NCPA and the Sell-out of Heritage
Part I - Overview
Part I - Overview
[This is the first in a series of articles on NCPA's recent move to commercialise its archival resources. Here Arnab presents an overview of the facts, and also his viewpoint as an artiste.]
1. Introduction
In keeping with the spirit of the times, the National Centre for the Performing Arts (NCPA), Mumbai, seems to be turning market-savvy. Recently it brought out a tender, and also circulated an e-mail, inviting financial and marketing partners for a project that seeks to commercially release selections from the Centre’s archive of recorded music. This is being done ostensibly to "support the NCPA's core founding principles with regard to the wide-ranging dissemination of India's rich cultural heritage." Notwithstanding the laudable nature of this objective, doubts remain whether the venture is really much different from usual sell-outs to corporate interests.
2. NCPA: Background and Antecedents
According to the Tata group's official website, NCPA is registered as a society as well as a public trust. However, according to some it was founded through a special legislation. In any case, it funded through a generous grant from the Dorabji Tata Foundation. This includes a substantial endowment, which, if invested wisely, can definitely help sustain its routine operating costs, if not more.
It occupies a large chunk of some of the most coveted real estate in Mumbai. Some time ago it built a large apartment complex to house its employees. Subsequently it took permission to sell the flats commercially. The NCPA Apartments Complex, as it is now known, ranks among Mumbai’s most expensive addresses in terms of cost per square foot of area. Recently, an apartment sold for Rs. 36 Crores. As per its rules, the Centre is entitled to 50% of proceeds from the sale of an apartment, half of which it hands to the Maharashtra government.
Despite such largesses, NCPA’s heyday is long gone. In what seems to be its twilight, it looks to the past as a way of legitimising its present. Its powers-that-be, coupled with a hired “arts administration consultant”, have come together to anoint themselves the guardians of over 5,000 hours of what they claim to be among the finest instances of recorded Hindustani and Carnatic music performances.
Reports suggest the Centre is facing a financial crunch. Though this has been denied by its administrators, the fact remains that it had opened its premises to hosting "corporate events and high-class (sic) receptions" as early as four years ago.
3. NCPA and Dissemination
Serious practitioners and connoisseurs of Indian classical music know very well what a farce the business of arts administration is, especially in India. Unlike other professionals with secure jobs and a steady source of income, musicians are financially vulnerable and often make poorly informed decisions based on an immediate, desperate need for cash. It is the responsibility of organisations like the NCPA, which are basically funded by Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funds and government patronage, to ensure that whatever they do serves the interests of the artists they engage. Unfortunately, it seems to me that these “premier institutes” in India are essentially vehicles that prey on the vulnerabilities of those who lead insecure, even destitute lives in the service of the arts, merely to serve the vested interests of a few.
NCPA's prior record in dissemination is dismal. Its earlier posture on the issue of sharing archival material is legendary. Even those artists who had performed at the venue were routinely refused copies of their own concert recordings by the centre’s staff, citing potential commercial “misuse” by the artist, although reportedly, frequent exceptions are made for powerful patron-musicians and their acolytes.
Given its earlier stance, it does not strike the discerning observer as though the NCPA administrators have suddenly sprouted empathy for students of Indian classical music and their need for these recordings for educational purposes. The decision to sell its archival recordings after almost forty years of zealous hoarding has ostensibly been taken with the objective of generating revenue. Obviously, the NCPA anticipates great profitability, if they can justify the hiring of a foreign “arts administrator” to oversee this project. So what is the financial need that drives this venture?
This is all the more galling because NCPA is neither the creator, and nor even really the owner, of the works they propose to sell. It is merely a repository. Not every artist has been consulted before his/her performances were recorded for the archive. According to khayal and thumri exponent Shubha Mudgal and tabla maestro Aneesh Pradhan, the Centre rarely ever signs or makes verbal agreements with artists whom they record in concert. Whenever it has bothered to make agreements pertaining to these recordings, they have almost always read “archive and educational” in the embedded statement of purpose. Even so, they use their (cement and bureaucratic) muscle to hoard recordings, to which, they do not own the rights.
The centre has already drawn up a catalogue of works they intend to publish, and without even consulting many of the artists who have created them, be it in the role of a main performer or accompanying artist. What is even more appalling is the fact that Owen Mortimer, the Centre's foreign “arts administration consultant”, claims in his tender notice that the intellectual property rights of each musician featured in the catalogue would be respected and all applicable laws honoured. As of now, this statement is both untrue and blatantly misleading. It remains to be seen how the Centre will rectify this infirmity.
4. NCPA and the Welfare of Art
Given how the “private sector” of the Indian classical music business is dominated by a number of interest groups that operate like a mafia, it is institutions like the NCPA that independent individual artists would look to for patronage, representation and protection of the collective interests of the professional community. With its infrastructure and access to both powerful private individuals as well as government resources, NCPA could have served as a powerful tool in the process of creating a regulatory body or even a labour union governing matters concerning Indian classical music. Alas, it seems to be nothing more than a struggling behemoth, a white elephant trying to sell the aura of its heydays to keep its reputation afloat, at the cost of innumerable individual musicians who are mere collateral to the interests of self-proclaimed musicologists and art administrators who infest the hallways of this hallowed institution.
Had the Centre been truly interested in the welfare of Indian classical music and musicians, they would have long ago, taken a progressive stand on the issue and created schemes under which they could nurture and sustain musical talent and steer it in the right direction. They would have exercised more discretion in their hiring process and involved genuine musicians and musicologists in the centre’s day-to-day affairs.
One of NCPA’s greatest shortcomings is the fact that its music department is essentially a tool in the hands of a small but powerful cartel of musical pretenders who pose as theorists and arts administrators. Indeed, all it has achieved in so many years is their archive. It has been conserved for over half a century with meticulous attention to security, and is now being made available to the public “with the larger goal of creating as large an audience as possible for Indian classical and traditional music” – at a price, of course.
A price which numerous artists, living and dead, rich and poor, have already paid, by way of poorly remunerated performances, some of which were recorded without consent, either written or verbal. For the benefit of the NCPA, of course, whose administrators, in the process of prostituting their zealously guarded archive, have now circulated a mass e-mail to all the e-mail addresses at their disposal, asking for the highest bidder to aid the process of this unilateral effort at commercialisation of the works of a wide range of artists. Ironically, this list of undisclosed recipients of the aforementioned email includes numerous artists who have performed for the NCPA, and whom the centre’s administrators did not think pertinent to consult before circulating such a message.
A large number of Indian classical musicians of the previous two generations have died either of starvation, or disease wrought by acute poverty. This, in itself, has absolutely no reflection on the class or capability of individual musicians. The fact of the matter is that transition of Hindustani music from princely patronage to the public concert stage has claimed many casualties, and transformed the profession into a vicious rat race for commercial success. It is a very small number of commercially successful musicians who control a vast majority of the limited resources available to the community, leaving many much more deserving artists to languish in poverty and anonymity.
5. Conclusion
Given how the measure of big-time commercial success in Hindustani music today is, in most cases, the ability to put on a pseudo-mystical façade and pander to the tastes of ignoramuses, it is for premier institutions like the NCPA to stand up for genuine artists, and to help generate patronage for serious music. Instead, the NCPA chooses to sell its archive and from what may be construed from its actions so far, deprive its musicians of royalties or even the right to decide if their own recordings may be made public or not!
While the NCPA, in its widely circulated mass e-mail claims that works of “the finest Indian classical and traditional musicians of the past 40 years (are) to be made available for international retail, in consultation with artists and their families and with strict adherence to intellectual property rights and all prevailing laws applicable for their legitimate release”, most investigations reveal that no such steps have been taken to date. This leads one to believe that NCPA officials are essentially paying lip service to the public at large, while soliciting financial participation of third parties in their bid, purportedly aimed at “presentation, preservation and promotion of India's rich legacy of classical, traditional and contemporary culture.”
[back to prefatory note and list of articles]
Read more...
According to the Tata group's official website, NCPA is registered as a society as well as a public trust. However, according to some it was founded through a special legislation. In any case, it funded through a generous grant from the Dorabji Tata Foundation. This includes a substantial endowment, which, if invested wisely, can definitely help sustain its routine operating costs, if not more.
It occupies a large chunk of some of the most coveted real estate in Mumbai. Some time ago it built a large apartment complex to house its employees. Subsequently it took permission to sell the flats commercially. The NCPA Apartments Complex, as it is now known, ranks among Mumbai’s most expensive addresses in terms of cost per square foot of area. Recently, an apartment sold for Rs. 36 Crores. As per its rules, the Centre is entitled to 50% of proceeds from the sale of an apartment, half of which it hands to the Maharashtra government.
Despite such largesses, NCPA’s heyday is long gone. In what seems to be its twilight, it looks to the past as a way of legitimising its present. Its powers-that-be, coupled with a hired “arts administration consultant”, have come together to anoint themselves the guardians of over 5,000 hours of what they claim to be among the finest instances of recorded Hindustani and Carnatic music performances.
Reports suggest the Centre is facing a financial crunch. Though this has been denied by its administrators, the fact remains that it had opened its premises to hosting "corporate events and high-class (sic) receptions" as early as four years ago.
3. NCPA and Dissemination
Serious practitioners and connoisseurs of Indian classical music know very well what a farce the business of arts administration is, especially in India. Unlike other professionals with secure jobs and a steady source of income, musicians are financially vulnerable and often make poorly informed decisions based on an immediate, desperate need for cash. It is the responsibility of organisations like the NCPA, which are basically funded by Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funds and government patronage, to ensure that whatever they do serves the interests of the artists they engage. Unfortunately, it seems to me that these “premier institutes” in India are essentially vehicles that prey on the vulnerabilities of those who lead insecure, even destitute lives in the service of the arts, merely to serve the vested interests of a few.
NCPA's prior record in dissemination is dismal. Its earlier posture on the issue of sharing archival material is legendary. Even those artists who had performed at the venue were routinely refused copies of their own concert recordings by the centre’s staff, citing potential commercial “misuse” by the artist, although reportedly, frequent exceptions are made for powerful patron-musicians and their acolytes.
Given its earlier stance, it does not strike the discerning observer as though the NCPA administrators have suddenly sprouted empathy for students of Indian classical music and their need for these recordings for educational purposes. The decision to sell its archival recordings after almost forty years of zealous hoarding has ostensibly been taken with the objective of generating revenue. Obviously, the NCPA anticipates great profitability, if they can justify the hiring of a foreign “arts administrator” to oversee this project. So what is the financial need that drives this venture?
This is all the more galling because NCPA is neither the creator, and nor even really the owner, of the works they propose to sell. It is merely a repository. Not every artist has been consulted before his/her performances were recorded for the archive. According to khayal and thumri exponent Shubha Mudgal and tabla maestro Aneesh Pradhan, the Centre rarely ever signs or makes verbal agreements with artists whom they record in concert. Whenever it has bothered to make agreements pertaining to these recordings, they have almost always read “archive and educational” in the embedded statement of purpose. Even so, they use their (cement and bureaucratic) muscle to hoard recordings, to which, they do not own the rights.
The centre has already drawn up a catalogue of works they intend to publish, and without even consulting many of the artists who have created them, be it in the role of a main performer or accompanying artist. What is even more appalling is the fact that Owen Mortimer, the Centre's foreign “arts administration consultant”, claims in his tender notice that the intellectual property rights of each musician featured in the catalogue would be respected and all applicable laws honoured. As of now, this statement is both untrue and blatantly misleading. It remains to be seen how the Centre will rectify this infirmity.
4. NCPA and the Welfare of Art
Given how the “private sector” of the Indian classical music business is dominated by a number of interest groups that operate like a mafia, it is institutions like the NCPA that independent individual artists would look to for patronage, representation and protection of the collective interests of the professional community. With its infrastructure and access to both powerful private individuals as well as government resources, NCPA could have served as a powerful tool in the process of creating a regulatory body or even a labour union governing matters concerning Indian classical music. Alas, it seems to be nothing more than a struggling behemoth, a white elephant trying to sell the aura of its heydays to keep its reputation afloat, at the cost of innumerable individual musicians who are mere collateral to the interests of self-proclaimed musicologists and art administrators who infest the hallways of this hallowed institution.
Had the Centre been truly interested in the welfare of Indian classical music and musicians, they would have long ago, taken a progressive stand on the issue and created schemes under which they could nurture and sustain musical talent and steer it in the right direction. They would have exercised more discretion in their hiring process and involved genuine musicians and musicologists in the centre’s day-to-day affairs.
One of NCPA’s greatest shortcomings is the fact that its music department is essentially a tool in the hands of a small but powerful cartel of musical pretenders who pose as theorists and arts administrators. Indeed, all it has achieved in so many years is their archive. It has been conserved for over half a century with meticulous attention to security, and is now being made available to the public “with the larger goal of creating as large an audience as possible for Indian classical and traditional music” – at a price, of course.
A price which numerous artists, living and dead, rich and poor, have already paid, by way of poorly remunerated performances, some of which were recorded without consent, either written or verbal. For the benefit of the NCPA, of course, whose administrators, in the process of prostituting their zealously guarded archive, have now circulated a mass e-mail to all the e-mail addresses at their disposal, asking for the highest bidder to aid the process of this unilateral effort at commercialisation of the works of a wide range of artists. Ironically, this list of undisclosed recipients of the aforementioned email includes numerous artists who have performed for the NCPA, and whom the centre’s administrators did not think pertinent to consult before circulating such a message.
A large number of Indian classical musicians of the previous two generations have died either of starvation, or disease wrought by acute poverty. This, in itself, has absolutely no reflection on the class or capability of individual musicians. The fact of the matter is that transition of Hindustani music from princely patronage to the public concert stage has claimed many casualties, and transformed the profession into a vicious rat race for commercial success. It is a very small number of commercially successful musicians who control a vast majority of the limited resources available to the community, leaving many much more deserving artists to languish in poverty and anonymity.
5. Conclusion
Given how the measure of big-time commercial success in Hindustani music today is, in most cases, the ability to put on a pseudo-mystical façade and pander to the tastes of ignoramuses, it is for premier institutions like the NCPA to stand up for genuine artists, and to help generate patronage for serious music. Instead, the NCPA chooses to sell its archive and from what may be construed from its actions so far, deprive its musicians of royalties or even the right to decide if their own recordings may be made public or not!
While the NCPA, in its widely circulated mass e-mail claims that works of “the finest Indian classical and traditional musicians of the past 40 years (are) to be made available for international retail, in consultation with artists and their families and with strict adherence to intellectual property rights and all prevailing laws applicable for their legitimate release”, most investigations reveal that no such steps have been taken to date. This leads one to believe that NCPA officials are essentially paying lip service to the public at large, while soliciting financial participation of third parties in their bid, purportedly aimed at “presentation, preservation and promotion of India's rich legacy of classical, traditional and contemporary culture.”
[back to prefatory note and list of articles]
