As someone who has been passionate from early teens about making Carnatic Music socially broad based and initiated pioneering steps for the same in my 20s, I see nothing wrong about anyone finding certain things in the past out of sync in today’s climate. I have definitely found a few things uncomfortable in the works of a few non-digital creators of earlier times. They may have been hailed as progressive in their eras but would come through as regressive today. That said, the majority of their works are palatable for people of any background.
Background: For instance, there could be some who may feel extremely uncomfortable about some segments in Shakespeare’s “Taming the Shrew”. The same holds good for various paintings or sculptures across timelines or regions.
The Issue: It is deeply problematic to shower 21st century views to decry a substantial contributor from another era like Tyagaraja to come across as champions of social justice and equality. This is neither connected to “honest artistry” nor to “mature social thinking”. In fact it is the exact opposite of both to trash anyone for writing, painting or sculpting things as they saw based on human evolution up to that point in time.
Solution: Someone “intellectually” or “morally” finding something wrong with a composition need not sing that particular song. For instance, if someone finds it abhorrent that there are songs referring to Shiva demanding that a devotee feed him meat from his own son (even if the intent was to highlight the devotee), one need not sing it. What’s “progressive” about tom tomming it and inviting the whole world to pillory the composer or his entire community posthumously?
Intentional Consequences: Another problematic part is that these cards are being played to trigger even more vilification campaigns against some segments of society using selective truths of convenience as examples. A prolific, multi dimensional composer like Tyagaraja who evolved over time is being nudged to be judged by millions based on the words of attention seekers. Obviously most would never have the time nor energy to make deeper studies of him to get the larger picture.
Balanced Approach: Before forming judgements, one needs to at least study 5-10 of his other works. For instance, how many people know that the same Tyagaraja also hit out at Brahmin Ritualism in songs like “Yagnadulu”, “Manasu nilpa” and “Teliya leru Rama”? He critiques hypocrisy in songs like “Kanugonu sowkhyamu” and stresses on the need for scientific approach even in prayers rather than blindly following templates in “Telisi rama chintana”. Many of Tyagaraja’s messages would be equally applicable to other communities too and valid across generations.
Real vs Pseudo Intellectualism: Any analysis or even judgements can only be accepted as truly intellectual only if backed by reasonable knowledge of another person or his works that comes through in balanced citations. The converse is equally true.
Social Discourses: Media outlets which carry any narrative need to create equal space for counter arguments to be placed by the next day to enable society to make more informed judgments.
In summation, Tyagaraja was a champion reformer who unhesitatingly hit out at any community, when he saw unacceptable trends. His inspiration as a musician, composer and social critique was Purandara Dasa (1484-1564), revered as the Father of Carnatic Music and a stunning counter example to those promoting conspiracy theories about lack of diversity in this system.
