Renowned Carnatic musician TM Krishna is an intellectual, social activist, author, columnist all rolled into one. Someone who stands firm on a range of political issues, whether it is the NRC or farmers' protest or CAA… We have come across many facets of this angry young man. He won the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 2016. This citation says it all. It was for his “forceful commitment as an artist and advocate of art's power to heal India's social division, to break barriers of caste and class to unleash what music has to offer not just for some but for all”. Recently, The New Indian Express hosted Krishna at its office in Chennai. Lightly edited excerpts from the interaction:
Why does Tamil Nadu, despite its ancient civilisation and rich heritage and culture, often fall into the caste trap? The state ranks high on caste-based violence. Why so?
It is not just a great culture, heritage and diversity. It is also the fact that we have been at the forefront of the anti-caste movement. That dichotomy is even more stark. The state probably led the country, along with Maharashtra, in the modern era in asking those difficult questions of caste with Iyothee Thass, Periyar and the Dravidian movement. So, we should have done much better. This is something that I have grappled with too. But I think that also brings to light the reality of caste.
Using Ambedkar's phrase, the ‘annihilation of caste’ can't be addressed only in the ‘process’ mode. It is not good enough if your Constitution says something. It is not good enough if you put certain processes in place. The question goes back to the caste culture that we still live in. Irrespective of which part of society you come from it is ingrained in you through your habits, rituals, cultural practices, the music you listen to, and the dialect -- caste is all-pervasive. That is where the whole contestation is happening. You have a political movement that has been anti-caste but the fact of the matter is there has been a failure in changing the cultural habits of the people of this state.
The system may put certain things in place in terms of affirmative action and reservation. We have done an incredible job on that front. Nobody can ever deny that a number of people from the marginalised sections have progressed because of the policies of the state. But that is not enough. What is the culture of the state, which includes people inside and outside the government? That truly has not changed. Let's be honest and acknowledge this.
We are more satisfied in saying “I'm not as casteist as the other person”. Nobody is willing to ask the tough question of themselves: why am I casteist? I am anti-casteist but I will be the first to admit that there are streaks of casteism in me. Because they are so deeply ingrained, I make mistakes every day. I am watching myself and saying: “What was that?” So has that changed?”
Then there is also our education system. How much of anti-caste comprehension is there in our education system? First, this entire public and private education system is a casteist one. Who goes to public schools and who goes to private schools? Everybody knows the answer to this question. It’s a bandwidth of caste. Parents sending their children to government schools want to move them to private English medium schools, not only because of English education, but also because of who are going to be their friends and classmates.
My children went to a private school. All their classmates were people like them. They have never experienced diversity of people in their life. Unless you experience it and make it a cultural habit and not a transactional or accidental happening, how can you expect social change? Therefore, we have failed culturally. It is a great disappointment because you expect better from Tamil Nadu. We expect better from ourselves.
The first thing you have to stop doing is rating ourselves on levels of casteism. “That caste is more casteist than me”. There can't be an uglier articulation than that. What are you doing? What are our schools doing? How much space and ways of living are we sharing? There can be a cultural transformation, but it might take two-three generations. That has to happen through concerted efforts, which is why I think civil society is an important part of this movement.
How do you think our children can have that diversity in the education system and have exposure to all cultures?
The ideal answer is that everybody should be going to public school. But that is a non-functional answer. I think public education has to be more in focus. I am very, very clear about it. There is a stigma attached to government schooling and that has to change. We know that is stigma more than anything else. It is not like private schools are doing the greatest job. Many of them are like poultry farms. Many of the government schools are fabulous. But the question is how we are going to change this perception.
Parents also have to change, but it is tougher to do. Children can change their parents. So, what are the conversations happening in classrooms? Are teachers also being educated to deal with the complexities of our society? We are all affected by the way we are habituated. How much are we empowering teachers emotionally and intellectually to address this in a classroom? Do you have a non-violent classroom? The answer is no. There is violence in words used in a class, in the way you talk to a child that has a dialect that is not part of your caste bandwidth. All this has to change systemically, which means the teachers should be educated and sensitised. It doesn't only start from second grade or third grade. It starts even before, from the anganwadis. We have to transform our entire perception of why we are sending our children to schools.
There is discrimination here as well. If you ask the elites what kind of education system we want, they will say that I want my child's horizons have to be broadened. I want them to have freedom in thinking. Ask them what education should be given to the marginalised and they will say get them a job. Don’t their horizons need to be widened? Don't they have to dream big? Do they have to become machine tools? Honestly, this attitude is obnoxious. But that is the language we speak. My discourse is with people like me. I am nobody to talk for or to a person who is in the margins. I don't have their life experience. From them, I listen and learn. We cannot have two sets of principles, one for the privileged and another for ‘others’. This is also intellectual discrimination. In all this, caste plays an underlying role.
Private education also needs to change. It is not enough if you say there is a Right to Education (RTE) Act. Are you saying that the children in private schools don't know who the students coming through the RTE reservation are? They all know. How? Have you asked that question? What have private schools done to make sure that these children are given the required support in the new intimidating environment and ensured that there is no discrimination. Hardly anything, because they think that they are doing them a favour. All this can only change in a classroom culture. It is a long haul. Cultural transformation is always more complicated. But we have to put enough systems in place and need to engage in the cultural transformation of people, including ourselves.
How would you suggest parents deal with this issue? What kind of discussion can they have with their child to make them understand?
I was lucky enough to grow up in a home where no conversations or questions were barred. I could discuss anything with my parents. I think that was a huge gift. Can our homes be like that? Are we, as parents, willing to be challenged by our children? I think the teachers have to ask the same question in the classroom. Are we willing to be challenged by the student? Not just on some subject matter. Serious questions that push you, where you know you are wrong but don't want to admit it.
We all face such situations as parents and teachers. I teach music, so I know the questions I don't want to hear and that is when we get offensive because we have the power to do it. Because we know we are pushed to a corner and our ego does not allow us to admit it. That needs to stop at home. Parents must be ready to say sorry. If the home can be a place of a fair degree of freedom, then that is carried forward. That also gives children the spirit to challenge power. Give them the freedom to challenge authority.
Our political, economic, social -- all issues can be handled, because these confident children will take the conversation forward. They will come together, listen, speak and realise that the primary responsibility of any form of strength is to stand by the people who don't have that strength. The principal responsibility of privilege is being an ally to people who don't have that privilege.
You are part of the high-level committee that is drafting the state education policy (SEP). Recently, there was a controversy as Dr Jawahar Nesan (a member) resigned from it. How is the committee functioning? What changes are you planning to suggest to bring this cultural transformation into the education system?
I can't tell you the details of what we are writing in the report. Controversies aside, I want to say that everyone on the committee from the chairman onwards is together on the fundamental principle that education is for all, and cares for the marginalised the most. Education begins even before a child is born. Education starts with a pregnant mother. When we say education policy, we are looking at it from the pregnant mother to higher education. That is the bandwidth of change we are looking at.
We have to ensure that every child in the state is able to learn with freedom and make choices on their own. Our system should support those who are marginalised in different ways - migrants, Dalits, tribals, children with special needs, different genders etc. We also have problems in how accessible certain kinds of knowledge systems are for all. All of us are prioritising the fact that we need an education system that allows any child to be able to pursue whatever they want without fear. Education is not just about opening schools or colleges saying it is for all. Education is us going out and welcoming everyone.
I would like to think our education policy will be as welcoming as that. We have to hold the hands of people who need help. It is our job to do it. The word inclusivity is not just a word in this policy, we are looking at it from various angles and suggesting changes that we feel are required to make the system more robust. We hope to offer a document that is about educating and enriching our society as a whole. A policy that is about hope and happiness for all.
Has the committee studied the National Education Policy (NEP)?
Of course, we have to. When we prepare the SEP, we have to consider what is in the NEP. We have to look at it critically and why there is a great disagreement with it. We have to see how to put forward the state education policy that challenges certain fundamental things that are problematic in the NEP. We have to have a policy that allows a child to be able to take forward the proposals in the SEP and also find a way to progress in life considering what the NEP says. It is a very messy place. But we can't ignore the NEP. We have to confront it and we will do it.
Does that mean, there is going to be very little space available for you to play?
Not necessarily.
Otherwise, you will be in contradiction with what NEP says.
We can. There is no necessity that we shouldn't contradict the NEP. But, I want to stay away from details. It is not just a political thing. There are obviously many areas where we don't agree with NEP. Educationists, who have studied the NEP have registered their strong disagreement on some fundamental issues. That will have to show up.
We have to understand the complexities of the challenge. We have to chart our own path. The state has the right to have its own path in education and that is what we are drafting. Also remember, our policy is a vision document. What happens after that is not in our control.
What made you the rebel that you are?
I didn't plan to be a rebel. I don't even know if I am a rebel in some ways. There are people who feel that I am not rebellious enough and don’t push things as much as required. They may have a point. The only thing I can say is my home and my school - I studied at J Krishnamurti School - allowed me to just be. Those two factors played a major role in not constricting my mind into any mould.
I have always been uncomfortable when I know that I am being fitted into a mould. That means you are not really thinking or feeling. It is like a habit of brushing your teeth. Singing at a concert is also like that. After a point, how is it different? If I have the abilities, skills and upskill myself constantly, I can do it for 60 years. It is actually not a big deal. We make it a big deal.
I didn't think I was going to be speaking about politics, social justice or environmental justice. I was not seriously engaged in any of this. I wanted to be a great singer and win all the awards that I could get. I was avaricious. Whatever I was doing then was indeed very pleasurable to be popular. You go to a concert and everybody applauds, it is a huge pleasure generator. But, the good thing was the environment I grew up in. That was my self-check mechanism. So, in times when I was quieter and by myself, I probably asked myself what am I doing.
I did not grow up in the typical Carnatic musician’s home.. I didn't come from a family of musicians but a business family. The exposure was slightly different. I experienced a change as a performer toward the late 1990s and early 2000s. As a performer, you are expected to be in complete command. When you are on stage, you are in control of everything including the audience. They must be eating out of your hand. You learn this. You go to concerts, watch artistes, their performance techniques and learn what you throw in at what point to draw attention etc.
Funnily for me, the best musical experiences were when I was not in control. When I was not in command of myself, I was not in command of you (audience), music was magic. This was a contradiction for me. If I am supposed to be a great singer or become a great singer but the best music is when I am not in control, what is it about me at that point in time that allows the best music to come out? So, it is purely self-questioning. The answer seemed to lie in the way power operated.
When you are in control what you are actually demonstrating is power… and it is intoxicating. If you have power, you can actually hold everybody. But when I lost that power, I seemed to be doing better stuff. The music was beautiful. It doesn't make sense. I felt this is something I have to think about deeply. So, I began the journey to understand where Carnatic music came from. I started doing research in musicology.
That learning of history, of people, of power, of how cultures are programmed, got me asking questions about my positioning in this entire thing, where I am placed in this and what my role is in perpetuating this power. That's when things started changing. Way back around 2005, the first thing I changed was the whole style of performing Carnatic music which many people have today forgotten. But all this is an organic process; it just happens and then you reflect on what happened -- you discard some things, you also learn from them. I broke down the entire concert format – people don't remember it now. But interestingly now, after over 15 years the Carnatic performance format has loosened up!
A few years ago, this would have been considered blasphemy. Now, people don't care how and what I sing because my socio-politics has become a bigger point of disaffection! The greatest gift from all these movements in me is the kind of friends I have made across areas of work, across fields of activity, regions, social spectrums, with whom I would have had no relationship if I'd just been a Carnatic singer. This has opened windows, doors and perceptions and it has changed the way I think and also my music.
Can we expect you in active politics?
Never say never in life because you don't know what life is going to throw at you but I don't see myself there because I inherently push back on any kind of homogeneity or power. So I don't know how I'd fit into political dogmas. I don't see myself as a person who can say yes because it comes from power. I see myself as a political person right through my life but party politics? That's an entirely different world. It would also mean that I give up on everything else I'm doing in life which are things I treasure. Party politics is 24x7 work so I don't see myself that way.
What is your response to people criticising you with terms such as 'urban naxal'?
I'm actually confused by the phrase; I've been trying to figure out what it means because is there a rural naxal also? I don't know who comes up with this. But if you think of why people give others labels like 'rebel' or 'urban naxal', it could be because they are scared of something. It even applies to labels like 'sanghi'. It reflects more on the people that give them to you. Labels stop us from being able to listen to each other.
I'm also equally at fault for doing this to people. If that's what you want to see, that's what you will see but if you can have a conversation with me and even if we vehemently disagree, you'd see that I'm actually not such a bad guy. The problem is we're at a point today where there's so much noise that you cannot listen. Everyone is triggered and when that happens, it's over.
I also come from privilege so can brush aside these labels. To someone who's not socially powerful, branding them an urban naxal could lead to someone attacking his house and killing him; it could be life and death. Labelling also negates the possibility of a conversation with this person. You should be able to have a conversation with anybody across the political spectrum. Democracy lies in the ability for us to have such conversations. I think, we are losing that today.
In one of your concerts, you broke down while singing a Thyagaraja kirtana. Why?
Were you surprised? Why were you surprised? Would you still be surprised if I looked overtly 'religious' and I had cried? I think you are surprised because of your image of me. Why did I cry? Your reasons may not be the same as mine. My relationship with the composition may not be the same as your relationship with it. All that matters is that I have a very deep relationship with the composition.
This is one of the problems we face today: even having deep experiences is categorised as a certain thing. If someone told me they had a deep experience because of this or that reason, then it’s not a deep experience. A deep experience cannot be categorised. When you have deep experiences, you will not be able to say why. If I say I got a spiritual feeling, it's shallowness and if I say it is because I connected with Thyagaraja's words, it is superficial.
Something profound happened when I sang it and I don't know how to say it. Every human being has this capacity and every human goes through it; some people have very deep experiences when they go on a run and I'm willing to say that someone has a deep experience while on a run in the same way as going to a temple or singing a kirtana.
Last September, former Kerala minister KK Shailaja refused the Ramon Magsaysay award, citing brutalities that the government under him meted out to the communists. A section of historians also discredits him citing his links with the CIA. As a recipient of the award, what is your opinion on this?
This is also the party position and I get it. There's a Communist history to it and I respect that. At the same time, I don't think that needs to be the universal view. Then the Nobel should never be accepted because the biggest award is also problematic. If you start doing this, you can't buy most cars today because all the original money probably came from Nazi banking money. You should not own a Benz in this country… Many international banks were party to Nazi money.
A lot of things we do today have a dirty past. Each one of us has to decide on that. In the case of the Magsaysay, yes, it has a problematic past but who are the people who have been given the award in the last four or five decades? That's what the award stands for. If you could look at that, there is a good argument to be made that it has gone to people who have thought about the society.
If you look at it from this angle, it seems fair. Every human being draws their own line of ethics, especially if it goes in the direction of history. Some might disagree and that's acceptable but I think what is more important to me is my ethical behaviour and that of the Ramon Magsaysay committee.
Last month, in an op-ed, you wrote about The Kerala Story and about how most movies made in our country are deeply problematic and offensive to marginalised communities. I quote, "But those of us who are pointing to the problems in The Kashmir Files and The Kerala Story have not taken up these causes with the same gusto. We cannot choose our moments of speaking up based on our own pet causes." Life treats us all in different ways. So, is it wrong to have your own causes? If I don't speak about the issue today, does it take away from my right to speak about another issue tomorrow?
That is not what I meant. My problem is with taking an ethical high ground. You can’t take the ethical high ground especially when there are movies that have portrayed Pakistan as permanently a horrible place and we never said anything. I believe those movies have created more hatred between already estranged neighbours. More so, because these movies are celebrated. There is always an evil commander, one ISI fellow etc. This is the only thing we see of Pakistan -- this evil stereotyping.
Doesn’t that paint all Pakistanis with the same brush? Why can't I say that I will speak about this but also acknowledge I've failed ? What is wrong with that? I am not saying you have to take up every cause. And I don’t. This is not a whataboutery argument. It's a statement of consciousness; do we have the consciousness to say we have failed ethically? That’s all I am asking.
For 50 years we have allowed caste violence in films across film industries, gender violence across film industries, homogenous portrayal of transgender persons in horrendous ways. I'm asking about our ethical behaviour. So can we say that yes,
I find Kashmir Files deeply problematic. At the same time, take a step back and reflect. We should do that for our own growth and consciousness. I especially ask that of liberals because I expect better of them. Social media is also a problem because you constantly need to assure people that you're thinking about what they would like you to: don't worry I'm thinking about this but I'm also thinking about that.
Looking back at when you received the Magsaysay award in 2016, along with Bezwada Wilson, do you think of it as an impetus to your future work or as a culmination of what you'd already achieved?
Awards are always uncomfortable because in those moments you ask yourself if you have done anything, especially since in the world of culture you can't really measure what you've done. Secondly, I'm worried that awards sometimes sit on your head. But the Magsaysay opened up a lot of doors for meeting diverse people and learning from them. I'm very grateful for that because I strongly believe that transformation happens in the heart.
It's not enough to think you and I are equal. I should feel you and I are equal. That's where culture and art play an important role and, here, the Magsaysay helped push this very important agenda: how can I change the way you feel towards me or I feel towards you? The reason why there are not many people interested in art beyond pleasure is because it's like drinking whiskey, you must drink it slowly! It takes time and you don't know when the effect will kick in! Cultural transformation is slow, it sometimes takes generations.
The Magsaysay allowed me to tell people that sometimes you'll have to wait. You give people the opportunity to experience life differently, see different cultures, engage with different art forms, with language, with dialect and then, some things change. It is one of my greatest joys when someone comes and tells me, “You know, I didn't like anything you did but I came to a festival you're a part of and I experienced something and went back deeply impacted”. That day I go back home and say okay, you're doing something; those things matter.
The Magsaysay helped me push this through in different spheres of activity. Art is seen as a pleasurable thing or a tool. For example, in politics, you have political songs but they are just ideological tools. Art is never itself, where by just making art, something changes. Even the political world in India has not been able to figure that out. Art is part of the human experience. So, it influences everything that happens. The question is can we play with that? Can we twist it? Can we give access where there is no access? Can we change who is participating? Can we change content? And let art do what it does.
That leads us to the (Urur Olcott Kuppam) Vizha. Is the next one in north Chennai?
Yes, we are hoping. We are in the planning stage.
What have you learnt from the process of working with communities that have not earlier engaged with Carnatic music, when taking your music to them and experiencing their art forms?
I think the dialogue has been immensely fruitful. One thing I have learnt from the exercise is the reason why many people stay away from ‘elite’ art. I am not just talking about Carnatic music or Hindustani music or western classical music, but any art form that occupies the top tier of the societal structure. Most people will use the usual excuse saying it’s very complicated and I think that is extremely condescending. You are basically telling the rest of society that they are not good enough to listen to this. I am not saying that I want 10,000 people to listen to this music. I just want a diverse audience. Can those attending and performing be from different backgrounds and different cultures?
The reason people from diverse communities stay away from the elite art forms is because of all the other messaging they transfer. You are not listening to just the sound or the music. You are also listening to all the other information that is already planted in your head by society. Even while you are listening to the song, your brain is tapping into all kinds of information related to what you are seeing – it could be about where you saw it last time. It could be about your family. It could be about your society. It could be so many things. What you see or hear is processed through all this information. You are not actually listening to the music. You are only visualising your bias.
Actually, nobody has a problem with Raaga Kamboji or Thodi. The problem is the moment the sound is heard or movement seen, it triggers a huge array of dislike or disinterest. This is because of how it has placed itself in society – the message being “we are special.” So, if we can eliminate that barrier, things can change I think in art, there are three things we need to handle – people, content and space. As long as we can keep changing this, we can do magical things.
Who are the people doing it or listening to it? What are we sharing as content? Where are we sharing it? If you subvert these constantly, then you are having fun and erasing limitations. Then something in that person’s brain is turned off. If I am seeing an art form which I have never seen on the street performed on the road, suddenly changes. Or if I see somebody whom I don’t imagine would sing this form, sing it, then the song sounds different. It’s not the same song. It’s a different song. So I learnt how to do this, through the vizha. The vizha was an equalizer in many ways, it allowed diverse art forms and communities to bounce off each other. So it is actually possible to create a space, a non-elite exclusive space where this is possible.
Our vizha was also taken into the Mylapore Sabha, where we turned the Sabha on its head. We did a thirunangai (transgender) festival, another festival of north Chennai culture in a Mylapore Sabha. Doing that was also a change, because the audience that normally came to that auditorium were experiencing things they would never normally do. All human beings are not evil. They are just stuck in society’s organisational trap. If you can think that way, then we can talk to everybody. Now, if they experience something that is out of their format, maybe they will go back saying that they were wrong to have a certain impression, or learnt something.
Similarly, for the people on the margins, there is fear and anger. Maybe through these interactions, they said, there are also truly nice people out there, maybe the next conversation will be slightly better. I think these little movements that we have seen in the vizha have taught us a lot about how these conversations have to be framed. So for me, personally, it has been incredible journey; the collaborations that we have done, the way we have sat together, curated, the self-criticism that emerged, and even the clashes that sometimes happen in the meeting, between two people, who are from very different social spheres but with very strong opinions, the fact that we could have that and grow out of it is special.
You have harsh criticisms of certain aspects of the Carnatic music community. How is your relationship with the community? Do you feel sometimes that you have to hold back what you say or do in public?
It’s difficult to describe my relationship with the hardcore Carnatic world. Yeah, if I go to an auditorium, I do get looks. I think the older generation is far more uncomfortable, but unfortunately, for them I sing well (laughs). So, they still come to my programmes. I think that’s the dichotomy they haven’t been able to resolve. Then there are extremists who would want to boycott me. So, if you think about it, I have been able to survive despite this for some time now. I have created my own space. So I think it’s a mixed bag for people. There are those who prefer that I don’t exist. There are those who have deep problems with my political statements. They mainly have problems with my statements on caste and faith. Everything else is irrelevant.
I also think they don’t understand what I am saying. Especially about faith. About caste, I think they understand. I get where that feeling comes from and I completely disagree. But with faith, they don’t seem to have a clue what I am talking about. Some people have decided I am agnostic, some say I am atheistic, but I have never said any of those things. I wish people would pay more attention, then we can talk seriously. We need to be serious not opportunistic or blinded.
In our society today, we have no right to be critical of our faith. If I am critical of my faith, they will come with the whataboutery question: ‘why are you not critical about that faith?’ There are people in those communities who are critical of those faiths. Similarly, I am critical of the community that I was born into, which is the Brahmin community. There are anti-caste activists among the Thevar, Nadar, and all other communities, who are critical about their communities. My job is to be critical of the life experiences I have, and I will be critical. I want us, this group to change.
Similarly in faith, I was born into a certain understanding of Hinduism, and I will be critical of it. So, I think they are a bit confused about where to slot everything I am saying so I am pushed into the easiest hate club. But I wish I was as enlightened as the 22-year-olds today.
People keep saying they are the Gen Z or the Instagram generation. I think they are far more enlightened than what I was when I was 22 or 23. The things they know about society, the way they are able to challenge things, is very admirable. I wish I had their insights when I was 23. I think the younger generation within the Carnatic community is also different. I know because I have a lot of conversations with them.
Do I hold back? Good question. I’d like to believe that I don’t. But the fact of the matter is the incidents that happen in your life sometimes make you rethink and hold back. You do think once or twice because you don’t want trouble ? It has happened to me so many times. There have been times when I said I don’t have the bandwidth for it now. And I’m thinking to myself, “you should not think that way”. But you are not thinking for just yourself, you are thinking for your family. So you create an oppressive society by just instilling this fear. Job done.
Imagine a person with so much privilege as me having this thought in my head. Imagine people who don’t have even 20% of the privilege I have; why would that person open their mouth? Then we ask why that person didn’t speak up. Or when #MeToo cases come up, we ask why didn’t this girl speak up 10 years ago. I mean it’s atrocious that we even ask that question when we have all the privilege and say why get into trouble. Imagine.
You seem to be asking deep questions, especially the experience you had while singing. It sounds to me that it’s a search; is it spirituality or religion to you?
You know, these words, they are very dangerous. Because when you use them, I don’t know what you mean. These are very heavy words. I am only interested in the way we can lead our lives. That cannot be only functional, it has to be experiential. It means can we be better people? Which means you have to be willing to unlearn, every day. Is this faith, is this spiritual, is this religion? I don’t know. I actually don’t care. Which is why I don’t see a dichotomy between my singing and my activism; to me they are part of the same continuum. Art experience for me is about finding ways of being sensitive. Life experience should be about finding ways of being more sensitive. I will make mistakes. I will fall on my face, get up and say, “I tried this, it didn’t work. So, I will try something else.”
You seem to be advocating reformation in everything. Is there nothing from our past, our culture that we can carry forward?
So, when you say our culture, what is that? I don’t know what our culture is? What is Indian culture? We use these words too much today. I don’t even know what ‘our’ is. We are in Ambattur now. We walk just two streets behind this office and ask people there about their culture and we will learn that they have a culture that is completely different from mine. Your idea of Indian culture is what you experienced. I think there are ‘our cultures’. And I don’t know 99% of them. I just know the 1% that I experience in my life. What my family and my circle taught me is my way of understanding Indian culture. Same for you. So I can only answer from this limited learning. I cannot answer for the person in the next street. It could be. You take from your past, I take from mine. Not Indian culture’s past – that’s a fraud. The Indian culture you speak about is your past. Another question: what if my past (my culture) is violence to someone else? What do I then do?
If you ask me if there is anything to take from my past, of course there is: the way I grew up, what my parents taught me, what my family taught me, what my school taught. A lot of things I speak today come from the past. No action is without history. But you also have to be always challenging your past. There are elements from the past – of beauty, goodness – that are still with you, in every human being, in every past and, of course, you want to keep that. But also want that reach more people that it did in our past. Hypothetical situation: Say my parents were wonderful people to me, but they were hateful towards someone else. Can I find the most beautiful qualities they gave me and make sure it’s not limited to me but extends to 10 people? And can I ensure that the hatefulness that they showed towards some others is not repeated by me or anyone else?
I am taking something from the past but I am also questioning it. As far as Indian cultures go, if you really want to go to the past, it’s a very messy place. And if you want to say there is something we all share in these multiple pasts – not single – then you must be willing to learn from different pasts. To listen to a story of the past that is very uncomfortable for me. One story can be loved by one person and hated by another person. So which is the truth? The truth is when these two stories talk to each other. But if you say her narration of the story is something I won’t consider at all, my narration is convenient and hence should be what everyone accepts, then I would tell you to take a hike! I don’t want that past.
In pursuit of a better you, among the things that you have given up includes singing at the December season. How much has all this affected your livelihood?
Well, I have managed till now. Actually, I have nothing to complain about. Yeah, life has thrown me a good dice. Some younger musicians recently told me, that I have actually shown them how they could be ‘classical’ musicians yet not get stuck. They needed to see someone who has succeeded. I do sing concerts and get paid decently. I am making some good money that keeps my family going. But it’s not been easy and it can be very lonely. I married someone who agrees with these philosophies and we battle it out every day at home, huge arguments. But you’re still alone and sometimes that can get to you. You must have the ability to just let it be. Little triggers can bother you; pressure can get claustrophobic sometimes. I need to let go.
You mentioned your wife. She's also a singer (Sangeetha Sivakumar). There's surely a gendered experience of the world of Carnatic music. Have you found ways to mitigate it in supporting your partner?
I should not be answering this. I think when I was younger, I didn't do a good job. In the early days, I failed my wife. I don't think I did enough. That's a regret. I don't think I completely comprehended the complexity. Later on, I'd like to believe I did slightly better. But she would probably have a different opinion. But it is a deeply gendered experience. Like any other field, but more so in an art form that is tagged as classical, or traditional, the gendered experience is much more a burden. The man has had it easy, very easy in the field -- the kind of opportunities I would get, a woman would not get. The system gives me an impetus that would never be given to a woman.
In the case of Sangeetha, the fact that she’s married to me was a double whammy because we are both performers and I was prioritized because I was a man. This is very difficult for her. Then my politics makes it harder because I can get away with it but she can't. It's also true that when people want to target you, they prefer targeting people around you because they are easy targets. And they know that you will not react because it will come off wrong. It will come off like you're doing it because that person being targeted is your partner, even when you are actually asking an ethical question. It will never be understood that way. She has been at the brunt of facing things in her professional career because she just happened to be my partner. So, it is not at all easy. It's one of those things that remain unresolved, unfortunately.
You've been vocal about the guru-shishya parampara and with it being questioned again with what is happening at Kalakshetra, how do institutions actually weed out it? Is it possible to reform such a thing with institutions? How do you make classes more accessible with that sort of system or do we take that system out of classrooms?
The problem is that even in an institution, it is informal. The culture is informal. Say you become a student at Kalakshetra, in terms of structure, you're going into a government of India institution -- you're paying fees to the government. But if you look at classroom culture, it's no different from you receiving private lessons. The attitude, the conversation, that casualness, boundaries being crossed so easily, all very much like private lessons.
Having said that, in an institution, it is at least possible to put certain things in place structurally. Like you have in universities, especially abroad, very clear parameters can be enforced so that the chances for sexual harassment or abuse are minimal, and students’ identities are protected if they complain. The privacy of every person is respected. An institution like Kalakshetra can put all that in place and give far more voice to the students. Actually, I would think an institution is in a better position to actually make sure things are cleaned up.
It is much harder in the completely unorganized sector. First of all, there is a legal issue, because they are not institutions. You just go to somebody's house. My students come to my house. The only place to complain is the local complaints committee. Now, I am not registered to anybody and I've not signed a statement saying, 'I shall behave in this manner otherwise I will be removed or license to teach revoked. There are no systems and no consequences. There is a lack of structure. Why is there a lack of structure? Because there is a lack of intention. It is also true that just putting a structure doesn't help. You can all create ICCs (internal complaints committees), but if the ICC is made nonfunctional by design, nothing will happen.
I have been a critic of the guru-shishya parampara. I think we romanticise it a bit much. Did I get a beautiful guru-shishya type of learning? Of course, I did. But are there problems with it? Very deep problems. Anecdotal evidence can never be a good argument for anything, because each of us will have different experiences. And no system can be dependent on good people. The system should work even when people are horrible, that’s a good system.
The guru-shishya parampara as a system is terrible. It only works if people are good. If the teacher is a wonderful person, it works beautifully and the sharing is wonderful. Secondly, the guru-sishya bond is not unique to the Indian tradition. You meet any great scientist or mathematician, they will tell you that there was one mentor with whom they had a special bond and they walked in the parks and had discussions, What is that? guru-shishya parampara. That is an unbridled sharing between two people, challenging each other's norms. That is the guru-shishya parampara, it is this bond between the mentee and the mentor, which is not bound by hierarchy, which allows for growth and frees the mind.
It can happen in the house, in an university, or in your office. It can happen anywhere. If this is the guru-shishya parampara, I will treasure it. Recently, somebody asked me " Is the guru-sishya parampara disappearing?" I said: "So what?". Because he doesn't understand what it means. I know what it means.
In the ‘80s, when I went to paatu class (music class), there were differences between the dynamics of me and a girl sitting in the classroom. I know what was expected of me, what was expected of her. I've seen it happen.
I know horror stories of how people have gone to a great musician's house, stayed there, done household chores, and not learnt anything. But they were gracious enough to never say anything negative about their guru. At the same time, there were great gurus who did share. But how can we ignore the abuse that has happened; students who had run away from the teacher saying "I want to leave all this" because they don't handle the pressure of the home. All this is not something beautiful. There are so many girls who have suffered.
Let's be very clear. These are not one-off cases. We live in 2023, we don't live in 1875. I have changed as a guru. There are things I did in my past that I will not do today. Because I've learned. I've apologized to my students because I felt certain things I should have never done. Why did I do that? I was copying my guru because that's what I thought was normal. We have to change. It's a good thing to change with the times. Not always a bad thing!
With Kalakshetra, there is a lot of criticism of the people who spoke up, saying that, you know, the challenging what we are taught, and this is a thing of our culture?
All these people who said this have never experienced what they're talking about.
Is it so essential to learning any art form that it must exist in a guru-shishya parampara?
I don't think so. If you're talking about this permanent subservience to your teacher saying namaskaram every day and falling at their feet -- all of this is completely unnecessary. You may say “he's talking like a very western educated man; he does not know Indian culture”. I know more about Thyagaraja than all these commentators. I sing him with my heart every day. All these people don't even ever come to concerts.
If those who write reams on social media actually came to concerts, every concert will have at least 3,000 people! Why do you think in the December season, you have concerts with only 100 people? The number of people on social media who come and shout and say, "our culture, we have to protect Carnatic music", they don't come to concerts, damn it. But they will sit at home and give us gyan of culture and carnatic music!
What we need is a beautiful spirit in the relationship between the teacher and student. I think if you call that guru-shishya parampara, I'd say fine. But there should be no hagiography and, most importantly, you can't give so much power to the teacher. That is not the guru-shishya parampara.
In the Upanishads, the teachers are being challenged, asked difficult questions by the students. We will quote them when it is convenient but, in reality, will tell students don’t challenge your teacher; they know better. If you really want to live by the Upanishadic values every teacher should be challenged. Every teacher must be questioned.
Here unfortunately, the burden is put on the students, especially in the cases of sexual harassment and abuse, as if the student is the evil person. People have these images of students under a tree, everybody's sitting around it, with birdsong. I think all this comes from the Amar Chitra Katha! Real life is not like that.
In 2018, we had a wave of ‘MeToo’ cases, and a lot of people in the Carnatic music community were named. Do you feel there has been a reckoning and improvement since then?
I am greatly disappointed. I don't think anything has been done to protect survivors. Again, as I said, in the world of Carnatic music, there is one so-called ICC, but why will anybody come to an ICC when the environment is unsafe for a survivor. The ICC has people who represent power: why would any survivor go talk to these people? You have not changed the culture. Simple. Have there been any sensitizing workshops for musicians? Have you educated musicians on ethical conduct and gender-equal behavior? Have you educated audiences? Have you at least put up standees in your sabhas about sexual abuse?
In the Carnatic classical world, they don’t like the word sexual. They will never admit it, but it is in their head. If you put up a standee that has the words sexual or sexual abuse, that imagery conflicts with their puritanical notions of the music. They believe going for a carnatic music concert is like going into a temple. Therefore, they would rather act as if these horrible things do not happen. "Don't talk about all those things."
A group of musicians including Sangeetha Sivakumar (my partner) have formed a group called Saha to facilitate safe conversations and sensitization. There are other volunteer groups started by young artists who are also taking the conversation forward. But I also think the December season should start every year with public awareness programmes on ethical behavior and sexual violence for both artistes and audience members. Audience members also engage in sexual harassment of artistes. You can ask any woman artiste. After a concert there will be at least two-three creeps who come up to them. So, it's the artiste, audience and the organiser.
There is a whisper network among musicians about organisers who are creeps. Why are we not addressing this? Because we don't want to talk about them and they have so much power. If we ask the establishment, they will just say, “nobody complained ''. How will anybody come to you, when you show no intent? I'm telling you, if they'd done workshops, distanced themselves from well-known sexual predators, conducted awareness programmes -- and this has been suggested to them umpteen times -- then in at least in a year or two, women would have felt more confident and believed the system cares. Until then I don't see any change. I think the younger generation is far stronger and when they get into a position of power, I think they will push the lever.
You’ve talked about coming from the Brahmin community. There is also the concept of toxic masculinity. Is that something that you work on with regard to becoming a better person? If so, how? Also, in parenting because you have two daughters.
It ultimately goes back to being acutely aware of the way you think. Many times the words that you use, or in the things that you take for granted toxic masculinity is embedded. I'd like to think that in the last decade-plus or two decades, I've worked on being far more aware of how I behave, both at a personal and professional level. I think having two daughters is truly helpful. Because they'll call you out as many times as they have to and say this is not acceptable. I've learned a lot from them. They keep me in check.
So, it’s more about how your daughters are parenting you.
(Laughs) I completely agree. My daughters think I am a terrible parent. They tell me to grow up many times.
WATCH | Express Dialogues with T M Krishna
TNIE Team: Anto T Joseph, Ranjitha Mary Gunasekaran, Shaik Abdullah MA, Santhosh J, T Muruganandham, Nirupama Viswanathan, Subashini Vijayakumar, Archita Raghu, Alen Moni Mathews
Video Team: Rakesh Kumar, Sunish P Surendran, Ashwin Prasath (Photos)