Art and Entertainment

Today (Dec 27^th 2006) I attended a Aruna Sairam concert in Mylapore Fine Arts and that experience prompted me to contemplate on the nature of and relationship between art and entertainment. She is hugely popular and the hall was full and there was a standing ovation at the end, which is quite unusual for a staid and low-key audience comprising mostly of tambrams. But I was surprised to find myself highly displeased and I was almost willing to walk out before the end. In the last two weeks I was privileged to see performances of artists, some really good (T.N.Seshagopalan, Ranjini and Gayathri, Malladi Brothers, Sudha Raghunathan) and some, which I felt, were kind of listless (Sowmya, Unnikrishnan and Nithyashri). But today I encountered an ace entertainer. To a quote a niece of mine who is well trained in classical music “She always brings out a lot of applause and seldom tears”.

I have always looked down on art movies and complained that they were not entertaining enough. This experience has shown me that for the artist the primary relationship is between them and the art they are pursuing but for the entertainer it is between them and the audience. In a competitive environment where commercial aspects are involved I think entertainment soon becomes a race to the bottom. Art seems permanent and entertainment ephemeral.

To come back to the concert, she quickly wrapped up the highly technical part seeming to be in a hurry to come to the more ‘interesting’ part. Then all hell broke loose. She was treated like a jukebox with people shouting requests from all over the hall. She obliged and kind of encouraged each request with an ‘avashyam padaren’ (a heavy tambram accent for ‘sure I will sing your request’). It all seemed like a big ego trip. Why do the audience want their favorite song to be sung? Is their desire more important than the artist’s inspiration? Why can’t they just use their CD player if they want to listen to their favorites? The song selection was moving down rapidly, welterweight to featherweight. I was tempted to stand up and ask her to sing ‘loosu ponne loosu ponne’ (a recent and atrocious tamil film song which goes something like ‘idiot girl, idiot girl, I idiot boy is running behind you idiotically), but my mom sitting next to me would have just collapsed in embarrassment. To clarify, I am no traditionalist. I don’t snicker; in fact I am energized, if artists sing Tamil compositions that some traditionalists don’t approve. I think there is enough room to manuevre and you cannot straightjacket art by insisting on tradition. It is not just what she sang but the way it was brought made it more entertainment than art. In any case I don’t know the basics of Indian classical music and hence don’t fully appreciate the techniques and nuances. But I can experience the difference. If I want entertainment I can go to a light music show or switch on TV, here I have come to enjoy the art in its full form. Let us not shortchange it by our shorter attention spans!

So whats wrong with entertainers? No, there is nothing wrong with them. But if all artists become entertainers the world would be full of BoysToMen and no Beethoven, full of Sydney Sheldons and no Shakespeare. I think there is space for both and only an insecure artists would rush to entertainment. Entertainment is like a quickie, there is a time and place for it, but if everyone seeks that all the time then they are really missing the real fun!

I think no good entertainer has died a pauper but there are some good artists who have (Van Gogh and Bharathiyar are popular ones, one fellow poet griped that there were more flies on Bharathi’s body than people in his funeral).

Another aspect to ponder. Is art possible through sustainable sustenance lifestyles or does it need a surplus that usually comes through some form of exploitation? That requires another blog entry.