From: buddha@leland.Stanford.EDU (Corvin Russell)
Subject: Re: Ajrara gharana, Ludicrous pankaj Udhas debate
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305 USA
Distribution: rec.music.indian.classical
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 21:35:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.020716.21653@epas.toronto.edu> kippenj@epas.utoronto.ca (J. Kippen) writes:
>
>Gottlieb's material is a fair reflection of some of Ajrara's most
>famous pieces, such as the Red Fort qaida
>
>ghetaka	ghetaka		dhinedhin	nagena
>(dhageti	rakita		dhinedhin	nagena)
>
>of which there are several versions.  This stuff is not secret, and is
>played by most people.  Two things are noteworthy: triple time and the
>use of "dhinedhinagena".  These characterise Ajrara style above all,
>and predominate in many of the pieces.  Otherwise, technically the
>fingerings are similar to Delhi fingerings (for tete), and are
>distinct from the traditional fingerings from Lucknow, Farukkhabad,
>Laliyana (Purab), Old Punjab, and Benares.
>
>In brief, there is still an Ajrara tradition, which is more than can
>be said for the old Delhi tradition, I'm afraid.  I hope someday
>someone does some decent research on that style, and finds out more
>about those old gharanedar musicians of Ajrara.


Just to follow-up on my own posting for information on Ajrara, I thought I
might give a few compositions that I've dug up as examples of Ajrara
playing.

First there's the kayda

dhagena dha-- dhagete rekite dhataka getaka dhinedhi nagena
Dha-kre dhetete genadha tigena dhataka getaka tineti nakena

This is a close relative of a Delhi composition almost identical
except for the use of "dhatige genaga dhingena nagene" instead 
of "dhataka getaka ..."  (taka in dhataka getaka of course played
starting on gab).  I have followed my own suggestion for notation
-- dha on kinar, Dha on sur, Dhin on sur, dhin on gab.  This 
composition is beautiful and is one of my favourites.

Next there's a sweet kayda in jhaptal:

Dhagenatit -dhagena titedhage dhatidhage tunakena

Finally, the famous composition

Dha-dha- gegenaga dhinedhine gegenana
tetegege nagadhine nagadhine dhinegena
takatete gegenaga dhinedhine gegenana
tetegege nakatine nakatine tinekena

(I haven't actually been taught this, so I'm not really sure
of the bol).  I've heard at least three distinct versions of this
composition.  Some players in Farukkhabad claim that the composition
originated there.  Any opinions?

BTW, I saw a bunch of episodes of the Doordarshan series "Sadhana".
In the installment featuring Zakir Hussain, one segment showed
him teaching a kayda which he claimed was from Lucknow.  It 
began

getaka getaka dhinedhin nagena

and had a second line, not the same as the one Jim gave in his
posting.  At the time I was dead certain that the kayda was not
Lucknow, but rather Ajrara (had I remembered Habibuddin's 
performance I would have been more certain), so this I guess is
independent verification.  

I noticed that in closing Jim said that the survival of Old 
Ajrara was more than could be claimed for Delhi.  Jim, I suppose
you mean by this that with the death of Inam Ali, Delhi's passed
away too (I presume you consider Inam Ali to be a genuine exponent).  
I was curious to know what in particular you thought had been lost --
specific compositions (gats etc.) or the style of developing kayda
and peshkar, or something else besides?  Surely there must exist
some faithful student of the gharana somewhere (what happened to
the khalifa's own students?).   On the other hand, I should frame this 
question wth mention of my own feeling that there aren't any
real gharanedar musicians anymore, in the sense that Kanthe Maharaj,
e.g., could be considered a gharanedar.  Everybody plays things from
all over the place, as Jim himself noted in his book at some
point.  Of course some people are more capable and willing
to play traditional styles than others.

I also noticed your mention in passing of the Laliyana gharana.  I
have seen references to this before, but I'd appreciate a brief
filling-in.   


There's lots more I have to say re: tabla,  but i'll save that for later.

__________________

RE: LUDICROUS PANKAJ UDHAS DEBATE

Perhaps if we're lucky, this debate will rage on for months, maybe more.
In the meantime, I'd like to put in my two cents worth.  As far as it goes, 
i'm behind Jim and the other rasiks on RMIC.  With one exception, I don't
think anyone claimed that ghazals weren't a classical genre.  of course
they are.  But by the same token, if you think Pankaj Udhas is an exponent
of the classical style of ghazal singing, you caught the wrong train out of
town.  I don't wish to denigrate people who actually enjoy listening
to trifling crooners like Pankaj Udhas, but their forum is not this forum.
Please, don't post your stuff here!  As for the person who sarcastically
noted that his operating system could handle an extra notice, and that it
was easy enough to press "n" for unwanted articles, i don't think that's
the point.  The point is that it costs a lot to beam things to jillions
of newsgroups, and is particularly wasteful when your posting is inappropriate
for some of those groups.  

Yours,

Corvin
Newsgroups: rec.music.indian.classical