Anupama Shrimali's concert provided a glimpse into her sadhana, M.A. Jyothi's singing lacked vigour
Anupama Shrimali (Ganabharathiat Veene SheshannaBhavana) gave her vocal recital,accompanied by H.S.Thandavamurthi (violin) andM.R. Manjunath (mridanga).Melodious voice made for expressionswas congenial for depictingthe deeper aspects ofclassical music. Deep graces set totwo speeds, clear accents and afine sense of shruthi in ThiruvottiyurThyagayya's varna, "Karunimpa"(Shahana), amplydenoted her sadhana and commitment.
Had she maintained the abovefervour with an added flavour ofversatility in the rest of the presentations,the entire picturewould have definitely gone in herfavour. The overall planning andapproach seemed to have driftedmore towards the lighter aspects.This attenuated impact could notcommand unreservedappreciations.
In the absence of significantspontaneity, the renderingsmainly appealed by virtue of gentlevocal inflections, clarity in accentsand a moderately slow pacethat favoured easy comprehensionof the body of the texts. JayachamarajaWadiyar's "ShriMahaganapathim" (Atana),Muthayya Bhagavathar's twocompositions "Saarasamukhi"(Goudamalhar) and "Vanchatomune"(Karnaranjani), andThyagaraja's "Nagumomu" (Abheri)trod very plain paths.Encouraging"Banturithi" (Hamsanada),"Maa Janaki" (Kamboji - both ofThyagaraja) featuring short alapanasand few strains of swarakalpana,flashed for a momentencouraging impressions of gainingnecessary momentum.Of the 14 numbers, a neraval (at"Munimanasa") appeared only in"Rama Rama Gunaseema" (Simhendramadhyama- Swathi Thirunal).
In the alapana section, she admirablyimbued into the sancharasall the features essential for aclear identification of the raga;yet, much of its substance remainedunexplored.
Other highlights - Purandaradasa's"Chandrachuda" (DarbariKaanada) and "Raagi Tandira"(Tilang), Vadiraja's "Govinda"(Ragamalika), and Vasudevacharya'sTillana (Kannada).
* * *M.A. Jyothi (Ganabharathi) sang,accompanied by Aditi KrishnaPrakash (violin) and G. S. Kumar(mridanga). This artiste's voicewas supple and melodious, butthe progressions lacked consistency.At times, exceptional tonalqualities faced downward trends,either for want of vigour or for noapparent reason.
Meanings of the lyrics successfullyreached the audience,through clear diction supplementedby melodic nilugades,bringing them under the influenceof the expected moods.
The first two presentations -"Maruva" (varna - Amrithavarshini- Yoganarasimha) and "Mahaganapathim"(Amrithavaahini- Jayachamaraja Wadiyar) may bequoted as fitting examples substantiatingher plus points: a majesticprogression accompaniedby admirable graces featured boththe compositions.
With the rest of the concert,one could find occasional, butperceptible traces of instability,and as a natural sequel, the sancharasbetrayed signs of imbalance.Muffled inflections marredthe mandra sancharas.
She interpreted Thyagaraja's"Ragarathna Maalikache" (Rithigaula)and Subbayya Shastri's"Nipaadamule Gathi" (Bhairavi)embellishing them with pleasingalapana, impressive neraval andscholarly swarakalpanas. As thelatter happened to be the focus, itincidentally comprised a tani avarathana.Liberal employment ofartistic imagination would haveburnished her scholarly competencetransforming the endeavoursinto a distinctly brightaccomplishment.
Other presentations were"Dhayarani" (Mohana-Thyagaraja),"Shri Kamakshi" (Saaranga -Annayaswamy Shastri - with ashort alapana), "Annapurne Vishalakshi"(Saama - Dikshitar) andso on.
One common factor that underminedboth the above concertswas frequent references tonotes. This substantially jeopardisedinvolvement, wherein spontaneousflow of both mood andartistry were at stake.