Thoughts I had while attending Open Sky Slam - Part II

First of all, Part I of this two part series has become my most read blog post. It is my first blog post to reach 200 page views. So, yaay! And thank you. And finally, here is the second line of thought I had while sitting there at Open Sky Slam.

Art has always had an interesting relationship with political engagement. There are artists who believe that it is the responsibility of every artist to have political opinions and to be opinion leaders. Then there are artists who believe that an artist is not obligated to anyone, except to her/his own art. I personally believe that people as individuals need to be socially and politically aware, especially in a democracy. Whether their art engages such issues or not is secondary, and it is the personal choice of every artist on whether to do so or not. However, irrespective of whether a person is an artist or not, I believe people in a democracy should be aware and active in issues that their community faces.

The urban Indian educated in English medium institutions sometimes tends to be isolated from social and political happenings around him/her. This often comes due to a privilege enjoyed by the middle and upper middle class educated Indian, which ensures that local political events and decisions do not inconvenience the said person in a big manner. This is especially so in Bengaluru, which has a culture of political indifference. One indicator of this indifference is that voter turnout in Bengaluru for elections is dismally low when compared to the rest of the state. (I also am culprit to this as I will not be voting in the upcoming Assembly elections, having missed the January 22 deadline to apply for an ID card. As you can imagine, I am very ashamed of this.)

In this context, Open Sky Slam, and similar art platforms are playing a very important role, although maybe unknowingly. These platforms are creating a community that is beginning to engage with political and social realities around it. In the many performances I witnessed on 24th, I saw various issues being spoken about, such as the controversial statement by Goa CM, Manohar Parikkar about girls drinking, the stigma around mental health, the complexities of the narrative around prostitution, and other such issues. There was one performance where a rape victim brought out her narrative, and in doing so, subverted the power structure. There was another performance by Aditya Kedia, where he spoke on the promises of politicians, and the subsequent failures to live up to the promises.

Though, some of the performances were intentionally dealing with political and social issues, such as the commentary on the statement of the Goa CM, and the one by Aditya Kedia, most performances did not do so. However, they are still largely significant. Building a collective of individual narratives builds a collective narrative. And many of the performances that did not deal directly with issues also did so in their personalized narratives. For instance, the poem of the rape victim was highly personalized, and yet offers a strong commentary on the prevailing rape culture of our society. Similarly the poem dealing with prostitution was also a very personal narrative. One of my personal favourites among the performances was the one by Cipun Mishra. I mentioned his piece in my previous post dealing with poetic techniques. However, I also love his piece for how intensely personal it is, and yet offers an incredible layered commentary on the socio-economic context in which he grew up. Having to sell the house to afford education for the children, foregoing lunch and saving ten rupees thereby are images that haunt the listener by opening a window into the lifestyle of middle and lower middle class Indians, and also at the same time offer a commentary on accessibility of higher education in India. Poetry in its most melancholic beauty!

Democracy is governance by the people. It happens when people engage with issues in public spaces. OSS and other such art platforms are creating public spaces where such narratives are being dealt with. They also bring people from different contexts together. I witnessed performances in English, Hindi, Urdu, Hindustani, Tamil, and even French. Each of these people are from different contexts. Bringing together different contexts enables narratives and discussions to be more nuanced, than if all the people were from the same context. That is not all. The public space, in this case, is merged with the historic role of the storyteller bringing about an interesting dynamic. In European history, we see that the court jester (the fool in Shakespearan plays for instance) offered political commentary, even often mocking the King and his subjects. Poets in India often offered social critique. These roles have been brought together in these art spaces and merged with the public space where opinions and ideas are discussed.

This is why I think such art platforms are important. Because they offer a means for political and social engagement for people who might not otherwise engage with such issues. Though there needs to be more of an intentional effort by individuals towards awareness and subsequently towards engagement, this is a start. And for now, I am satisfied with baby steps.

Thoughts I had while attending Open Sky Slam - Part I

First off, Open Sky is amazing, and all you wonderful readers should do yourself a favour and go for their slams. For a year and a half, I'd been wanting to attend one of these slams, and I finally made it. And let me tell you that I regret not having attended sooner. While I was sitting there, various thoughts came into my mind, and having found them interesting, I would like to share them with you. I found that my thoughts followed two distinct trails. And as such, I am organizing them into two posts, of which this is the first.

Spoken word poetry is appreciated often for a number of things. For the issues it brings to light, for the conversations it creates, for the wonderful communities it builds around the art form, for the validation and solidarity offered by the community to each of its members, and so on and so forth. However, I have very rarely found much appreciation for the form and techniques employed by the artist. I do not want to be misunderstood here. I do appreciate it for the other reasons I have mentioned and for many more. However, as I was sitting there at Open Sky Slam, the various techniques employed by many poets made the whole experience a treat. I'm sure all of you know these techniques and have seen them often. But allow me to talk about a few of the poets who really stood out personally to me in terms of technique alone. This does not mean that they were better than others who I've left out. I'm looking at them purely on technique.

The thought first hit me while watching Meghna Prakash perform. Her performance had a musical cadence. And as she performed, she was gently swaying to her own words. Performance poetry is primarily an auditory experience, with a tinge of visual. And the way she used both the auditory as well as visual elements was masterful. Cadence refers to the modulation of the voice that renders a musicality to it. It is linked to rhythm, and many traditional written poets have used it masterfully (e.g. "Once upon a midnight dreary / While I pondered weak and weary....). However, the technique finds its ultimate use when combined with good performance.

Though performance poetry has been present in different forms among various different cultures, its modern avatar as spoken word poetry is still quite young. The lack of established traditions and genres allow artists to experiment heavily. One of the possible ways of experimenting is through borrowing elements from other art forms. Angshuman Sharma did a brilliant job by borrowing a number of elements from stand up comedy. He not only borrowed the performance elements, but his content (or lyrics) was prepared in a way that the entire performance can pass as a decent stand up piece, without losing the quality of spoken word poetry.

Imagery is an all time favourite among poets of all traditions, be it written or spoken word. Imagery engages the senses and thereby makes poetry a wholesome experience. Three performers who used it really well today were Akshay Balan, Cipun Mishra, and Simran Narwani. Akshay used olfactory imagery to great effect with his poem on smell itself. "Burn smell - black herbal coconut oil - old books - coffee breath and smoke": such words and phrases leave a distinct odour among the audience. Cipun Mishra used striking visual imagery which made the experience not unlike watching a video montage or a photo album. The image of the shopping complex where once a house stood is something that will be stuck with me for a long time to come. Simran employed tactile imagery in a simple and powerful manner. We all know how a hug feels, and therein lies the effectiveness of her imagery. We could feel each line as it was performed. While I felt my hands enveloping a friend, Simran asks whether the hand really belonged to me. Brilliant!

A number of poets today performed beautifully in Hindia and Urdu. The advantage of this is that traditionally Hindi, and especially Urdu poetry is meant to be performed. The most popular form of such poetry is the Shayari. Many Hindi and Urdu poets employed this. However, two poets really stood out to me in the way they used this. Aditya Kedia, in a poem where he spoke about colours, juxtaposed Shayari lines within story telling. The strength of the story telling form often lies in imagery, and timely well delivered punch lines (which generate snaps). Aditya did have imagery (a poem on colours will of course have good imagery), but his punch lines were delivered in the form of Sher (couplets) of the Shayari tradition. Similarly, Abhishek (I don't know his full name) juxtaposed dialogue into the Shayari form. Dialogue is a technique primarily of the theatre. And Abhishek's poem consisted of two parts. The first was the poet talking to the shoemaker, and the second was the reply of the shoemaker. Very clever!

To conclude, techniques are like spices. They add flavour, but if not used in the right amount, could make the entire ordeal of sitting through a performance quite painful. The chef is usually precise with his preparation, but the person who eats may not recognize the various spices that make the food delicious. Similarly, precise use of technique may often be unnoticed, but that does not make it unnecessary.

P.S. 1. I'm sorry that the first two techniques I mentioned ended up becoming rather vague. I thoroughly enjoyed experiencing the techniques as an audience, but explaining turned out quite a hard nut to crack. I know I haven't done justice to it, and I apologize.

P.S. 2. I'm planning to do a series of posts commenting on the various elements of spoken word poetry, such as technique, form, structure, performance, and so on. Do look forward to it.