking the Macaulayite road and adopting European notation, they chose an Orientalist approach by trying to recover and revitalize early forms of Indian notation.45
The use of these notations as a tool of instruction became a salient feature of Bengal Music School. Kshetra Mohun’s pedagogical treatise Sangītsāra (1869) shaped the curriculum of the school, which constituted raga based compositions, their notations, and even English songs like “God Save the Queen”.46 Initially, the main subject of teaching was gāyan (singing) and each year the faculty grew increasingly to teach instruments like sitār, mridang, and harmonium. It is important to note that harmonium was not an Indian instrument and there were on-going debates on its compatibility with the tonal system of Indian music.
43 Bhattacharyya 2016
44 Ibid., Capwell 1997 45 Capwell 1997:293 46 Ibid., 294
During his own educational years, Tagore also attended classes of western choral singing that were a compulsory part of the college curriculum. Having been familiarized with that and directly associated with piano at an early age, he had perhaps sufficient knowledge of the Western tradition which led him to the formation of a hybrid music system using his school as a medium. He formed an Indian-European orchestra, which comprised of Indian musicians. Important to note is that orchestra was an essentially foreign tradition, but to consistently integrate two different traditions of music and to not necessarily outdo one over another, he merged the two styles. For the same purpose, he made new and hybrid designs of instruments. (See Appendix- Fig. 1) These instruments can now be found in the museums of Kolkata, Brussels, Tokyo, and New York.
In 1886, based on a similar concept, another music school was founded in Baroda – a state on the western region of the subcontinent – with the name Chokrāni Gāyanshālā (also known as ‘Children’s Music School’ in English).47 Maula Baksh (1833-1896), the founder of the school and a famous musician of those times, is said to have derived inspiration from Tagore with whom he spent several years in Bengal.48 However, the curriculum of this school was different in that it
integrated elements of South Indian music with Hindustani Music. Baksh was a Muslim born in a small northern state, who learnt music in a typical gharānā style and sang professionally in courts. On one of his music tours to South India, he got his first exposure to music practice outside courts. He then realized that music as an art had a long history and theory and that it was also practiced for purposes other than public entertainment. In 1870, a year before Tagore started his school, Baksh had started his venture to bring the art of music out from the boundaries of courts. He published the first ever known music magazine in India by the name of Gayan-abdi-Setu (date unspecified), which literally means “a bridge across the ocean of music”. It was a six-page long booklet that gave information on “singing and playing”. Here, he wanted to span a common platform between the
47 Kippen 2007:152 48 Ibid.
North and South Indian music traditions particularly.49 Keen to make music education accessible to
public, he published instruction guides, books containing rhythm notations and compositions in different languages, and manuals on how to play the harmonium.50 He also managed to get some of
the old Sanskrit treatises on music translated to Hindi.51 By 1905, there was also a provision of
diplomas and certificates given to those who attended the courses. Admission to the school was based on a selection process.
In the same vein, Vishnu Digambar Paluskar (1872-1931) founded a music school in the North region in 1901. He strongly believed Indian music to be a Hindu entity and a symbol of the nation.52 Naming his institute as Gandharva Mahavidyalaya was his first and foremost step towards
reinforcing Hindu identity of music- Gandharva means “the mythological singing and dancing of celestial beings in the heavenly court of the god Indra in Vedic mythology”.53 The practices of the
school were informed by the feeling of strict devotion to the Hindu gods. Every morning the school would have a communal prayer and end the days with the singing of devotional songs.54 Moreover,
a music magazine was launched, which was in Hindi language.55 There was a picture of a Hindu
goddess that symbolized music’s religious connection. Paluskar was a disciple of Ichalkaranji (mentioned earlier in the discussion of gharānā) and so, he learnt music in an environment that did not allow him to inquire or annotate. In contrast to this method, he devised and introduced his own system of notation, published handbooks on harmonium and magazines to make learning of music easy.56 The school was open to all, but its overtly (Hindu) religious character reflected his aversion
49 Bakhle 2005:38 50 Ibid., 42 51 Ibid., 43 52 Ibid., 138 53 Ibid., 145 54 Ibid., 154
55 Name and date of the magazine is unspecified. Bakhle 2005 reports that none of the copies have survived
so far.
towards Muslims. And even though he defied the concept of gharānā, the functioning of his school resembled the strict nature of his teacher’s pedagogy:
No student in Paluskar’s school could take musical instruction lightly. Students were repeatedly told that they were involved in a process of tapasyā in service to the goddess of music. This was no laughing matter, and even silly pranks that students engaged in, no doubt to enliven the overwhelmingly ponderous atmosphere of religiosity, were swiftly cut short and the students castigated.57
The additional feature of his school was the focus given on development of teaching skills in music learners for an alternate career. The students were consistently made to perform in public spaces to raise funds for the institute. Even though there was no formation of an orchestra, the use of harmonium was dominant as an accompanying instrument. This particularly raised a question on the pedagogy and the effectiveness of the outcome. Many students preferred learning the harmonium as it was easier to learn. Within a span of three months, they could start earning money by playing tunes on it in weddings, etc.58
The contribution of all the three personalities in institutionalizing music against the backdrop of two long drawn traditions – guru-śiṣya paramparā and gharānā, is immense. Bringing music education to the masses was a big step, the inspiration of which emerged out of the Western curiosity to rationalize Indian music. These educational reforms and notational forms of music were new imports from the West. However, there was no academic framework that could allow students to develop and eventually apply intellectual ideas pertaining to their music. Even though music schools acquired a position in the field of education, the popular belief of oral transmission being the authentic method could never really be shadowed. As music started entering the sphere of more academic discussion in the 20th century, the resistance of musicians grew stronger. The
next chapter will investigate whether this response turned into an interface or a conflict.
57 Bakhle 2005:15
Chapter 2: The pioneers of musicological thinking
At the cusp of 19th and the 20th century, the European style Indian music schools were
flourishing and growing in number. The idea of teaching music in such a school setup was new and systematic but the method of transmission still rested upon the concept of imitation. Tagore’s schools introduced notations and considered Sanskrit texts as the theoretical basis of Indian music. Baksh’s school intended to bridge the gap between Hindustani Music and Carnatic (South Indian) music, where, the influence of old Sanskrit tradition was sustained. And Paluskar’s school rested entirely on the premise that music was a religious practice. That music was an art with a long historical story which should be written in connection with contemporary performance practice of the time was an idea introduced by Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande (1860-1936). Bhatkhande’s ideology and work is significant to our discussion of musicology in the sphere of education for two reasons. First, he worked towards classicization of Hindustani Music; the standard theory which is followed today in many institutions is the one written by him. Second, his ideas were scholastic and displayed an approach that, in my opinion, is needed today for the inclusion of musicology in education.
Bhatkhande, in the longer run, envisioned a higher education of music that was informed by theoretical rules and description written by him. However, it was only by mid-20th century that
music was introduced at the level of higher education. Alain Daniélou (1907-1994), commonly known as an ‘Indologist’, addressed the situation of music education with a slightly different yet scholastically similar approach. He directed a music research project at Banaras Hindu University. Although he did not spend longer than three years at the university and his name is rarely included in the available discourse on Indian music education, the implications of his work cannot be overlooked. The current chapter will provide information on the work done by these two scholars in starting an intellectual dialogue and bringing a new dimension to the study of Hindustani music.
Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande (1860-1936)
In 1920, Ernest Clements, an English civil servant and a scholar of Indian music, wrote in one of his books The Ragas of Tanjore: “There are only a few competent teachers in the whole of India; they are mostly illiterate . . . as each singer dies, the danger to Indian music becomes more imminent. Theory is practically non-existent . . . Correct intonation is only to be found practiced by a few professionals and they cannot impart their secrets, except by example.”59 Bhatkhande, holding
a similar opinion, dedicated almost the last three decades of his life in order to promote music literacy by reconciling the long history of Hindustani Music and establishing a theoretical system intelligible to anyone who wanted to learn music. Known today as an Indian musicologist of great prominence or the “Father of Renaissance of Hindustani Music”60 or the great personality behind
modernization of Hindustani Music, Bhatkhande, however, received his higher education in law from an English university in Bombay. He practiced as a lawyer for about fifteen years before embarking on his ambitious venture of sensitizing music enthusiasts to textual authority.61 His
learning of sitar and singing from his early years remained with him and the study of theoretical Sanskrit treatises became his obsession for the rest of his life.
Starting roughly from 1907, he traveled extensively across the country interviewing musicians about their knowledge of music theory and collecting notations of over a thousand compositions. Completely dismissing the idea of a “living archive” and “secrecy” within the gharānā, he published these compositions so that anybody could learn them. Between 1910 and 1914, he published his magnum opus Hindustani Sangeet Paddhati, a collection of four volumes on theory and history of Hindustani music. The fourth volume, however, came out in 1934. All of these works
59 Quoted in Farrell 1997:52 60 Nayar 1989
contained a list of libraries and corresponding texts that were meant to benefit every student of music if they read and “memorized” it.62 His rather unidirectional goal was to sketch a consistent
history of music from the Vedic times to the 20th century and in doing so, he wanted to formulate a
theory that had its roots in the historical account yet explained the techniques and principles of contemporary performance practice: “Classical music is well-known to the public. But the rules and regulations, i.e. scientific knowledge is nowhere near, as it should be. My desire in music is that the present day ragas and raginis should be classified nicely and the rules they observe should be clearly indicated.”63 After delving into a number of Sanskrit treatises, Hindi translations of
Urdu-Persian treatises, and listening and talking to famous musicians of the time, he studied the many scattered theoretical accounts that had developed over a long period of time in the country. He compressed and simplified all of it into one theory of music that could be understood with respect to performance practice. For example, he reorganized seventy two modes into ten parent modes and classified all the ragas under them.64
Furthermore, his main aim behind such illustrious compilations was to educate those interested in learning Hindustani music by making translation of theory into practice easy and seamless: “His method of teaching was unique. In the beginning, he would explain all the peculiarities of a raga according to the Shastras [scientific literature]. Then he would explain the characteristics of the allied ragas in such minute detail that the students grasped it intellectually and consequently felt confident.”65 This was the kind of engagement he desired in the methods of
music education. In contrast to the traditional belief (also mentioned in the discussion of gharānā in the previous chapter) that good music was a product of voice training only, he emphasized the knowledge of rules of music as a decisive factor of good performance. He also founded music
62 Ibid.,120
63 Quoted in Nayar 1989:64 64 Bhatkhande 1916:39 65 Ibid., 55
academies in cities like Baroda, Gwalior, Bombay, and Nagpur between 1920 and 1925.66 Another
academy opened by him - Marris College of Music in Lucknow (1926), now known as Bhatkhande Music Institute Deemed University, is the only one that has survived till today.
Another major step taken by Bhatkhande towards bringing music in a scholarly debate was the commencement of a series of four All India Music Conferences between 1916 and 1925 in Baroda, Delhi, Banaras, and Lucknow.67 These conferences did the work of bringing musicians,
music scholars, critics, writers, and connoisseurs together at the same platform. The objective of these conferences was to discuss and debate upon all matters related to music like comparison of pitches and scales between practice and ancient theory, or the development of “national music”.68
This was also a platform where a lot of disagreement emerged between the participants and mostly between the musicians and the so-called musicologists. The major speakers at the first conference were scholars or theoreticians; musicians were mostly treated as “practical artists”69 or segregated
from the “respectable classes”70. Conversely, musicians deemed these scholars as having only
“bookish knowledge” and no real skills of performance.71
By demystifying music rules and constructing a consistent theory, Bhatkhande took the risk of making the understanding of Hindustani Music accessible to all and thus affecting the role that masters or gurus played in music education. Although he never undermined their position in educational landscape, his interrogative approach towards gauging their theoretical understanding became one of the reasons why gurus became hostile towards him. Besides, his habit of writing and documenting all his music-related encounters with them, even brief conversations, was absolutely
66 Alter 1994:161, names unspecified 67 Trasoff 1997:338
68 Bakhle 2005:181 69 Ibid., 85
70 Trasoff 1997:337 71 Bakhle 2005:110
new and perceived as annoying.72 Musicians were, hence, reluctant to collaborate with him: In
1914, upon his encounter with Abdul Karim Khan (1872-1937), a prominent Indian musician of the time, he sought answers to some of his questions related to a raga. Khan was ready to demonstrate the answers by singing, while Bhatkhande wanted to record them in written theoretical terms, a practice Khan neither appreciated nor tolerated.73 The two skills of writing and singing did not
necessarily have to play out mutually exclusive but perhaps they did. And, in fact, a concordance between the two was what Bhatkhande himself dreamt of: “Had Abdul Karim cast his lot with him, Bhatkhande said, the two of them could have changed the face of Indian classical music together.”74
In addition, he risked offending the many nationalists, who were convinced that Hindustani music practices were strictly religious and symbolized Hindu tradition, by constantly attempting to keep music and religion separate from each other. He disregarded the belief that the ancient Hindu texts were a divine creation and the anecdotes that some musicians with the power of their ragas could influence seasons and climates.75 Instead, he stated, “times of the night and day are associated
to particular ragas, according to a design which might suggest a psycho-physiological basis”76 – a
hypothesis that has triggered many research projects in the field of recent psychology.77
Throughout his journey, he was in a duel with Vishnu Digambar Paluskar (discussed in the previous chapter), the Hindu nationalist founder of the very religious music schools, and could never come to terms with him.78 Paluskar convened his own set of music conferences, which were fundamentally
72Bakhle 2005:239
73 Ibid. 74 Ibid.
75 Ibid., 125 It was (and still is, by some people) believed that accurate singing of some ragas at a prescribed
time of the day could stimulate external changes. Like, raga Deepak could light fire, or raga Malhar could bring monsoon.
76 Bhatkhande 1916:35
77 See for example, Chordia P., Rae A. (2008) “Understanding emotion in raag: an empirical study of listener
responses”, Wieczorkowska A. A., Datta A. K., Sengupta R. (2010) “On search for emotion in hindusthani vocal
music”, Mathur, Avantika et al. (2015) “Emotional Responses to Hindustani raga Music: The Role of Musical Structure”
different from the conferences organized by Bhatkhande. The aim of these conferences was focused on reviving Hindu culture by having Hindi as the formal language, singing congregational prayers at both beginning and end of the conference, promoting a different system of notation, and discussing only Sanskrit texts as the authoritative treatises.79 In short, these conferences were the exact
opposite of what Bhatkhande wanted a united and national discussion on music to look like.
He may have faced several challenges and his successors may not have continued his legacy the same way he would have expected:
Bhatkhande not only documented all he wrote, he made his sources public. In so doing, he established a standard for music scholarship that regrettably, has not followed his example. Instead, letters, diaries, original compositions, and rare books have been kept hidden for decades, rarely shown even to research scholars . . . such secrecy would have been anathema to Bhatkhande.80
But, in my opinion, he certainly raised the standard of music education and widened the scope for what it could look like in addition to merely copying and singing the ragas: “He blended high-minded scholasticism with rigorous attention to citation, documentation, and proof, always driven by a desire to make music more accessible to a larger public . . . Bhatkhande’s commitment to music allowed for a random practice to be disciplined by a connected history, a stern typology, and a documented musicology.”81
Moreover, even though many musicians and traditional thinkers found Bhatkhande’s ideology unconventional and his approach unpleasing, by resisting and opposing the change, they did, as a matter of fact, indulge in the conversation started by him. They may not have agreed with some of his assertions about Hindustani Music, but the fact that they began thinking within a theoretical framework and began using common terminology, indicated a certain change in the sphere of music education and awareness. In his first All India Music Conference (1916) itself,
79 Bakhle 2005:209 80 Ibid., 130 81 Ibid., 130-131
Bhatkhande expressed a sense of hope that his work would trigger a better sense of music education:
The first step then in the revival of our Northern music has been attempted by me and my labours have so far resulted in a fair measure of success. I feel happy at the thought that I have been able to mould a model for my successors to improve upon and to perfect; and I cannot but hope that in a few years more there will be an easy system for the instruction of our music, which will lend itself to mass education. Then will the ambition of India be fulfilled, for then the Indians will have music in the curricula of their universities and music instruction will be common and universal . . . once there is a system of music, the gates of instruction will be thrown open and compulsory music education will immediately follow almost as a natural consequence. Writing easy text books and gradual manuals will be accomplished in a trice. Indeed, optimism in these matters is permissible, for I have very high hopes that the new Hindu University which has been recently established in Benaras will have a faculty of music and thus the work of imparting education in music will travel fast.82
The Hindu University of Benaras or Banaras Hindu University that he mentioned in his speech was founded in 1916 by an Indian politician Madan Mohan Malviya with a vision “to blend the best of Indian education called from the ancient centers of learning - Takshashila and Nalanda and other hallowed institutions, with the best tradition of modern universities of the west.”83 It was only after
thirty years i.e. in 1946, the ideas to start a college of music were put together and in 1950, an institution named Shree Kala Sangit Bharati (English name- College of Music and Fine arts) was born. The post of director and assistant director was given to Omkarnath Thakur and Alain Daniélou, respectively.
Alain Daniélou (1907-1994)
Daniélou was a scholar of music, culture, philosophy, and religion, with a specific focus on ancient India. He belonged to an influential French family and received education in diverse fields of arts. Having acquainted himself with dancing, painting, singing, playing instruments, his love for the arts was unmistakable. On an adventurous journey to the East, driven by curious motivation
82 Bhatkhande 1916:43
and a desire to explore the world, he first visited India in the year 1935. In his autobiography The
Way to the Labyrinth: Memories of East and West (1987), he described the relationship he
developed with the subcontinent from then on and how it eventually became the center of focus for all the work he did the rest of his life. Out of some fifty books authored by him, thirteen of them are based specifically on India, covering mostly cultural aspects from history, yoga, religion, to the nitty-gritty of Indian music. His first encounter in India was with the native province of Bengal, which was the British capital of the time. There, he visited a university called Vishwa-bharati, which primarily began as a small school set up by Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941), an Indian poet who received the 1913 Nobel Prize in literature. In Daniélou’s words, Tagore was an educator and economist, who “started the school as what was then a bold experiment in making the education of children as closely parallel as possible to the course of their natural development.”84 Here, Daniélou
was asked to direct the school of music but he did not like its “international and intercultural flavor”85. Children were taught only “basic principles of classical music” and mainly songs that were
considered “modern music”, in which he was least interested.86 Daniélou wanted to experience the
“true culture” of India and hence, he left for Banaras.87 This city was (and still is) popular for its
Hindu heritage constituting old temples and Ganga river that is considered holy. He decided to live there with his partner and got an Indian citizenship in the year 1939.
Like other European travellers, Daniélou was keen to dig into Hindu culture but what probably set him apart was his approach. He converted into a Hindu and spent most of his time studying Hindu schools of philosophical thought and practice. He also learnt Hindi language and
84 During his stay at Rabindranath Tagore’s place, Daniélou was requested to get funds for the school from his
European contacts. This description is from the budget proposal prepared by him to promote Tagore’s work and collect sponsorship.
85 Daniélou 1987:97 86 Ibid.
