Just reflecting that in Indian classical music, the string instruments are mounted with metal strings, and you don't hear anyone, from the beginner to Ravi Shankar, making any hue and cry over the fact that people now use metal instead of silk or other types of strings on their ancient instruments. No-one bothers their brains with this, or accuses others of not being the carriers of an ancient tradition because the material of their strings have changed. The Indians also adopted Western instruments into their classical repertoire: the violin was adopted, all kinds of innovative playing techniques were created for it, and today it is a standard instrument in Hindustani and Carnatic music. They also use the harmonium and the Shruti box. No-one is troubled by the fact that there are innovations in music, changes in the form and material of instruments, and the adoption of Western instruments for the playing of Indian music. They don't bother their brains with such trivialities, but instead focus all their energies on developing the aesthetic quality of their singing and playing, not just maintaining the beauty and excellence of their musical traditions but also making them better and better. An ancient and clever people, the Indians, I admire them greatly, nowhere more so than in their philosophy and their music, both of which are highly, highly sophisticated.
The Chinese intelligentsia and artistes (those who are the true inheritors and lineage holders of tradition) were/are also like their Indian counterparts. We have 5000 years of history, and 3000+ years of civilization. We are always aware of history and its passing, always aware of change and continuity. We do not have simplistic views of art, culture and time. As artistes, we do not block change. As a people of history and culture, we do not forget our roots but we are not enslaved by them either.
I recently finished watching an 8-episode CCTV documentary on Kun opera, and among some of the many interesting observations made, is the fact that all art forms have their times of flourishing and diminishing. For example, the Shi poetry form reached its peak of perfection in the Tang dynasty. In the Song dynasty, it was the time of Ci poetry. In the Ming period, it was Kun opera. By the time of the late Qing dynasty, Kun opera had diminished in public appeal and what dominated the stage was Peking opera, so the Qing-era intelligentsia turned their literary talents to writing novels instead. Knowing well they could not do better at something their predecessors had already perfected, the Chinese literati of each successive dynasty did not content themselves with aping the past or trying to go back to it, but instead created new art forms which they in turn brought to heights of perfection. These new art forms were in dialogue with the past, they drew on past art forms for inspiration but also departed from them in important ways. They had roots in the past but they always broke new ground.
Not only were the Chinese literati innovative in their practice and broad in their outlook, so too were Chinese artistes and performers. During the Qing dynasty, Kun opera artistes had to switch to performing in opera troupes of other genres as Kun opera was no longer being patronized by the public. The Kun opera artistes did not remain purists, but excelled in both Kun opera and other operatic forms. For this reason, half of the top 10 artistes in Peiking opera at that time were Kun opera artistes who excelled in all operatic forms. In fact, by this time, opera artistes had to excel in all operatic forms in order to be respected (An equivalent today might be this: if a Guqin artiste cannot play on all kinds of Guqin strings and all kinds of Guqins and express all kinds of different moods, but can only play on one kind of string and/or qin and can only express one mood, then s/he has not reached the status of a great master and has not earned the highest respect.)
When Chinese intellectuals who were Kun opera enthusiasts begun to revive Kun opera in the 20th/21st century, they deliberately used modern-looking sets along with ancient costumes. Their principle was to revive an ancient art form for a young, modern audience, that would be in dialogue with contemporary times, and never did they try to recreate a fossilized past. This is the historical sensibility of the leading Chinese intelligentsia throughout the ages. Foreign friends who do not understand this historical sensibility mistakenly think that these Chinese artistes and intelligentsia are not in touch with their history and are not historically authentic. In fact, they do not have a deep enough understanding of the minds of the leading Chinese intelligentsia. If the Chinese intelligentsia did not have this nuanced historical and cultural sensibility, we Chinese would have stagnated long ago. Our art forms would not have remained relevant to people through the ages, our art, culture and society would not have evolved with the times, and we would have lost our civilizational edge. In fact, Chinese scholar-artistes throughout the ages are always in touch with history - including contemporary history - which is the most important part of our history that we cannot afford to deny, lose sight of or connection with, and our artistic creations reflect this.
To understand better the Chinese literati's involvement with the Kun operatic form in the Ming-Qing dynasties and in modern times, see:
In English:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfENuxzQI4U
In Mandarin:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT8p4pgNxy8&list=PLBA9A04342BEE077A
No comments:
Post a Comment