Talk:Carnatic music/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Karnatak vs Carnatic

--Siva 15:54, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Why is the term Karnatak used instead of Carnatic? The article title is Carnatic music, and that is also the term most commonly used in English. Guaka 12:52, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

changed to Carnatic -- Paddu 09:21, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Carnatic" is as correct as "Crishna" for "Krishna" and "Cawnpore" for "Kanpur".MarcAurel 03:23, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

"CARNATIC is Colonial or Europian name for KARNATAK or KARNATAKA (Sankskrit: Karnataka Sangeetham )" Pluto.2006 05:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Devanagari

Hi, Thanks for ur comments. I'm unable to view the devanagari encoding and thought that they were junk characters and deleted them. I'm using firefox(0.8)/mozilla(1.7b) as the browser. I have selected the encoding as Hindi(Devanagari) but still the characters show up jumbled. Can you pls let me know how to view them?

Thanks

You don't need to select any encoding, but you need to have you got Devanagari fonts installed? What's your OS? -- Arvindn 05:37, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Scale

"Carnatic music uses the carnatic scale, which from the starting note is half step, one-and-a-half steps, half step, whole step, half step, one-and-a-half steps, half step. As you may notice, this is symmetrical, and the sargam letters (in Tamil at least) used to refer to the notes (sa ri ga ma pa tha ni sa) reflect that symmetry - ri & ni look similar, ga & tha look similar, and ma and pa look similar."

there is no such thing as 'the carnatic scale' defined this way. this is merely one of many scales that are used. Iitmsriram 15:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Carnatic music and Karnataka

The article says that the term "Carnatic (or Karnatak) music" bears no relationship to the Indian state Karnataka. I thought that it was called Carnatic music because it was first popularized by Purandara Dasa and Kanaka Dasa, saints during the Bhakti movement in Karnataka. Also, it says that "Karnatak music" literally means "Traditional music" - I couldn't find any sources to say that "Carnatic" literally means "Traditional." Can someone clarify?--ashwatha 15:53, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The doubt here arises because the british instead of keeping the original word anglised it.It is also interesting to note that most of the english words are not used "as is" in various languages including in india.According to modern usage Karnataka(Karanudu) means Lofty Land(Karu-lofty, Nadu-land) because the southern india is a plateau.And therefore the high plateau of south can be roughly be associated with karnataka.But that does not mean it includes Andra and Tamil land of today. During ancient times there was no strict boundries between southern regions particularly with regards to language ,culture, tradition, art,music,etc.Since music was more patronised in Karnataka, it got the name as "Karnataka Shastirya Sangeeta".That does not take the credit away from others who made contributions to it.That is why it is not tied to the region and it is famous around the world.Also saying that Carnatic has nothing to do with Karnataka is like saying Buddhism, Jainism,Hinduism are not local to India.Look at the contribution of Kerala to Indian and world Mathematics, and how the credit went to the western world because of not being recognised and acclimed in India.So be fair and dont twist history.

I think you're right. Whereas Karnataka has a retroflex na, the na in karnataka sangeetham is alveolar. My Sa-En dictionary doesn't give anything beginning with karn- (alveolar na), and my En-Sa dictionary says that "tradition" is sampradayaha. I don't know the historical details that you give, but I will make an appropriate change.--Siva 16:36, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I'm confused here - Sanskrit has no alveolar consonants as far as I can see; did you mean the Dental consonants? In any case, "karNe aTati iti karNATakam" i.e., karNataka sangItam is that which pleases (aTati) the ear (karNam), is one possible derivation of karNataka sangItam that has nothing to do with the name of the state. Is there any reason to believe Karnataka was called so even during the times of the Haridasas? Ambarish | Talk 14:46, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes, there is - in fact, the name "Karnataka" is first available in the Kannada literary work "Kavi Raja Marga", written in the 9th century. 10th century Kannada works mention the name of the state in several places. Also, the basis for carnatic music (Maya Malava Gaula as the base raga, etc) was laid down by Purandara Dasa in an attempt to simplify classical music and bring it to the masses. At the very least, we should mention the different possible derivations of the term "carnatic music" instead of declaring outright that it means traditional music and that it doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with the state(carnatic doesn't mean traditional anyway). I will be making this change in a couple of of days if there are no objections. --ashwatha 01:53, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Agree. I didn't write the original text; I was merely pointing out that there could be multiple theories, and one ought to mention all of them. BTW, I'm still uncomfortable about the actual spelling of the term - whether the 'n' is dental or retroflex. If the latter, the Devanagari figure ought to be changed as well. Ambarish | Talk 16:06, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I think it is the dental 'n' in the sanskrit term, so the current figure should be ok; I have heard the word "Karnataka" being pronounced with a retroflex 'n' (though it is rare), but never in connection with the musical school. I agree with you that Sanskrit doesn't have any alveolar consonants. --ashwatha 02:39, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, this is very fishy, then. "karṇa" meaning "ear" has the retroflex nasal. I understand that the term for the state is derived from "karu" + "nādu", with "nādu" having the dental nasal, so there's no way "Karnataka" could possess the retroflex nasal. A very simple test for determining the etymology of the term for music is to figure out which nasal is used. That was the reason I was particular about the Devanagari diagram as well. I think for the moment it's OK to retain the figure as it is; perhaps some Sanskrit literary guru could clarify things. Ambarish | Talk

Even that wouldn't clear the confusion completely; as noted above, the name of the state is pronounced with a retroflex 'n' is some rare cases. The etymology of the name of the state is also ambiguous - "karu"+"nādu" is one accepted etymology which results in a dental 'n'- but there are also other etymologies, such as hyper-correction (a common way non-sanskrit terms were sanskritized) from the term Kannada to Karnataka, or that it is a compound word formed by the phrase "Land of Kannada" ("Kannada Naadu", etc. Dictionaries treat the two "Karnataka" pronounciations (dental 'n' and retroflex 'n') as synonyms. See this link for a discussion of the etymology. ashwatha

KARUNADAKA SANGEETHAM can be split as Karu+Nadu+Aga+Sangeetham. Karu - in Tamil means Nucleus, core, main or black. Nadu -means country or land, Agam -means inside,belongs,from. Thus 'Karunaadaga Sangeetham' obviously was coined to mean 'Music from/of Main land' referring to Tamil Nadu. Carnatic music was prevalent in Tamil nadu from early times of Alwars and Nayanmars with compositions set to different raga (known as Pann in Tamil) and tala systems mostly on Lord Shiva and Vishnu. More on this topic can be read from http://www.carnatica.net/tmusic-main.htm

The above link is an article about Tamil music; would you know any citations for the above etymology for "Karnataka Sangeetham"? Ambarish 02:46, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Carnatic music is named after the Southern region of the Indian subcontinent named by western colonists as Carnatic. This name was used to refer to the region between the Eastern Ghats and the Coromandel Coast encompassing much of what is called today as South India. Thus the term carnatic music was used to denote South Indian music.

See: Carnatic (region) Robin klein 17:33, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I see an attempt here for a cultual hijack. Everything south Indian is being presented as Tamilian. I do not see word Dravidian being used. I do not understand this illogical discussion. It is undisputed it is Karnataka Sangeeth. No vernacular uses the word Carnatic. Carnatic is an anglicised version. Please do not attempt to show everything soth Indian as Tamilian. I have respect for Tamil but it is not fair to run propaganda. All websites provided as proof are also Tamil related websites. ~rAGU

Why did you change the link to the Ancient Tamil music from the History section? The relevance is fully cited. The citations also include published journals. Do you have any references for the 'Dravidian' music? Please spend some time reading the relavant citations and the related WP pages. Please discuss before removing. - Parthi 22:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

There are no attempts of 'cultural hijack'. The etymology of the name 'Carnatic music' and the history of its evolution are two different unrelated things. There is wide agreement regarding the influences of the ancient Tamil music in the development of Carnatic music. - Parthi 01:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: The word Karnataka. There are serveral theories surrounding the origin of the word and I don't think we are going to be resolve that question here. It is clear, however, that it is written and pronounced as karnaaTaka, and not karNaaTaka, the way it appears in DevanaagarI script in the first paragraph. Ambarish mahodaya has an interesting way to resolve the samaasa. Let us not invent a new word and make up history to suit the word.

Secondly, I find the Tamil slant rather disturbing. It is indeed a heartening fact that Madras remains a vibrant music center. Just as it is wonderful to see several vidwans and vishuShis from Tamil Nadu.

For the record, in Sanskrit, both the name of the region "Karnataka" and of the style of music "Carnatic" are written "karṇāṭaka (karNATaka)", using the retroflex "n". Take a look, for example, at the way "Karnataka" is written on page 257 of Monier-Williams dictionary (it is near the top of the third column). This has something to do with Sanskrit phonology: the combination "-rn-" (i.e., the consonantal "r" followed by the dental "n") is extremely rare in Sanskrit - the nasal following an "r" will almost always be retroflex (-rṇ-). -- Arvind 11:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

History/Instruments

Are the nagaswaram and tavil purely historical in relation to Carnatic music? That is to say, they are not used in classical concerts today, and their use in weddings and religious functions is vestigial. -- Solipsist 11:36, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think it is improper to claim that Carnatic music's rules were written 4000-1000 BC. I think there is little evidence for this. It is better to say that the rules of Carnatic music were written hundreds of years ago by unknown people.

-- User:thaths

Theory

I'm thinking it might be a good idea to move the Theory section to a page of its own and replace it with a much shorter overview. Its good information, but quite dense and technical. I suspect its more likely to turn away the average reader, and not help them understand what Carnatic music is. -- Solipsist 11:36, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree that some part of the monstrously long article needs to be moved to its own article. I like the idea of "theory" getting its own page because I think it is what people need to "understand what Carnatic music is."

However, can you make the case for Southern and Northing Indian music and music theory to be so different that they require seperate articles from the beginning? A "Indian music theory" page would be preferable as it would nicely balance the predominately European influenced theory articles (hm...). Hyacinth 21:49, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. There is already quite a few statements contrasting southern and northern music in the theory section. I suspect a combined theory page could address these distinctions nicely (I'm 100% sure I don't know enough to do it though.) -- Solipsist 21:48, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I do not mean to suggest that there is some grand unified tradition of Indian music theory that could make up an article. There are differences between Northern and Southern theory, and we may need single contributors knowledgable in both areas. I'll make it a priority to research, but no promises when that will bear fruit. Hyacinth 22:10, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Tonic Vs. Key

I have noticed the usage of the word Key in a number of places which I think tonic would suit better. Key involves a key signature, in other words the pitch differences seperating the notes in the scale / raga, even though the term "Key of X" can be used to specify a tonic of X since key signatures do not correlate well, in most cases, with ragas, I think that the concept of a tonic is very applicable to both western and carnatic music. Does making this change seem appropriate?

I agree. Key indicates harmony, tonic indicates only centrality, importance, or originating. I edited accordingly. Hyacinth 20:34, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't. Look at it this way: Suppose you take a song and change the tonic. You just change which note you're calling sa. That's different from changing the sruti, i.e., modulating. I could be wrong, though; I'm no Western musician. Can someone knowledgeable in Western music clear this up?--Siva 21:52, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Indian classical music using any "scale", raga, or set of swara may start on any pitch, always on the note sa, so long as it is comfortable for the performer. There is no modulation in Indian classical music, a drone on the tonic sounds throughout. Modulation is changing the note/pitch of the tonic, which inevitably changes the key, but the concept of key includes both tonic and scale (and thus harmony). These confluences, between scale & tonic, which creates key, and between note, pitch & frequency, do not exist in Indian classical music and thus the concept of key is unecessary and seemingly misleading. I am unfamiliar with mode mixture in Indian classical music, but it or a change of scale would better be described as such, "change of raga/mode/scale" or "a change to such-and-such raga/mode/scale". Hyacinth 03:59, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't think I quite understand anything you wrote beyond the first two sentences. What exactly is the difference between tonic and key? (Try to keep technical terms at a minimum. If you can, please explain using Indian terminology.)--Siva 21:32, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Actually, neither term is quite suited to describe the concept of shruti, although tonic comes closer. A tonic is the base note of a key or musical scale. When we say things like 'oru kattai shruti' or 'sruthi saythukollir', we're talking about changing the pitch of 'sa' as the base note. This is essentially the same as adjusting the tonic; however, the difference between the two concepts - as you point out - is that any note can be used as the tonic, whereas only 'sa' is used in Carnatic music, which makes using the term somewhat problematic.

The reason 'key' doesn't work is that it's a very different concept. If you're familiar with the Natyashastra, you'll know the concept of 'samvadi shruti' and 'vivadi shruti' and how 'murchanas' and 'jatis' were built on them. Key is rather similar to that. One of the more important characteristics of a key is that a particular note 'agrees' with notes at certain intervals (exactly as was the case with 'samvadi shruti') and 'disagrees' with other notes at other intervals (as was the case with 'vivadi shruti'). When we talk about a key, we mean not just the pitch of the first note, but its 'samvadi shruti'. Changing the key means not just that the pitch of the first note changes, but that the 'samvadi shruti' which is at the centre of the piece shifts to the 'samvadi shruti' associated with the new note. That makes 'key' even less appropriate to describing 'shruti'.

I think the best solution is to simply explain what the role of 'sa' is without using the words 'tonic' or 'key', as we've done over in the nynorsk article - simpler, more elegant, and easier to understand. We can always have a separate article on Carnatic theory where we explore the relationship between Indian and Western concepts. Aravindhan 17:57, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This seems like a good compromise to me. We do need to explain the difference between European influenced and Indian concepts, and if using key or tonic to describe Indian concepts is innapropriate that needs to be spelled out to prevent European influenced readers from making the assumption that it is appropriate but neglected in the article. Hyacinth 19:34, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Concerts and Content

I made a significant contribution to the Concerts and Content. As I write other pages related to Carnatic music I see a need to link to concerts and contents. Do you guys think it makes sense to move these out to a separate article? HairyPotter 05:38, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure—are there articles specifically about concerts in other styles of music?--Siva 21:16, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Not really, but there is Music Season for now that wants to explain 'what goes on' during a Carnatic Music Concert. HairyPotter 02:18, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Do we really need it? Also, I think "Music Season" is far too general a name for that article. At the very least it should be "Music season (Indian music)" or "Music season (Carnatic music)."--Siva 23:37, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

It certainly is not "amusing" to see people walking out during a tani... this behaviour is a great insult to the virtuosity of the accompanyinsts. And, people never walk out when the accompanyist is someone like Umayalpuram Sivaraman, and in yesteryears, Palani Subramania Pillai or Palghat Mani Iyer...

The Raga Aalapanai is not easy. The raaga has to be described in 3 octaves; and should contained the microtonal variations (gamkas etc) in the right places. It is the singer's interpretation and understanding of the Raaga.

Pertinently, the person who setup the modern concert system was Ariyakkudi Ramanuja Iyengar... In the old days, the tani avartanam used to be toward the 1.5 hour/2 hour mark, approximately half way, and the percussionist would decide how long it lasted. There have been tanis - esp. legendary ones between Palghat Mani Iyer on the Mridangam and Pazhani Subramania Pillai on the Kanjira which lasted over 45 minutes!!!

There are also Talavadya Kutcheris - where only percussionists take part...

Favour for me.

My Dears,

I want to know which ragam was to playback in a wedding VIDEO CD.

And tell me the title of the album IN CD.

And tell me where i will get.

Please contact me to msfelix@rediffmail.com or msfelix@hotmail.com.

Awaiting for the mail.

Do this favour for me.

Thanks from Felix.S.Stephenson

I'm sorry, but it doesn't serve the purpose of an encyclopedia to tell you which ragam was played on a CD. Besides, we don't know which CD you're referring to.--Siva 20:32, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Telugu transliterations

What's with the Telugu transliterations in this article? To be fair, shouldn't there also be Tamil, Kannada and Malayalam transliterations of all the terms?--Siva 14:33, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

May I request you to add following in the title:

Kannada: ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ಸಂಗೀತ, Malayalam: കര്നാടക സംഗീതം-- Subramanya 12:52, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Palghat Srirama Bhagavathar

Pardon my ignorance, but how famous is Palghat Srirama Bhagavathar ? His page looks more like a family history than about his accomplishments. Tintin 09:15, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Can I assume from the lack of response to the question that he is not famous, and move a vote for the deletion of Palghat Srirama Bhagavathar  ? Every mention of him has been added by the same person.

My knowledge of Carnatic music is very limited, but I don't think his name sits well with the likes of Ariyakudi or Chembai who the writer has compared him to. Tintin 11:48, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd say the article is worth deleting. Like you said, it looks more like a family history than an encyclopaedic article. It's not very well-written either; not only does it have a lot of unexplained jargon ("gurukulavasam", "rasika"), it is also packed with clichés ("breathed his last") and perhaps even a few grammatical flaws. Also note the broken links at the top of the page, neither of which would actually be the title of any article in Wikipedia. However, if the creator of the article is willing to speak out in favour of the greatness of Palghat Srirama Bhagavathar (perhaps providing us with a few links to sites containing slightly more authoritative information), the deletion of the article would probably merit reconsideration.--Siva 13:47, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Palghat Srirama Bhagavatar was one of the highest regarded, though not very popular carnatic singers... the fact that he died early before his contemporaries has made him somewhat unknown today, but he was senior to both Ariyakudi and Chembai--Srkris 22:08, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

More details about Palghat Srirama Bhagavatar is available at http://www.sangeetham.com - Hari, Posted on Oct 28 2005

• Thank you. Should it be moved to Palghat Rama Bhavathar ([1] etc) ? That seems to be the name by which he was known. It needs a cleanup - a lot of the family details can be removed - but I don't have the guts to rewrite an article on Carnatic music :-) Tintin 14:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion

The article Surajananda has been submitted for AfD voting. If he is someone important, please vote and/or try to improve the article. thanks, Tintin 18:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Name of Carnatic flute

Can editors here please give their opinions at Talk:Carnatic flute, regarding the proposed page move? Because there are several main vernacular languages used in South India (Tamil, Telegu, Kannada, and Malayalam), it's probably not a good idea to have the article title under one of those four names; also, I don't know if it's a great idea to have it listed with the English word "flute." Thus, I am proposing to move Carnatic flute to "Venu," one of the Sanskrit names for the instrument, and the Indian name by which the Carnatic bamboo flute is best known in English-speaking countries. Thanks! Badagnani 07:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

The latest reversals by User:Bharatveer

The latest reverts by this user requires some close attention. I don't believe the previous edits warrented such sweeping deletes, although this action is nothing new. Bharatveer as you have deleted the so-called 'Tamil POV' would you mind spending a bit of time editing this article to add some citation information? - Parthi 05:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Parthy, I reverted because i felt it was a simple case of tamil pov pushing( inserting tamil font in front of kannada and some childish remarks regarding vedic infuence etc ). It is none of your business to ask me to spend time on this article. Hope you stop this sort of unfriendly acts. Bharatveer 08:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Bharatveer, when are you going to stop this driveby reverts and namecalling and for once make some useful contribution to WP? BTW it is my business to question any blanket reverts. I make useful contributions - Parthi 08:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

And when did The Hindu become an acceptable source for you (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ramayana#User:Bharatveer.27s_edit_wars). I thought you considered it a marxist journal?? - Parthi 08:39, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Parthy, terms like "useful" are all very relative. I quoted "the hindu" as i thought it would be acceptable to you .So dont try to digress from the topic.This article is about carnatic music, let the discussion be about it then. Bharatveer 08:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Sticking to the topic, I had a look at the two refs you provided. The first one is the Carnatica.net mentioning that Purandaradasa is the Sangeetha pitamaha. There is no other reference in the site. Who named his such? Carnatical.net? The the article should say. Purandaradasa is called the Sangeetha Pitamaha by Carnatic.net. I also read through the Hindu article. I couldn't find any information refering to the cited statement "The roots of Carnatic music was sown during the Vijayanagar Empire by the Kannada Haridasa movement of Vyasaraja, Purandaradasa, Kanakadasa and others." in the article. Can you be a bit more specific in your citation? - Parthi 08:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The references are good .(atleast as good as the references you cited in the ramayana article). Dont expect me to point out each information for you . From the ref ; "The southern music system was for the first time called ``Karnataka Sangeetham in the 13th Century when Vijayanagar was founded" . IS That specific enough??Bharatveer 09:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

No, the article says Purandaradasa lived during Vijayanagar period. There is no dispute there. My question was about the statement The roots of Carnatic music was sown (sic)... etc. Where in the article does it state that Purandaradasa invented carnatic music? BTW one cannot sow roots. The article does not even mention Vyasaraja and Kanakadasa. How can you provide this reference source to support the statement? - Parthi 09:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The references are good and it will stay. There is no point in confusing the issue altogether.What do u mean by purandaradasa inventing carnatic music? Bharatveer 09:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

No, the article will be copyedited. Watch this space. - Parthi 09:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

You can certainly copyedit , but it should not be vandalism like what you are trying to do here.Bharatveer 11:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Can you tell me how my edits are vandalism? - Parthi 11:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

And can you also explain why we need to have Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam and Devanagri scripts in this article but not Tamil? - Parthi 11:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Who is stopping you from including tamil script here? You can surely include tamil script too .Bharatveer 11:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe such biased writing as I found in this article. Wiki requires articles to be presented with a neutral point of view. What I added here are genuine contributions of Tamils. The land of Tamil Nadu had been the centre of music for more than 2500 years and Carntic music is the current name for the classical music of south India centred in Tamil Nadu. I wonder where I should complain about this highly biased article and this blanket reverseals. it is well-known that almost every group of native people from diverse regions of the globe have music and singing traditions of theri own from time immemorial, but what is unique in the Tamil region is the great systematization and experimentation since 2500 years ago. I earnestly ask you, Bharatveer, why did you revert my edits? Please understand it is not Tamil POV, it is the undeniable history. Can you quote from Kannada (or from Telugu or other Indian languages) songswhich are set to raagas, with deep meanings too, as the 20,000 plus Tamil songs I can cite? Please tell me wheter any region in the world has such a rich tradition! Why are we not properly highligting what is a glorious tradition? I found that the previous version of the article systematically suppressed information about Tamils and contributions from Tamil lands. Coming to later times like 15th century, is there any Indian language with such soulful songs with such intricate rythm as Arunagirinathar's thiruppukaz? I do not want to revert to my previous edits right away, but I want to know why my edits were reversed.--Aadal 12:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Aadal

I can quote not one but thousands of songs from each of india's languages.Similarly I find almost all languages of the world as sweet and rythmic as Tamil. Your reaction is nothing but some sort of emotional outburst.Your edits were also reverted for the same reason.Bharatveer 13:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Please quote the thousands of songs from the languages you claim, which use the 7 svaras. Even assuming what you say is true, why then do you not mention the contributions from Tamil and Tamil traditions? Why such a biased writing? Sir, with all due respect to you, I ask that the article be more balanced. The Sama Veda system is not Canatic system, Purandaradasa's is Namakirtanam and not Carnatic music. Muthu Tandavar, Arunachala Kaviraayar, Marimuthu Pillai are true pioneers before the trinity Thyagaraja-MuthuS-SyamaS. Don't you think, all these have to be mentioned with proper emphasis and balance?--Aadal 14:25, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Aadal

Since Bharatveer true to form has reverted the History section to his POV, I have included the weasle tag to highlight that this section is highly pov and some users are unwilling to accept a more rounded history for Carnatic music. - Parthi 05:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The article, I feel, has too many flaws and biases and the way user Bharatveer is reverting it, it is hard to improve the quality of this important article. Let me ask whether the following description of Tala (as found in the article) is a sensible one and whether it gives an authentic description of the understanding of Tala?

"Measure of Time in Carnatic Music is called Tala.In carnatic music, singers keep the beat by moving their hands in specified patterns. These patterns are called talas, which are all formed with three basic movements: lowering the palm of the hand onto the thigh, lowering a specified number of fingers in sequence (starting from the little finger), and turning the hand over."

Is this a description of Tala?!! This article needs major rewriting and edits and the way the user Bharatveer is behaving is truly preventing any improvements that can be made on this. Many pioneering contributors to the Carnatic Music are systematically ignored and the descriptions are often quite naive, like the one on Tala above, and it has glaring bias. --Aadal 05:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Aadal

Arbitration request regarding unreasonable behaviour by User:Bharatveer

I am going to raise the behaviour of User:Bharatveer for arbitration with the admins. This has gone beyond reasonable conduct. - Parthi 08:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Bhartveer has reverted (not edited) this article once [2], twice [3], thrice [4], four times [5], five times [6], six time [7], seven times [8] in the past 24 hours. He/she hasn't even seem to attempt seeing a different position in latest reverts. Some action needs to be taken quite urgently on this user.- Parthi 08:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

At first sight, Bharatveer's edits seem to be motivated by deep-rooted POV. I've blocked him for 24 hours based on the above evidence. The other editors shall try to bring NPOV to this article and cite reliable sources. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

History of Carnatic music - to arrive at a compromise

During the past few days there have been a number of edit-revert actions taken on this article, specifically relating to the History of Carnatic music section by myself and User:Bharatveer. These actions resulted in this user getting blocked for 24 hrs. I regret that as I did not intend this to happen. Sometime I feel we take this too seriously and let our feelings of regional affinities to cloud our bigger goal.

The contest section is the History of Carnatic music and has been the suffering from repeated edits and reverts.I have given the two versions in contention:

Version 1 - proposed by User:venu62 and User:Aadal

Main article: History of Carnatic music

Carnatic music, whose foundations go back to Vedic times, began as a spiritual ritual of early Hinduism. Hindustani music and Carnatic music were identical, evolving from the Sama Veda traditions, until the Islamic invasions of North India in the late twelfth century and the early thirteenth century CE. From the thirteenth century onwards, there was a divergence in the forms of Indian music — the northern style being influenced by Persian/Arabic music.

Carnatic music is named after the Carnatic region in southern India. The region known to Europeans as the Carnatic extended along India's eastern coast. It was bounded on the north by the Guntur Circar, and thence it stretched southward to Cape Comorin. The origin of Carnatic music can be traced to the Tamil Saivite saints Appar, Sambandar and Sundarar (CE 700 - 800) following and extending the traditions of the ancient Tamil Sangam musicians (BCE 200 - CE 200). The Tamil Saint Arunagirinathar who wrote Thiruppugazh incorporated rythmic music in his hymns on the god Muruga. The Tamil composer Muthu Thandavar in Tamil Nadu and the Kannada composer Purandara Dasa in the 15-16h century CE. Purandara Dasa is known as the Sangitapitamaha or 'Father of Karnatik music'. Carnatic music as we know it now took its shape during the during the Vijayanagar Empire. The Kannada Haridasa movement of Vyasaraja, Purandaradasa, Kanakadasa and others actively helped shape it. The most recent developments were ushered in by Tamil composers Arunacahla Kaviraayar and Marimutthup Pillai, followed by the well known Trinity: Tyagaraja Swamigal, Muthuswamy Dikshatar and Shyama Sastri.

Purandara Dasa laid out the fundamental tenets and framework for teaching carnatic music.. The learning structure is arranged in the increasing order of the complexity. The lessons start with Sarale varase, meaning simple patterns and having no defined end.

See also: Ancient Tamil music

Version 2 - Seem to be preferred by User:Bharatveer

Main article: History of Carnatic music

Carnatic music, whose foundations go back to Vedic times, began as a spiritual ritual of early Hinduism. Hindustani music and Carnatic music were one and the same, out of the Sama Veda tradition, until the Islamic invasions of North India in the late 12^th and early 13^th century. From the 13^th century onwards, there was a divergence in the forms of Indian music — the northern style being influenced by Persian/Arabic music.

Carnatic music is named after the region in southern India what is today known as Karnataka. Carnatic was the anglicized spelling of Karnataka and hence it has come to be known as Carnatic Music. The great Kannada composer Shri. Purandara Dasa is known as the Sangitapitamaha or 'Father of Karnatik music'.ref-SangitaPitamaha. The roots of Carnatic music was sown during the Vijayanagar Empire by the Kannada Haridasa movement of Vyasaraja, Purandaradasa, Kanakadasa and others.Ref-Hindu

Purandara Dasa ,the Karnataka Sangita Pitamaha laid out the fundamental tenets and framework for imparting carnatic music.. The learning structure is arranged in the increasing order of the complexity. The lessons start with Sarale varase, meaning simple patterns and having no defined end. Though a good command of the 72 parent ragas and related ragas, taanams and pallavis, swara prasthara, is a mark of a professional - by no measure is that an end.

See also: Ancient Tamil music

I sincerely believe that the version proposed by myself and User:Aadal is neutral without diminishing any particular influence. I would like other editors to comment on this and help us resolve this issue. - Parthi 23:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that instead of arguing who made the most contributions, it's best to just factually state who contributed what, and let the reader make up their own mind. I think Parthi and Aadal's contribution is quite close to that, but perhaps we could provide even more detail and even less judgment. What do you think about this outline:

• the roots of all Indian music in the Samavedic chant
• the development of (grama) ragas in south India in the post-Vedic and mediaeval period
• the use of the ragas in south Indian music of this period. It seems to me that discussing the Tamil poets here is inevitable, but let's not lose track of the evidence demonstrating the identity of the system used by Tamil composers with the wider musical tradition of South India, as evidenced by works like the Sarngadeva's Sangitaratnakara (which was composed in the Deccan), and - later - the compositions of the Dasa poets, etc.
• the impact of Purandaradasa on Carnatic music
• the classification of ragas into the mela system and the development of Carnatic theory

On the name, perhaps the easiest thing to do is to mention that there are two theories, because we aren't quite sure whether it refers to Karnataka or the Carnatic? -- Arvind 00:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Parthi, undoubtedly, the current text is better than the earlier one preferred by Bharatveer, but there are still genuine problems in presenting a NPOV. Many of the statements are still not true above. For example (1) Purandadaradasa is not the one who proposed or used Kriti format as used in carnatic music. It is Muthutandadavar roughly belonging t the same period as Prandaradasa. Puradndaradasa's is Namasankirtanam. I'm willing to correct my view point if it is shown otherwise. (2) Sama Veda is certainly a pioneering development, but it is not a 7-svara singing, but more like 6-svara and also the system is quite different, not the ascending scale of 7-svaras. (3) The statement (sic) that the roots of Carnatic music was sown during the Vijayanagar Empire by the Kannada Haridasa movement of Vyasaraja, Purandaradasa, Kanakadasa and others is not true. The Sirkaazhi trinity of Muthu Thandavar, Arunachala Kaviraayar, Marimuthu Pillai played key roles along with Oththukkaadu Venkatasubaiyar and a number of others before Tyagaraja Swami's time. The traditions in Tamil Nadu (not just 15-19th centuries but spanning at least from the 7th century) was the essential and foundational one. This is not to say there were not musical traditions elsewhere. All the three of the carnatic music Trinity Tyagaraja Swami, Muthuswami Dikshitar and Syama Sastriare from Tamil Nadu. While I would have no objection to present the contributions of Kannada Haridasa movement or the patronage of Vijayanagar empire, the article has to present the situation in a more balanced way. When we talk of history, is there any history of ideas with any supportive material? Is there any attemtpt to trace the developments ? Is there any mention of Kudumiyan malai inscriptions (7th century musical inscription in Puthukkottai, TamilNadu) or in Thirumeyyam? Any mention of Venkatamahi and his period (16th-17th century) and his work introducing 72 Melakartha? The criticisms of his system? Any mention of the origin of Shadjam, Rishabam etc? Is there a mention of Sangita Ratanakara? Cilappathikaram? Any mention of traditional singers called PaaNar? I believe, there should be a period of free constructive editing and normal process of asking questions and asking for evidence etc. I believe the article is in serious need of many constructive revisions and details. --Aadal 01:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I would envisage the Kutumiyamalai inscriptions being discussed under point two or three in the outline I presented above, and the Chaturdandiprakasika of Venkatamahi is more or less exactly what I had in mind in relation to the last point. On musical traditions elsewhere than in Tamil Nadu, there is very little literature that survived in the other Dravidian languages in the early period, but works like the Sangitaratnakara (which I mentioned in one of the points of my suggested outline) seem to quite clearly indicate that the same tradition as in Tamil Nadu was also practiced in the Deccan. And yes, the post-Purandara Dasa developments are also important and ought to be discussed in some detail.

My suggestion, however, would be that, given that a content dispute has already arisen, we try and arrive at an agreed version on this page before posting it onto the main page. That will, in my opinion, prevent a revert war. -- Arvind 01:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that it is quite necessary to metion prominently the Telugu Kritis and Sanskrit Kritis and not just Tamil and Kannada (the original version had virtually no mention of Telugu). The main point is there should be a fair balance of ideas and contributions based on known facts.--Aadal 01:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure, Parthi and Arvind. It sounds like a good idea to format something that is acceptable to all before posting it on the artilce page. Arvind's outline sounds like an excellent start to me. We could build on that. --Aadal 02:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

As my knowledge of the technicalities and history of Carnatic music is very limited. I would like to request other editors with more complete knowledge to attempt the rewrite. May be it will be a good idea to tackle History of Carnatic music first and then insert a brief summary in the Carnatic music page. Any volunteers? - Parthi 03:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Some comments

So far, this page has been one of those (like south India) that daily attracts vast hordes of people but never benefits from the attention -- it knows no peace, stability or good sense. I am rejoiced at the entry, finally, of knowledgeable and capable people. Alas, I cannot be counted among that number, but Parthi has nonetheless kindly invited my opinion on the matter, and so are my 2 kasus:

The identification of the word "Carnatic" with present-day Karnataka, and the notion that the Carnatic region is roughly coterminous with the state, is one of the great chestnuts of our time. Many perfectly earnest but clueless people from other parts of India and abroad have come to hold this notion; if they visit Wikipedia, they must go away better informed. Something similar (but more egregious) is found in the case of Ghana, which named itself "in memory" of a famous empire of old, which empire actually had nothing to do with the territory of the present-day country. Of course, Karnataka is part of the Carnatic (which refers to all of south India), and has participated fully in the development of high south Indian culture, but it is laughable to infer that all things Carnatic originate exclusively from that area. Another problem with version-2 is that, on the one hand, it implies a continuum between Samavedic music and carnatic music (with Hindustani music being the one to deviate due to Islamic rule), while on the other hand, it states that Purandaradasa was pioneer of the Carnatic style and it was in his days (the Vijayanagara empire of the 16th century) that Carnatic music took root. I find some problems with version-1 as well, being:

Carnatic music, whose foundations go back to Vedic times, began as a spiritual ritual of early Hinduism.[1]

Ascribing everything to the Vedas is of course a hoary tradition, but how does this actually work in the given instance? The ritual chants of the Samaveda may have provided one notable strand into the texture of south Indian music, but something more than a sundry website needs to be cited before the "foundations" of Carnatic music are ascribed to it. I take Aadal's point that Samavedic chants evidence only six notes, not seven, nor an octet; I somehow doubt if that text laid out the features of Raga aalapana as we know it, or even enumerated the ragas; certainly, the classification of ragas was the work of Venkatamakhi. Maybe this sentence could be worded to state that Carnatic music developed gradually from timeless musical traditions in south India, upon which Samavedic learning had an important influence.

Hindustani music and Carnatic music were identical, evolving from the Sama Veda traditions, until the Islamic invasions of North India in the late twelfth century and the early thirteenth century CE. From the thirteenth century onwards, there was a divergence in the forms of Indian music — the northern style being influenced by Persian/Arabic music.

Sweeping assertions. The terms "Hindustani music" and "Carnatic music" did not exist in that era, so what this sentence asserts is that the (classical) music of Punjab, Bengal and Kerala were all the same, from time immemorial until the coming of the muslims. Untenable. Why do we need to comment on the history of Hindustani music at all? If deemed necessary, something like "unlike Hindustani music, Carnatic music evidences little or no Islamic infuence" should be adequate.

Carnatic music is named after the Carnatic region in southern India. The region known to Europeans as the Carnatic extended along India's eastern coast. It was bounded on the north by the Guntur Circar, and thence it stretched southward to Cape Comorin.

Never mind the Europeans and why they decided that Guntur was a cultural breakpoint. Let us leave the various proposed etymologies of the word 'Carnatic' to the Carnatic region page. "Carnatic music takes its name from the word Carnatic, a generic term for south India" should do.

The origin of Carnatic music can be traced to the Tamil Saivite saints Appar, Sambandar and Sundarar (CE 700 - 800) following and extending the traditions of the ancient Tamil Sangam musicians (BCE 200 - CE 200).

Again, let us not talk of "origins" but of "seminal influences / contributions."

The Tamil Saint Arunagirinathar who wrote Thiruppugazh incorporated rythmic music in his hymns on the god Muruga.

Chants are rhythmic, and Tamil has a long tradition of very beautiful chanting, to say nothing of the Vedas. Was the Thiruppugazh the first recorded instance of rhythmic music in south India? Highly unlikely, but if so, we need to assert that unambiguously, with a reputable citation. If not, we need to find something else to say about the Tiruppugazh.

The most recent developments were ushered in by Tamil composers Arunacahla Kaviraayar and Marimutthup Pillai, followed by the well known Trinity: Tyagaraja Swamigal, Muthuswamy Dikshatar and Shyama Sastri.

These were all great composers (need to add Annamacharya and Bhadrachalam Ramadasu) but if we say "developments," we must point out the changes in musical patterns or compositional styles that these composers collectively pioneered. For instance, Annamacharyas compositions typically lack anupallavis, but this was normal in this age. When did it change? Detailing that change, in readable layman's terms would be an enrichment of this page, Annamacharyas own style being elaborated upon on his own page. That is the kind of thing that this page should provide the reader.

May I also request Aadal to reduce the "me too" inclusion of certain names. Can't the trinity, the trinity, have a sentence to themselves, without being prefaced by other names? Can we have a reputable citation for Muthutandavar being widely referred to as "Sangeeta Pitamaha"? We must not err on the side of any extreme.

Sorry to ramble! Nobody is really gonna plough through all this, but forgive the self-indulgence. This page needs major major revamping and I am glad that it finally seems to be at hand. Regards, ImpuMozhi 15:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello ImpuMozhi. I'm glad you've wended your way to this page. Can I assume you intend to play a significant part in redoing this section? Shall we get started with the rewrite on Talk:Carnatic music/Draft? -- Arvind 16:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm truly delighted that I can agree 100% with ImpuMozhi's comments here (which is quite rare for me!).

• Re: Karnataka. This has nothing to do with the state of Karnataka, and such assertions are quite contrived. Prof. P. Sambamurthy, in his "South Indian Music" Vol. 1 page 21 says the following,"In Tamil, Karnataka means tradition, purity, sampradayam and suddham. People who are wedded to ancient ways of living are even now referred to Karnataka manusyas.
• Prof. S says on the same page elsewhere, "The first work to mention the word 'Karnataka' is the Brhadesi. It mentions a desi raga by name Karnata (verse 375). Sarngadeva speaks of Karnataka music and dance material. He speaks of Karnata bangala, Karnata gaula. Nanyadeva in his Bharata Vartika mentions the word Karnataka." After this he mentions the meaning given in the previous bullet. So, Karnataka has the meaning given in the first bullet and the first occurences are given here. The Karnataka State is part of the South India and part of the Carnatic music tradition. References to the near exclusive assocation with the Karnataka State has to be modified.
• I agree about the comments re Appar, Sambadnar, Sundarar's contribution. Instead of saying origin, it is better to say seminal influences (though personally I feel they were quite foundational, but this view need not be presented). There are more than 9295 songs of Appar, Sambandar, Sundarar which are set to specific PaNs. There are more than 18,327 songs in Saiva literature alone and these are all before the 12 century.
• About Arunagirinathar, the point is not just rythm, his work is quite unique and unlike any before or after, in that it has more than 1088 separate santhams and the Talas in that work are very unique and far more elaborate than the one known in more mainstream carnatic music. (I'll provide reference for this, but the uniqueness is well known among the music lovers).
• The modern Kriti format was first used by Muthu Tandavar (Pallavi, Anupallavi, Charanam), although these were also present in a slighly different form in Appar et al period. Many aspects of Carnatic music were in practice during Tevaram days (see V.P.K. Sundaram's books, pazanthamiz ialkkiyaththil icaiyiyal (பழந்தமிழ் இலக்கியத்தில் இசையியல்) and the two encylopediaic volumes). The trinity are really Muthu Tandavar, Aruchala kaviraayar and Mari Muthu Pillai and the second trinity is Tyagaraja et al. This is undeniable history. Tyagaraja et al may be popular today, but some 60-70 years ago many of the Muthuswamy Dikshatar's Krits were not sung as it is now. The historical precedents have to be properly cited. Muthu Tandavar is not referred to as Pitamaha etc., but he was the first known singer of great reputation to have used the modern format. Oothtukkaadu, Gopalakrishna Bharathi (contemperory of Tyagraja) are important contributors and they ought to be mentioned in my view. --Aadal 18:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

• According to Prof. P. Sambamurthy, in the book cited above, says on p.20. it is Haripala (1309-1312) who first mentions the Karnatic music and the Hindustani music in his work Sangkita Sudhakara and he quotes a sloke of this work apparently quoted in Abhinava raga manjari.--Aadal 18:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Arvind, I am not knowledgeable enough in the subject to be able to develop a structure and begin writing the page. I am sure that you, Aadal and Parthi can do that much better. Aadal seems to have access to excellent scholarly resources, so please do begin on the page. Both European classical music and Arab music are well-developed pages and you could, if necessary, refer to those for ToC ideas. I am a good copyeditor and I could help with that, if you people get things going. Let me warn you, this page is unstable, too dynamic and beset with spammers. It really needs cleanup and improvement. Best regards, ImpuMozhi 04:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll be happy to pitch in whatever way I can. Let us start with the History section first. Arvind can start, or I'll do so within the next few days. I'm tied a bit for the next few days (until August 1st), but I'll still be able to devote sometime. I've access to some books and articles and I've a reasonable knowledge of musicology and history of music and I'll also be able to offer documentary support. --Aadal 16:03, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that there has been a lot of dispute regarding the history of carnatic music. I can see that there are more knowledgable people all set to work and remove the POVs. As Impumozhi mentions a few posts above, the article is too dynamic and really requires clean up. As Aadal says, we will start off with the history section(or have we started already?). Sure will put in my best efforts and contribute. --Charukesi 23:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Devanagari transliterations

Why do we need the transliterations in Devanagari? Please explain.

Good point. IAST and/or IPA transcriptions would do in most places. But we do need the Devanagari at the beginning of the article, since every other article about something Sanskrit has the name of the thing written in Devanagari. I'll wait for a few more users to give their comments, and if a consensus is reached, I'll start removing the unnecessary Indic text. --Siva 23:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the use of vernacular scripts in this page has been a reason for the numerous edits that have happened in the recent past. There have been many eidts rearranging the order of these to suite the editor's perceived importance of a particular language. IMO, this is an English language encyclopedia and the vernacular scripts are not necessary for the article. - Parthi 00:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. But we do need Devanagari at least in some places, since most of the technical terms come from Sanskrit. --Siva 00:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

and why do you think Sanskrit is wedded to devanagari? every word in sanskrit can be represented perfectly in kannada alphabets. kannada script is richer than devanagari(there are sounds which devanagari cannot represent, but kannada script can). i am not sure but i think even telugu and malayalam have all the required alphabets. tamil of course, is totally useless when it comes to writing sanskrit because it's script is severely lacking. in any case, why do we need devanagari? -Sarvagnya

Sarvagnya, perhaps you should update the Kannada Carnatic music article instead. This is the English language WP. - Parthi 03:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

what does that have to do with anything? i only merely asked why the devanagari transliterations are needed. what is its significance in this article? if you can enlighten me on that, i'll be grateful. but please dont bring in irrelevant stuff. Sarvagnya

Indic scripts are essential in this article .The order of the scripts , if its agreeable to everyone should be according to the 'english alphabets'. The reason that some people try to bring their Povs in this order, should not become a reason to remove the scripts. Bharatveer 04:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Can someone explain why we need any vernacular script in this article? This article is about a music system. Why cant we express the technical terms in IAST and IPA notations? This has nothing to do with POV pushing. Hindustani music has only two languages, while it is widely sung all over India. - Parthi 04:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Now you explain why Hindustani music has two scripts ??? Bharatveer 05:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. do you ? - Parthi 05:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

BTW you haven't explained why we need all the south Indian scripts in this article. - Parthi 05:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Bcoz most of the carnatic music compositions were made in these languages . Same reasoning applies to Hindusthani as well.Bharatveer 05:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, but the overuse of these scripts makes this article difficult to read. I can see no purpose being served by the extensive insersion of the vernacular script for each and every difinition of a technical word. What are we trying to convey by this? Pronunciation? If so, why can't it be provided more effectively ysing IAST and IPA notations? - Parthi 05:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

As i said before; it has nothing to do with pronunciation .So bringing in IAST and IPA notation is not going to help.Bharatveer 05:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

So are we just using the south Indian scripts simply to establish the fact that it is sung in all these languages? Why can we say so in a sentence and move on. How does the use of these scripts convey "Cantic music is sung in Telugu, Hindi, Malayalam and Tamil" to the reader? - Parthi 05:40, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Why is there a need to establish something ? You brought the example of hindustani music .I explained why there are 2 indic scripts instead of IPA or IAST. So the Carnatic music article should also have all the scripts (mentioned now ) .SO it is not merely intended to convey that carnatic music is sung in these languages , rather it conveys that the development of Carnatic music were mainly due to these languages.Bharatveer 06:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

And how does the article convey that message? It is not clear to me how you claim that by seeing the vernacular scripts used in the article, the reader is somehow gets the message that Carnatic music was developed in these languages. I still thing the overuse of indic scripts makes the page look unkempt. Hindustani music is not a benchmark article which should be followed blindly either. Aren't there abhangs and kirtans in numerous languages and dialects? What about Marathi? - Parthi 06:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

It will not be clear unless you keep ur povs aside, when you edit this article. You somehow thinks that the inclusion of other scripts would 'diminish' the importance of Tamizh .This is the main reason why you and the other user Aadal is trying to do here. Your attempts to bring in another trinity ahead of (thyagaraja , dikshitar and shyama shastri) and also trying to put down the importance of Purandaradasa makes your intentions very clear.But you should know that including other scripts would not in anyway reduce or diminish the importance of any language and no body is trying to do that here.Bharatveer 06:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

You again miss the point in the discussion. I am confident enough with my heritage (whatever it may be) that I don't need to 'diminish' any other culture in order to feel superior. I have no favourites. If you care to read the extensive discussion above and examine the comments by Impumozhi, Vadakkan and Aadal, you will notice that what they are trying to do is to make this article factually accurate. Have you ever considered the possibility that you may not have the most complete knowledge in this matter? You cannot accuse others as POV pushers as your edits elsewhere clearly show that you are not above this accusation yourself. Keeping aside what you think of me (which is irrelevant), the point under discussion is what will be lost if we remove the vernacular scripts from this article. I am not convinced we will lose anything. - Parthi 06:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not miss 'any' point. I have already explained the importance of the inclusion of the scripts.Your argument that inclusion of scripts in the article makes it unreadable is laughable .As for your comment that I am not above accusation ; Can u pls show what Pov I am trying to push here.Bharatveer 07:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been watching this conversation and there seems to absolutely no merit in favour of including vernacular scripts everywhere. If at all, they can be included in the title of the article and nowhere else. If you want to still push for that, let's have a vote. I don't want to see productive improvements to the article stalled on flimsy grounds. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Sundar. It is Wikipedia policy that "foreign terms within the article body do not need native text if they can be specified as title terms in separate articles." In my opinion, each concept in Carnatic music deserves an article of its own, much as each concept in Western Classical music has an article of its own. It seems quite clear that there is no room for the inclusion of the vernacular scripts under current Wikipedia policy. Except for the title of the article itself, a transliteration into the latin script is all we should have. I also suggest that the transliteration follow the Sanskrit form of the word, since most words take slightly different forms in the various South Indian languages. -- Arvind 10:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Since it's a policy, there need be no further discussion on this. You can discuss the other aspects of the planned rewrite. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

An 'official' pov pushing?Bharatveer 10:33, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Whatever you might call. Do you seriously believe that having transliterations in so many languages for each and every noun in the article adds value to an English Wikipedia article? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I never wanted the transliterations for each and every term , but for the title . and 5 is not so many .Bharatveer 11:02, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Your attempts to bring in another trinity ahead of (thyagaraja , dikshitar and shyama shastri) and also trying to put down the importance of Purandaradasa makes your intentions very clear.

• you hit the nail on the head. to all concerned: stop weaving together bits of 'history' and pushing POV. if tamilians had a trinity back in the age before the deluge, then so be it. but that has nothing to do with carnatic music. if anything they should be considered trinities of your so called tamil 'isai'. whatever tamil 'isai' is or may be, it is NOT carnatic music.

• carnatic music is carnatic music as we know it TODAY. there is no other carnatic music. and that Purandara Dasa is considered by everyone as the 'Father of Carnatic Music' is beyond question. Purandara Dasa framed all the intricate rules that govern Carnatic Music and also laid down exercises for learning it. To this day, the Mayamalavagowla raga is taught as the first lesson to every beginner. Even this was set down by Purandara Dasa. Puranadara Dasa without a hint of a doubt was the architect of Carnatic classical music. From there it was taken forward by Kannada haridasa saints to other parts of india, notably the other southern states. it was this tradition that the "kannada" saint laid down that had spread far and wide by the 18th century and was inherited by the likes of thyagaraja, shyama shastri, dikshitar et al(incidentally none of them composed in tamil in spite of living bang in the middle of tamil hearland.)

• also the term Carnatic without a doubt refers to Karnataka. during the vijayanagar empire(which was when Purandara Dasa lived), the Karnataka empire ruled over the entire south and that plausibly is why your claim of Carnatic referring to the entire south is true(if it is true ie). on the one hand on the dravida related pages and tamil related pages you shout from rooftops that 'dravida' all of south is 'dravida' and on 'carnatic' you claim it is 'carnatic'. bah!

• just pointing out that x,y and z were early proponents of tamil music or some other music and that music in turn, had some similarities with Carnatic music and hence, x,y and z are seminal contributors to Carnatic music is POV at best and utter nonsense at worst. For that matter, every form of music in the world from tribal music to thyagaraja to mozart to michael jackson has a lot in common. it is the same seven notes. so mr. tandavar may be michael jackson's father too, i mean his music's. weaving a POV out of half truths will not take us anywhere. it is precisely because of this attitude that half the tamil related articles suffer. the standard modus operandi of editors there is to dump in a million words there, plaster it with a dozen photographs, blur the line between history and mythology and weave something new altogether. Sarvagnya

[While I tried to post a response to Bharatveer, somene was posting it. So, I'm reposting the following without reading the previous response] Bharatveer, it is a fact that there was a trinity before Tyagaraja et al. Not only that, it is Muthu Thandavar who is known to have sung using the modern Carnatic Kriti format. It is important to write fairly and state as accurately as possible the facts. Whether it is Purandaradasa or Muthu Thandavar or Tyagaraja or Marimuthu Pillai or Oothukkaadu Venkatasubbaiyar, they are all south indian musicians of great accomplishments and it is important to state the facts as such. Credit should be given where it is due. Whether you like it or not, Tamil Nadu was the centre of Carnatic music by and large and it is not to say that music was not nurtured in other parts of south india. The fact that all the three of the celebrated trinity of Tyagaraja et al are from/lived in Tamil Nadu is not a coincidence. You're yet to show me the thousands of songs written with raga (or PaN, பண்) in other languages before 10 century CE. I've quoted 9295 Tevaram songs, not to mention 4000 Divyaprabandam (though these are not sung in the same way as Tevaram) plus numerous others I've not cited. While SangitaRatanakara (SR), prior to that Brhddesi and some 15-20 works in Sanskrit between the period of Bharata's NatyaSastra plus Narada's Naradiiya Siksha and the Venkatamakhi's Cadurdandi Prakaasika in the 17th century, do discuss music, there is so little in the form of examples. Tell me why there is no lullaby or dirges in Sanskrit, but there are so many in Tamil. Tamil is traditionally, from very ancient days, known to be three-fold rich- iyal-isai-natakam, in which isai is music. This is not Tamil POV - I'm stating facts as I know them, and if I'm wrong I'm willing to correct my opinion. Whether you like it or not Tamil and Sanskrit are two ancient and rich languages and Tamil is one of the official classical languages of India (and the world) and when it is about music it is quite reasonable to bring in the examples and facts from the body of tamil literature on music. I would with all due respect to you request you to be a bit more open minded about Tamil, about which not only Tamils, all Indians can be proud of. --Aadal 18:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Trinity

It looks like the user who was posting before me is User:Sarvagnya. Just wanted to state that the trinity before Tyagaraja et al are carnatic pioneers and his comments clearly show that his statements are misguided. I have no objection to mention that Kannada haridasa movement enriched Carnatic music but to claim that it was foudnational is questionable. It is my understanding, which I am willing to correct, that it was (and is ?) Tamil Nadu which was (is?) the centre by and large for Carnatic music, which is not to say that there were not developments in other parts of south india. --Aadal 19:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

while nobody is questioning the fact that muthutandava, marimuthu and kaviraya lived before thyagaraja and his contemporaries, it is your assertion that M,M and K were(also?) the trinity that is POV. there were other musicians too before the trinity(T,MD,SS) other than M, M, K who might have contributed. that doesnt mean you can pick three such composers most convenient to you and call them the trinity. Sarvagnya

Sarvagnya, your statement above whatever tamil 'isai' is or may be, it is NOT carnatic music. clearly shows YOUR POV. - Parthi 20:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not name them a trinity, they are variously known as Siirkaazhi trinity, tamil trinity, Aadi-trinity etc all re Carnatic music. Would you highlight how Tyagaraja et al came to be regarded as trinity? I mean since when are they called trinity and who named them as trinity? Would you deny that they all lived in Tamil Nadu? Would you say that Tyagaraja never heard any Tamil songs in Tamil Nadu? Tyagaraja never heard any Nagasvaram vidwans playing in Tamil Nadu? In other words, I am trying to point out the influence of the Tamil cultural landscape, Tamil milieu, in which Carnatic music developed. This article on Carnatic music was so biased against tamil and avoided mentioning key contributors and contributing ideas and developments (Muthu ThaNdavar and the Adi-trinity were pioneering contributors and they ought to be mentioned prominently in any fair writeups, along with Annamacharya and a few others, though Annamacharya's works were discovered more recently and his influence on the development of Carnatic music is debatable). Purandaradasa's compositions were not Carnatic Kritis, but Namasankiirtanams. Instead of arguing here, if we can contribute constructively and informatively to rewrite the article, it would be more useful. --Aadal 20:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

• I did not name them a trinity, they are variously known as Siirkaazhi trinity, tamil trinity, Aadi-trinity etc

only to you(tamilians). nobody else considers them trinities of karnatik music. i am a kannadiga, barath seems to be malayali and yet we have no qualms accepting telugu/sanskrit composers as the trinity. as usual it is only you tamilians, who are trying to push your agenda. if you want to honour M,M and K(interesting to note that tandava was not even contemporary to the other two - well thats a diff matter) do so on Tamil Music or on their own pages. call them what you want.. call them the high priests of hip hop. I dont care(hip hop guys will care though). That T,MD and SS constitute the trinity is beyond question. There are a zillion references on the net itself. Sarvagnya

• I mean since when are they called trinity and who named them as trinity?

Finding the answer to that will be a useful exercise to undertake and such info can surely find a place in this article or maybe one on the trinities. that however is besides the point. the point is, nevertheless, T,MD and SS are the 'trinity'... nobody else. Sarvagnya

• Would you say that Tyagaraja never heard any Tamil songs in Tamil Nadu? Tyagaraja never heard any Nagasvaram vidwans playing in Tamil Nadu?

What does that have to do with anything? The point is, Tyagaraja composed his songs to adhere to the rules and structure laid down by Sri. Purandara Dasa. Tyagaraja has even composed a song in praise of Purandara Dasa. Not in praise of some tom, dick and harry.

Also, by the way, what is it about Nadaswara that you feel so compelled to slip it in here? Are u trying to suggest that Nadaswara like everything else good and pristine under the sun, belongs to tamil nadu?

Also going by the number of telugu composers from where Thyagaraja stayed, it is anybody's guess if it was 'Tamil' Nadu in those days. Sarvagnya

• This article on Carnatic music was so biased against tamil and avoided mentioning key contributors and contributing ideas and developments (Muthu ThaNdavar and the Adi-trinity were pioneering contributors and they ought to be mentioned prominently

biased! what biased? muthu and this adi trinity(if u're referring to appar et al) were at best 'trinities' of tamil music - tamil 'isai'. and tamil 'isai' is NOT carnatic music. it is a different matter that maybe their compostions are now sung in Carnatic style. For that matter I can take snoop dog's compositions and set it to a raga and sing it in karnatik style. that wont guarantee snoop dog a place in the karnatik hall of fame. the so called 'adi' trinity et al, could never have contributed to karnatik music because carnatic music didnt even exist then. otherwise every musician from the start of time can be considered to have contributed to musical forms of later eras. indian film music is also influenced by carnatic music. so why dont u consider appar & co as pioneers of tamil film music? so unless your adi trinity contributed to carnatic music or a carnatic composer like say, thyagaraja or puranadara dasa acknowledged their(your adi trinity) influence on their own music, you cannot say that x,y,z ought to be the high priests of carnatic music. Sarvagnya

if you want, create a page for tamil music or tamil isai and glorify them all you want. Sarvagnya

• Purandaradasa's compositions were not Carnatic Kritis, but Namasankiirtanams.

and what exactly do u mean by that? Sri. Purandara Dasa composed devaranaamas(padas/padagaLu) and devaranaamas are as much a part and parcel of Carnatic music as krithis. any composition composed to adhere to the sophistication and rules/meter of Carnatic music is part of carnatic music. just because a composition is in praise of a hindu God(as in your 'aaaaaaaadi' trinity's compostions), doesnt make the composition a part of carnatic music Sarvagnya

I'm not responding because Sarvagnya uses such offensive and disrespectful langauge towards great contributors to south indian music (actually a world heritage). The fact that Tyagaraja et al. could flourish in Tamil Nadu goes to show the culture of Tamil people. By denigrating Azhvars and leading Nayanmars like Tevaram authors, and distorting the history of Carnatic music, Kannada language or Kannadigas fame is not going to gain respect. True accomplishments of Kannadigas will always shine. Respect to facts and fairness earns respect. I'll not respond to such unreasonable language and comments. I've said enough here and leave them to open minded persons to judge the merits of what is said. --Aadal 17:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

A possible resolution

Hold on—the above conflict could be cleared up if relatively unbiased answers are given to the following questions:

1. What is the relationship between Tamil music and Carnatic music? Are they one and the same, or do they form distinct traditions that both emerged from a common ancestor?
2. What exactly were the contributions of the Tamil trinity to Carnatic music?
3. Is there any evidence that these contributions had an influence on later Carnatic musicians such as T, MD and SS, or is it possible that people outside of Tamil Nadu came up with the same things independently?
4. Is there any evidence that Tyagaraja et al. were influenced by the musical tradition of Tamil Nadu? If so, then why did they not compose any songs in Tamil?
5. Why is it that the Tamil trinity is not very well known?

I have no bias one way or the other; these questions are asked with an open mind. --Siva 17:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Siva

• What is the relationship between Tamil music and Carnatic music? Are they one and the same, or do they form distinct traditions that both emerged from a common ancestor?

I've answered this question several times in this page! Let me cut and paste one section below, but before that, let me also answer your question more specifically. Carnatic music is, historically speaking, an evolution of Tamil music but it requires a lot of space to elaborate. In short the concept of Raga (Pann), systematic scales and generation of ragas, tala and kala development, Kriti format, niraval, thani, etc. etc. are from Tamil music. Carnatic music is not some new invention out the blue. By Tamil music one does not exclusively mean that the sahitya is in Tamil, but the system is as in Tamil tradition. Is Tamil music different from Carnatic music? Tamil music encompasses more than Carnatic music and and on the same token Carantic music has developed and evolved other features as well. I would say 80% or more of Carnatic music is of Tamil music origin, losely speaking. For example in Tamil music it is possible to have two madyamas, but not in the traditional carnatic music of today. Just one example. Now let me cut and paste something from this talk page :

The modern Kriti format was first used by Muthu Tandavar (Pallavi, Anupallavi, Charanam), although these were also present in a slighly different form in Appar et al period. Many aspects of Carnatic music were in practice during Tevaram days (see V.P.K. Sundaram's books, pazanthamiz ialkkiyaththil icaiyiyal (பழந்தமிழ் இலக்கியத்தில் இசையியல்) and the two encylopediaic volumes). The trinity are really Muthu Tandavar, Aruchala kaviraayar and Mari Muthu Pillai and the second trinity is Tyagaraja et al. This is undeniable history. Tyagaraja et al may be popular today, but some 60-70 years ago many of the Muthuswamy Dikshatar's Krits were not sung as it is now. The historical precedents have to be properly cited. Muthu Tandavar is not referred to as Pitamaha etc., but he was the first known singer of great reputation to have used the modern format. Oothtukkaadu, Gopalakrishna Bharathi (contemperory of Tyagraja) are important contributors and they ought to be mentioned in my view. --Aadal 18:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

• What exactly were the contributions of the Tamil trinity to Carnatic music?

Tamil trinity (Muthu Thandavar, Arunachala Kavi, Mari Muthu Pillai) were popular composers somewhat like Tyagaraja et al. They shaped the carnatic music prior to the trinity. MS Subbukaksmi, Dancer Bala Saraswathi and many great singers have sung employed numerous krithis of Muthu Tandavar et al. Some people like Professor Pasupathy of University of Toronoto, and M.V. Ramana, Muthukumar et al have written about this which are availabe in the net. Here is one example, not the only example.

• Is there any evidence that these contributions had an influence on later Carnatic musicians such as T, MD and SS, or is it possible that people outside of Tamil Nadu came up with the same things independently?

Prof. Pasupathy had written an article in Sruti magazine re this. It is inconceivable that these composers and muscians who lived in deep TamilNadu in those days where on a daily basis one can hear tamil music and discussions and yet they were not at all influenced by it. It is possible others, and other traditions outside Tamil Nadu, could have influenced them, but you have to consider the facts that there were no television and radio in those days, no CDs and MP3, and they were living in a rich tamil cultural milieu. Tyagaraja's Telugu too is said to be Tamilized somewhat, I was told.

• Is there any evidence that Tyagaraja et al. were influenced by the musical tradition of Tamil Nadu? If so, then why did they not compose any songs in Tamil?

See above. We can only guess. May be he felt that with the wealth and depth of songs in Tamil, he felt he would not be able to make a difference, but in Telegu he could which he would have known better. But we are talking about music traditions here and not language. Tamil music here refers to the Tamil system of music, traditions etc.

Another reason could be that Tyagaraja was born in a Telugu speaking family. - Parthi 00:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• Why is it that the Tamil trinity is not very well known?

They were well known some 50 years ago. MS. Subbulakshmi in her Carnegie concert used Muthutandavar's song. Many senior artists have used their songs. It is true that in the last 30-40 plus years, the popularity of T.MD, SS had contributed to the diminished popularity of the earlier trinity. But these things go in cycles and we are not talking about popularity in a given time, but rather historical facts. There are books of compositions of the Adi-trinity. One reference is (in Tamil, Tamil MummaNikaLin KiirththanaikaL, Manimekalai Publishers, Chennai, 1987)(லேனா தமிழ்வானன் (பதிபாசிரியர்), தமிழ் மும்மணிகளின் கீர்த்தனைகள், மணிமேகலைப் பிரசுரம், சென்னை 600 017, முதற்பதிப்பு 1987.). Numerous websites have info on the Adi Triniti. One example is http://carnatica.net/composer/pretrinity.htm

I've answered as best as I can. I've used my answers below your questions. --Aadal 20:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks; I just wanted to bring some focus to the discussion. If other users don't object, perhaps you could write something in the "History" section (or the as yet nonexistent History of Carnatic music article) about how Carnatic music evolved from Tamil music (preferably with references). --Siva 22:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Forms of technical terms

In accordance with what was agreed above, I've removed the vernacular scripts from everywhere except the article title itself, and the svara table. As suggested by User:Bharatveer, I've also arranged the five scripts in order of their name in the Latin alphabet, moving Malayalam up two places. While doing this, I noticed that technical terms in this article are sometimes written in their Tamil form (with a trailing '-m', e.g. 'swaram, 'ragam'), sometimes in their Kannada form (with a trailing '-e', e.g. 'prarthane', 'keerthane') and sometimes in their Sanskrit form. It seems most sensible to me to standardise on using the Sanskrit form for all names (thus, 'svara', 'raga', 'prarthana', 'kirtana', etc.) -- Arvind 20:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

I have cleaned up the article with a number of Manual of style changes and did some minor copyedits. This article still needs a deep copyedit for language and summary style. Some of the sections have been written in a style not suitable for an encyclopedia. As I am not an expert with the technicalities of Carnatic music, I will now let people who know the stuff to carry on. - Parthi 06:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Tamil name

கருநாடக இசை is the correct name; that's what the Tamil article is called. --Siva 02:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately the tranliteration in the Tamil article is not entirely accurate. The most common usage is கர்நாடக இசை. - Parthi 04:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Siva is right. The correct written form is கருநாடக இசை, though it is written as கர்நாடக இசை or கர்நாடக சங்கீதம் in spoken style. Tamil words don't have the form கர்நாxxx etc. Words which have such forms as கர்xxx etc. are either corrupted forms (of கருxxx) or loan words. Here கரு stands for central, essenatial, traditional core. --Aadal 14:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. If you look at the Madras Tamil Lexicon, you'll see that they list both forms under கர்நாடகம் and கருநாடகம்), but say that கர்நாடகம் is derived from கருநாடகம். The relevant pages are 363 and 374, in case the direct links don't work. -- Arvind 23:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

I had reverted to Venu62's version. These repeated vandalisms clearly show the anti-tamil bias of some users.--Aadal 19:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)--Aadal 20:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Evidence for Vyasatirtha and Kanakadasa's Carnatic Kritis?

I wonder whether someone can show evidences that Vyasatirtha and Kanakadasa composed Carnatic Kritis and whether their Kritis were popular or prevalent with singers. I do know that Kanakadasa was a revered saint and Vyasatirtha was a Sanskrit scholar, but my questions are about Carnatic Kriti. Were their compositions Kritis? I've not read in any of the books that they were Carnatic Kriti composers. On the other hand Annamacharya's Kirtanas, though discovered late, had Pallavi, Anupallavi, Charanam parts. Taallapaakkam (1400-1500) composers were among the first to have Kirtanas with the three parts (P,A,C).--Aadal 13:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The Hindu reference, though very selective, still does not support the claim that Vyasatirtha and Kanakadasa composed Carnatic Kritis. The present citation is misleading.--Aadal 13:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I wonder why there is no response to these questions. Are the statements made in the article correct?--Aadal 03:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Order of languages

The statement is- "Composers of Carnatic music were often inspired by religious devotion and were usually scholars proficient.." . The Bhakti movement was spearheaded by Appar, Sambathar and Sundarar and the Haridasa movement and Jayadeva's work etc were inspired by Alwars songs and it is appropriate that Tamil should be first. Sanskrit and Telugu were more important languages in the sense of inspiring devotion than Kannada. It is well-known that the Bhakti movement spread from Tamil Nadu. In Carnatic music, other than Purandaradasa's Namasankiirtanams, there are not many leading compositions in Kannada. While the order is not a big deal, it is better to list in some reasonable order. --Aadal 12:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

ha ha. take your puerile imagination and rant someplace else. WP aint the place for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balnanmaga (talk • contribs)

I personally like alphabetical order, since it avoids making subjective judgments as to which language has contributed more. -- Arvind 18:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that in general alpahbetical order would be better, but when the statement is as above, it is better, I thought, to cite the sequence in some reasonable order. I don't believe it was subjective, it reflects the historical evolution. Nothing terribly would be wrong if it is listed in alphabetical order, but what is wrong in listing them in the way I did? If you believe it is better to list them in the alphabetical order, please feel free to revise it and I've no serious objection. --Aadal 19:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I do not personally have strong feelings on this point. Alphabetical order just seemed to be a good way of avoiding heated (and frustrating) debates on which language's historical contributions were greater. -- Arvind 19:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand and agree.--Aadal 19:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I have edited accordingly as per user:Aada;'s agreement.Bharatveer 04:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Both composed lot of Kritis. "Nammamma Sharade" is one of the most famous composition of Kanakadasa. You may read abput them elsewhere. 24.66.94.140

Fact-checking

First: The "History" section asserts that Purandaradasa mentions in one of his compositions that he wrote 475,000 songs. It would be nice to have a reference for this (at least the name of that composition), as it could be seen by some as hyperbole.

Second: Why was the {{fact}} tag removed from the sentence about Carnatic music being one of the "oldest and richest" musical traditions? Richness of a musical tradition is subjective, and any statement concerning this is best left out of this article. And it needs to be justified (perhaps with a relevant reference) that Carnatic music is indeed one of the oldest musical traditions. If you count Samaveda as part of Carnatic music, then sure, it's probably the oldest surviving one. But if you say that Carnatic music began with Purandaradasa, then it's hardly any older that European classical music. --Siva 00:10, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

It is not true that Carnatic music started with Sri Purandaradasa or Tallapaakkam Sri Annamacharya. Carnatic music is the current name for the traditional south indian classical music- and it is and had been evolving, like any living music. The concept of raga, systematic generation of scales for ragas (a scale is not a raga), systematic tala (rythm), long and continuous traditions over 2500 years with tens (or hundreds) of thousands of songs of rich philosophical content are quite unique. You're perfectly right that if we count only from 1500s, then perhaps it is not much older than western classical music. In any case, when the statement is one of the oldest and richest, I think the statement is quite valid.--Aadal 19:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

References

Sorry, another thing: we need fuller bibliographic information for "Theory of Music" by Vidushi Vasanthamadhavi, as well as the Tamil poem cited. (A translation of the latter would be nice, too.) --Siva 00:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I have inserted a citation for the number of Purandara Dasa's compositions. I have removed the mention of his song in which he claims so. I have no proof. If some one wishes to cite it we can reinsert this sentence. I have also removed the sentence in the lead para about Carnatic music being one of the oldest traditions. If someone wishes to cite it we can unhide this sentence. - Parthi 01:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe that the references cited should have the original spelling for the authors and titles and not transliterated with diacritics. Those who wish to search or verify details using library resources may have difficulty if we write P.Sambamurthy as Sāmbhamūrti etc. I request to retain the original spelling for the authors and their works.--Aadal 19:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Devanagari transliterations - reloaded

Again. Can someone explain why we need transliterations in Devanagari? Sarvagnya

In the opening paragraph? Because karṇāṭaka saṃgīta is a Sanskrit term, and Devanagari is the script most commonly used to represent Sanskrit words. I'm sure that Sanskrit could be written equally well in the Kannada script, but then it is best not to favor any particular linguistic or ethnic group, and use a script that is not already associated with a Dravidian language. --Siva 02:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

"karnataka" is not a sanskrit term. even if it is, that is no reason to have devanagari there. while there are any number of sanskrit compositions in karnatik music, do u have any reason to believe that the composers used devanagari?? it is inconceivable that the mysore maharajas or mysore vasudevacharya or any south indian composer for that matter, would have used devanagari. also what proof do you have to claim that devanagari is the script most commonly used for sanskrit? devanagari wasnt even around till the 13th-14th century. Sarvagnya

If the Sanskrit text is removed, the IPA text should go too, since that referred to the Sanskrit pronunciation (as does the transliteration). -- Arvind 23:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Pls show your dislike for sanskrit somewhere else. Wikipedia is not the right place to do that.Bharatveer 04:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

The bulk of the carnatic compositions which are sung today by most artistes are either in Sanskrit or Telugu. Other languages that have a good representation are Kannada, Tamil, Malayalam. Hindi and Marati are used sparingly since the number of compositions in them are not that great. Even in songs that are set to Dravidian languages, there are an abundance of sanskrit-borrowed words. Sanskrit has used devanagari in the last few centuries at least. I dont think wikipedia either supports the Brahmi script for Sanskrit (which was used earlier before Devanagari) or the grantha script (which was the precursor to the dravidian scripts and also used for sanskrit in the south). So Devanagari has to remain (possibly with other relevant dravidian scripts wherever possible or necessary).--Kris 09:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Adding an external link to a website containing a discussion forum

Is it OK to add an external link to www.rasikas.org/intro.php which is a website containing forum discussions on carnatic music, to wikipedia pages directly related to carnatic music?

The website contains non-forum content also (as in http://rasikas.org/chembai).

Wikipedia external links policy specifies that forums are generally not to be linked to since they are presumed to contain non-verified or non-original content.

But I feel a mere "art form" such as Carnatic Music can only evoke opinions, and not hard facts such as papers on sciences. Such opinions (at least on this forum) usually come from connoisseurs and contain valuable factual information, notwithstanding that they expressed in a forum.

More, I feel wikipedia's ultimate intent is to guide its users to find relevant content-rich pages that may be of interest to them. This aim is satisfied by the website in question.

So I feel this case is a good exception to the general rule that forums or websites containing forums are not fit generally for external linking in wikipedia.

Please give your opinions.--Kris 09:20, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

User Aadal's unreasonable and offensive behavior

The user Aadal has called me (and probably User:Sarvagna) as vandals (name-calling) at [[9]]. On 14th October, he/she twice reverted the article and both times called me "vandal".

I pointed it out to him/her at User_talk:Aadal#Calling_names, and he/she denied outright that he/she called me a vandal. After I again indicated the article history page, also citing Wikipedia:Vandalism, he/she was forced to acknowledge that he/she called me a vandal. But he/she still refused to accept that calling me a vandal was name calling, and further added that he/she was right in calling me a vandal. When Wikipedia:Vandalism#What_vandalism_is_not clearly points out that edits pursuant to NPOV disputes are not to be considered vandalism, User:Aadal persists in his/her offense without offering any apology. This is like adding salt to wounds and has caused much personal offense. I want Aadal to apologise here for his/her offensive conduct and personal attacks.--Kris 04:36, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Aadal wasn't half offensive as you were when you called me a liar. Don't keep harping on some imagined offense and write some useful articles in WP. - Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 05:02, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

But you did lie when you said a consensus has been reached on the issue. Calling someone a vandal when its not Vandalism is name-calling, nothing more. And when I User_talk:Aadal#Calling_names pointed it out to him/her, she has accepted that she called me a vandal, its not an imagined offense.--Kris 05:16, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Now User:Venu62 is threatening me with "stern warnings", and calls this an "outburst" and a "personal attack" on Aadal. I leave it to everyone to check for themselves about what he calls an outburst, and about his own behaviour and language. Further he replies like this for this (my message to him), after blanking out my message in his page. I leave it for wikipedians to judge for themselves the extent of hypocrisy in his actions. If the readers, after going through all the above, think User:Venu62 is innocent, so be it.-- ॐ Kris 09:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

User Skris' (Kris) unreasonable and offensive behavior

I request to stop personal attacks and focus on discussing the contents and issues. I believe the repeated deletions of the constructive edits I made with ample documentary support to this page nothing short of vandalism and when I reverted one of the edits with a short comment 'stop the vandalism'. If it is felt it is not an act of vandalism by those who did those repeated deletions, they should say so and not use such personal attacks and resorting to this kind of behavior. Example is User User:Sarvagna's comment that content dispute is not vandalism in one of his reverts. Anyone interested can visit my talk page and the discussion here to see how [User:Srkris|Kris]] had behaved and his false claim that I accepted calling him a vandal and now he makes an outrageous demand! By the way Aadal is my user name and I'm a male. I repeat my request to stop the personal attacks and focus on discussing the content issues. Further, I believe Venu62's claim that a consensus was arrived at was true, based on the discussions at that time and that was the reason the page was at least somewhat stable and I could add the current first few defining lines on Tala (though the citation from the ancient PanjaMarabu about the stbtlety of Tala was unreasonably removed). --Aadal 16:22, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

This is going from the ridiculous to the comical. Not only you call me a vandal (and accepted that you called me a vandal in User_talk:Aadal#Calling_names), now you deny that you called me a vandal, and in the same breath you say that my edits were nothing short of vandalism. Does it make any sense to you, it doesnt to me! Who is acting outrageous now is clear.

Even a short comment saying that my edits were "vandalism" or "nothing short of vandalism" IS name-calling. Sarvagna was right in pointing out that content dispute (about what is and is not NPOV) is not vandalism. That is what wikipedia also (as I have repeatedly pointed out) says Wikipedia:Vandalism#What_vandalism_is_not. By the way, demanding an apology for name-calling is not an outrageous demand. Just because I called your behavior "unreasonable and offensive", you also say the same to me just like that? Again this makes no sense, at least to me.

Atleast 2 individuals (Sarvagna and Bharatveer) have said explicitly that no consensus was arrived at. Even my perusal of the earlier discussions shows that no consensus was arrived. And how can two users (one of whom has accepted he doesnt have much knowledge at User_talk:Aadal#Carnatic_music_article) make all the decisions about what is or is not Carnatic Music, in blatant disregard of the mainstream view (supported by all facts and references in the article itself) and also upheld by a diverse set of users right here in the discussions?--Kris 19:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Carnatic music/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

(reserved for comments from WikiProject India Assessment Team, where appropriate)

Last edited at 14:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 20:17, 2 May 2016 (UTC)