Pages

Monday, June 25, 2012

The Harp and the Harpsichord

Kartikey Sehgal

Background

Bach= Johann Sebastian Bach. German Composer. Among the bosses of Western Classical Music. 

Harpsichord: A harpsichord is a musical instrument played by means of a keyboard. It produces sound by plucking a string when a key is pressed. The harpsichord had fallen out of popularity during the mid 18th century in favour of the fortepiano and keyboard.This is how it looks: 

(click here to enlarge)

Harp: The harp is a hand-plucked string instrument, usually triangular in shape, in which the plane of the strings is perpendicular to the soundboard. This is how it looks:

(click here to enlarge)

Attention for videos: If you have slow internet: Click on 240p in the settings that are in the bar just below the YouTube video screen. If you don't see 240p, then stick with 360p.

There are several compositions by Bach that I feel would do better without the use of the Harpsichord.

Let us see what our friend wikipedia tells us about this instrument. Any emphasis - mine.

During the late 18th century it gradually disappeared from the musical scene with the rise of the fortepiano. But in the 20th century it made a resurgence, used in historically informed performance of older music, in new (contemporary) compositions, and in popular culture.

In the late 18th century the harpsichord was supplanted by the piano and almost disappeared from view for most of the 19th century: an exception was its continued use in opera for accompanying recitative, but the piano sometimes displaced it even there.

Perhaps the most celebrated composer who wrote for the harpsichord was J. S. Bach (1685–1750), whose solo works (for instance, the Well-Tempered Clavier and the Goldberg Variations), continue to be performed very widely, often on the piano. Bach was also a pioneer of the harpsichord concerto

And talking about Joseph Haydn and Mozart (famed composers like Bach), who are considered as pioneers in style and introductions of musical forms, this is what we learn:

For both, the instrument featured in the earlier period of their careers and was abandoned once they had shifted their efforts to the piano.

Why did they do that? The use of the Harpsichord... Doth it seem like an attempt to give a base to the orchestra, with the plucking sound (not by the fingers as in the harp) moving to the tune of the string section? And my estimation of Harpsichord as a base comes from the modern day musical trend of basing the songs with drums and ‘beat’.
This is untrue because we are dealing with men, who, even if they wrote to make the people happy, to cater to their tastes, would not tamper with the sanctity of melody and reduce an instrument to just an appendage. We must, immediately discount comparisons with the modern trend of using an instrument just so that people can clap and dance to its... beat.

The Harpsichord can add emotion to the movement if it is defined by another instrument, say, a violin. To see what the Harpsichord adds or subtracts from music, let’s listen to this piece by Bach that does not use the Harpsichord.

Now hear the same composition by Bach where the Harpsichord assumes prominence.

If you don’t have the patience, then hear at least till 1: 30 mark of either movements. They serve as practicals. Else you’ll be depending solely on theory.

Do you think that the Harpsichord plays a better role in this concert of taking the movement forward, depending many-a-time on it’s solo recital. Or is the emotion that we attribute to the Harpsichord actually derived from the violin and other instruments.

I prefer the first version, without the Harpsichord.

...

How pleasing the Harp sounds here (reminder: harp is not harpsichord), in Mozart’s concerto:

(hear 1:40 onwards for the Harp)

Did the piano replace the Harpsichord (in 18th-19th century) as it sounded better, in terms of its ability to transfer the emotive content of the movement. While in a mix, with the other instruments, the Harp fits very well. But is it able, in an orchestra, to emote as other instruments do? Yes.

In the interview below, we hear that the Harpischord has no nuance or dynamic. And the Harp is praised as an impressionist instrument and very evocative in sonatas. The story is titled, “Harp, Not Harpsichord, in Bach's Sonatas”. It is recommended listening for music lovers who’d like to see the difference.

In the Mozart piece above (the video above the radio link above), hear 5:00 onwards to see how good the Harp sounds, how well it is mixed with the flute, and when it’s time for its solo, it carries forward, and works as a great intermediary in taking the movement ahead. In Bach’s concertos, I think the Harp would have done better. It is time I found out if there are Bach recordings available that replace the Harpsichord with the Harp.

In Bach, I often found the Harpsichord to be a distraction, and ‘like a man who must have his chance in the orchestra because he pays for everyones food’.

I feel that I would have enjoyed the Bach concertos more if the Harpsichord played a lesser role in the orchestra.

Here’s where the Harp strings you

While using ‘short notes’ (note value), the Harp is similar to the piano in its effectiveness. They can tell a story on their own, or they can do a group session with the other instruments. Argue that the Harpsichord can not play ‘long notes’ and sustain like the violin, or be dynamic like the Harp (and piano). And if emotion requires sustenance, then you may say that in an orchestra, the Harpsichord draws emotion from the other instruments.

Harp has dynamism and would fit the orchestral setting of the Bach concertos.

Here’s how one of the most popular compositions by Beethoven sounds on the Harp. I say that the Harpsichord does not carry the emotion for this.

Listen to this piece of Ave Maria, composed by Bach, and played on Harp-Violin.

Like pebbles falling in a stream, that’s how I describe the sound of the Harp, as the violin takes a walk alongside, oblivious to what the Harp is saying. Parallel poetry.

Now listen to the same composition employing Violin-Piano

Ignoring the lesser sound quality of the video, and without the need to compare, we can say that both interpretations work to bring out the emotive content of the composition. What Harp has Piano doesn’t, and what Piano has, Harp doesn’t. But both play their role in ‘Hailing Mary’ (Ave Maria = Hail Mary).

Here’s the same composition, piano solo

And finally, Ave Maria, Harp solo

Listen to them repeatedly if you are a lover of music. (It’s better than listening to your human lover)

Now I come back to the point I made earlier, that in the Orchestral works of Bach, the Harpsichord sounds distracting and overused in some places. I say this with slight trepidation, as I don’t want to discard the value of the instrument. That which makes an attempt at sincere pleasure, you don’t want to hurt.

You may listen to and see for yourself if the Harpsichord works in an orchestra as an effective instrument. Unless mixed in with the others, and provided the padding, does it function as carrier of the message/emotion of the composition. If it does, or not, here are the Bach pieces I feel overused the instrument or depended on it to convey more than it could.

and

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

The Last Epitaph for Mehdi Hassan

Kartikey Sehgal

During my recent trip to Lahore for a musical performance, I had wished that someone would sit with me, exclusively, and talk about art and music. Any genre, style or era. I would invariably have brought in Mehdi Hassan into the conversation.

It was not to be. Mehdi featured in conversations related to the gloom that grips Pakistan. Regular electricity failures, Taliban, corruption, fear of life. Mehdi was never alone; he was never a solo. He was brought in as a counterpoint, a saviour. ‘We have so many problems, but thank God for Mehdi Hassan’.

Whenever the conversation got uneasy or boring or out of context, I brought in Mehdi Hassan. It lit them up. I mentioned his name to the musicians who were rehearsing to accompany us. One of them shifted from talking about the state of education to tell me about “...this unknown facet of Khan sahab! Once he had an informal mehfil with Tufail Niazi...”. The incident may or may not be unique, but the enthusiasm was of a man who was happy with life. Momentarily, the attention was away from the bludgeoning electricity prices and unhealthy religious indoctrinations.

Then there were those - of all ages - who didn’t care for Mehdi Hassan. I didn’t care about them.
Whatever else Pakistan may be, for me, it is also the home of Mehdi Hassan. And you don’t ignore him in his own backyard.

His name has been my mother’s only autograph. Hailing from Jammu and Kashmir, she has faced the wrath of India-Pakistan wars and hidden in makeshift bunkers to avoid bombing. Yet, no love was lost for the “most brilliant” Mehdi Hassan.

“Pyaari Beti Seema ke Liye” on a piece of white paper, preserved till a few years back.

And despite a series of some God-damn arguments, when I had to compose a ghazal for her, she called to ask me if I could base it on a specific raga, and make it sound ‘unique’, something... “just like Mehdi Hassan”.

Mehdi was for us - my father, mother and I - the epitome of excellence. And the converging point of our interests. If, at the dinner table, we have different preferences for music, it is a safe bet to arrive at “The Best of Mehdi Hassan”.

During our recent weekly get-together for art and poetry, my friends and I discussed one of Mehdi’s simpler and popular ghazals. The next day, a member remarked that he listened to the ghazal several times, and knowing the meaning of the words and the crux of the poetry enhanced his pleasure. “Poetry requires personal experience. Knowing the meaning of the tough words, you can connect to your own life. And his voice conveys the pain. It’s more than singing.” The sher in focus was:

“Haath Uthate Hue Unke Na Koi Dekhega,
Kiske Aane Ki Karenge Wo Dua Mere Baad”

“Perhaps in every religion, we lift the hands to pray. But who will see the girl do so after I am gone”, he inferred in Marathi-Hindi.

Likewise, now that you are gone and people are praising you as a messiah, who will really take on the mantle to sing classical poetry, and who will sing it in the 'Voice of God'.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Don't ask me for the love I once gave you

Kartikey Sehgal

My composition of Faiz's 'Mujhse Pehli Si Mohabbat'sung by Seema Sehgal, at Tagore Theatre, Chandigarh, on 20th May, 2012. 

I trust you will enjoy listening to this as much as I have enjoyed composing it. The poem is one of the most well-known in modern times and among the best Faiz wrote.

Even now your beauty is tantalizing, but what can be done
There are other heartaches in the world than those of love

This rings true to the nature of men, especially those who see beyond the pleasures and entrapments of love; a life-long game for those prone to romanticism. Should love be the pursuit, and life the hobby. Or should the world be the pursuit, and love a side-game, a passion indulged when the sufferings of the world are lost to the mind. 

Early on in the poem he says,

Your face would bring permanence to every spring
What is there but your eyes to see in the world anyway

A short-lived passion - when faced with the essence of life, whatever we know of it. 
But even in the worst of places and circumstances, when life has wearied us, we pause and say, 'what is there but your eyes to see in the world anyway'. Such is the game of life, the mantra of its continuum. 

And when the mind has wearied of the promises of love, it looks at the world beyond

The dreadful magic of uncountable dark years
Woven in silk, satin and brocade
In every corner are bodies sold in the market
Covered in dust, bathed in blood

Don't ask me for the love I once gave you, my love.

Thursday, June 7, 2012

Art and the Mind

Kartikey Sehgal

After reading Rabindranath Tagore’s play titled Malini, a group of art enthusiasts wonder that among the characters - each aiming for the righteous - who is wrong and who is not. We have come not to a conclusion that can put us at ease and make us believe that - the riddle is solved.

The riddle is self-created. The play, seemingly, is not about the right or wrong, the moral or immoral.
The riddle was posted as a query to examine human relations and the enigma of morality and duty. If a friend is misinformed and acts according to his current ideals, without meaning to harm you, but only because he feels that he righteous, then would you hold his actions wrong?

This is the story of the play, taken from this website.

This is a famous drama composed by Rabindranath Tagore. This play takes place n a Hindu kingdom. Malini, the king’s daughter has been taught by Buddhist monks. She wants to leave the palace and help to solve the problems outside. The Brahmins are worried and are threatening to rebel against the king. They are demanding that Malini is sent away from the kingdom. Malini leaves the palace. Many Brahmins think she is a goddess and begins to follow her but kemankar leaves the king’s garden. Malini is tired and confused. He has found that is too difficult to solve the problems outside the palace. Supriya says he has betrayed his friend, Kemankar, by telling the king about the rebellion. Kemankar is arrested and the king offers Supriya the chance to marry Malini. Supriya says that all he wants for the king not to kill Kemankar. Kemankar arrives in chains. He is proud of what he has done. He asks to speak to Supriya they argue. They then agree to die together. Because that is the only way to find out who is right. Kemankar kills Supriya with his chains. The king asks for his sword to kill Kemankar but Malini says “Fathe, Forgive Kemankar”.

The play led us to discuss the nature of woman as a decision-maker, and the role of the king as an administrator - is he unconcerned about morality but makes decision out of ruthlessness, or is he fickle, or is he, as one reader remarked, the bearer of others’ actions?

When she is accepted as a Goddess, Malini wonders the next day if she is worth the glory. Is she not showing weakness, and what of her grandiose proclamations the day before - these were the queries, formed out of the need to understand human beings, and not just limit the self to the story of the play.

This discussion, of course, will eventually lead to more thoughts on human behaviour, which is a good phenomenon only if the participant has the capacity to ponder and assimilate, else it can be painful.

The purpose of art is to engage our minds in a world beyond the performance; to connect to the setting, the words, the people - the external world, whether this external worldit be related to us or it be of imagination. The purpose of art is certainly not this alone. But this seems a good purpose in any case.

Is art not a tool for introspection. To look away, you look within, and to look within, you look at the painting, the music, the actors, who make you look away; remind you of things seen and unseen.

Art, hence, differs from entertainment. Entertainment, is, but a part of art.

Saturday, June 2, 2012

State of Action

Kartikey Sehgal

If you are a man and want to tell a girl that she has nice hair, then you go to her and tell her that she has nice hair. If you are a girl who wants to tell a man that you have nice hair, then you hint and hint and travel the world over and over and blame him for the expenses. That’s also the difference in films.

Certain films are direct. They have a message, or a story and they tell it to you straight. Using people who act straight - the actors.
Other films use lots of emotions and to drive home their point.

This is no criticism. It’s about how simple cinema can be. Or how indirect.
You take a camera and shoot people who say something, and then you move on. Or you spend time in their tears and say the same things.

'Straight-cinema' appears simple but takes immense courage, fortitude and other such text-book qualities. Simple things are difficult. So we hope that people are lost in weepy emotions. Coz when they cry, or spend their time in fear, joy and other emotions, then they will not see through the deficiencies. Such films, however, may turn out to be good. Hence, no criticism.

I will not take examples. You do that for your self. Or instead of films, look at people around you, especially in their interactions with women. There are men who only ‘beat around the bush’, flatter excessively and waste time with the other gender. And there are men who are either quiet, or talkative, but they speak straight.
And there are those who act to be straight or quiet or broody but waste their time in trying. Nothing like originality.

Anything that’s original and promising doesn’t waste time in pandering too much to others’ tastes. Now you will tell me men who are brilliant and have spent time, and lots of it, in convincing and pitching their worth to the money bags - the financiers.

Here’s the difference. It doesn’t matter to them. I have projects that I am pitching to people, some are long-pending, and a few very long-pending, but I loathe complaining to people about them, except when they are friends and I need to inform them about aspects of my life or of art.

Do you struggle in art, in making it, or do you struggle to convince people.
Both, you say. I agree with you - today.
On another day, I reply - neither.
You just do your work. Leave the rest.

You hone the art of straight talk - tell the girl she has nice hair. And then move on no matter what her reply. Action can transcend talk.

You make a film, or you don’t make it. That’s all. You do, or you don’t.
Nice state to be in.

...

When i am in the boat, I can think of storms to come, but do nothing about them, except wait.
Or I can think of the fear I had about the water, when I sat on the boat.
I still can’t do anything. I am in the water, on the boat. I look at the sky, look around, and think of other things.
I am already here.

...

Letting go, a popular usage, means doing it without fear of regret.
When I let go, I think that I won’t care what people think about me.
Letting go is a temporary feeling/affair.
So after I let go something, do I immediately let go in another event?
And keep going this way?

...

Is action the problem or is choice the problem?

...

"I have frequently experienced myself the mood in which I have felt that all is vanity; I have emerged from it not by means of any philosophy, but owing to some imperative necessity of action . . . .”
- Bertrand Russell