On January 1, 2025, Carnatic musician TM Krishna, known to many as TMK, received the prestigious Sangita Kalanidhi award. However, he did not receive the mirror MS award due to a Supreme Court petition filed by V Shrinivasan, grandson of the legendary Carnatic musician MS Subbulakshmi (1916-2004). Shrinivasan claimed that TMK slandered MS’s Bharat Ratna legacy, making it improper for him to receive the award instituted in her name after her demise in 2004. The matter is under judicial review and pending before the Supreme Court.
Although national newspapers have recognised TMK as an influential generational artist, there has been limited intellectual debate on the SC case. Key issues like global Wokeism, national intangible heritage, and Freedom of Speech remain unanalysed. The case also brings attention to slander and the need to protect the Bharat Ratna and Thyagaraja legacies upheld by MS for eight generations in the digital age of social activism. Regardless of the outcome, the SC verdict will significantly impact national and global discussions on Indian culture, arts scholarship, cultural politics, social justice activism and ethics of historical representation.
How did Shrinivasan and TMK become involved in this Supreme Court case? The dispute began with TMK’s 2015 MS Understood project, which reinterpreted MS’s life through caste and gender politics.
TMK’s Twin Factoids and Disinformation
In 2015, as the world prepared to celebrate MS’s Birth Centenary, TMK drew on two interlocked Indo-US academic and popular social justice concepts known as ‘Brahmanical Patriarchy’ and ‘Devadasi Victimhood’ These concepts were circulating in the global public sphere as historical narratives, academic concepts, partial truths and factoids for some time. The Washington Times defines a factoid as something that looks like a fact and could be perceived as fact but is not a fact.
TMK used the twin factoids to create a Brahmin/Devadasi framework to explore the global legacy of MS and Carnatic music. He embarked on this project by focussing on the marital relationship between Brahmin freedom fighter T Sadasivam and MS, who had a mixed Brahmin-Devadasi background. TMK portrayed Sadasivam as a controlling Brahmin husband and MS as a caste-oppressed devadasi wife/artist, explaining that MS is not just the global face and voice of Carnatic music but also a victim of Brahmanical Patriarchy.
TMK suggested that MS’s marriage must be perceived as a tragic event because she was transformed into a ‘Saintly Barbie Doll,’ through the evil machinations of a Sadasivam Patriarchy. After articulating this offensive critique, TMK used the caste/gender frame to create an MS Devadasi-Victimhood narrative and shared his views in publications such as the Caravan (2015), Wire (2016), and Manthan Lecture in Hyderabad (2017).
By framing MS’s national legacy within the context of Brahmanical Patriarchy and Devadasi Victimhood, TMK distorted and tarnished MS’s Bharat Ratna legacy on an unprecedented scale. The twin concepts, derived from global academic and social justice discourses, do not resonate with the factual histories of MS or Sadasivam, who are fixed in identity politics ideologies, which, while appearing to be factual, are not based on concrete evidence.
After nine years of silence, Shrinivasan challenged TMK’s Brahmin/Devadasi Victimhood narrative in his 2024 SC petition, dismissing it as ‘cheap politics,’ based on conspiracy theories, hearsay and gossip.
Shrinivasan’s petition presents an opportunity to examine the implications of TMK’s MS understood project and his social justice activism. TMK has expressed his views on MS’s legacy through various publications and social media platforms. His narrative aligns with global trends in wokeism, and the dissemination of disinformation intended to influence public opinion, sometimes leading to obscuring facts. This method has generated discussion within the music community, with some critics describing TMK’s anti-caste interpretations of Carnatic music as self-serving and defamatory.
Taking the Devadasi Name and Wearing the Brahminkattu Saree
Let us consider the creation of another widely accepted MS Brahminism factoid.
TMK explains that after her marriage to Sadasivam, MS adopted Brahmin customs and distanced herself from her non-Brahmin devadasi roots to become an ideal wife to Sadasivam. TMK highlights this transformation by noting her professional attire, the ‘conservative smarta-brahminkattu’ style, which she wore for her concerts in India and abroad for over 60 years. For millions of fans worldwide, MS’s legacy is symbolised by her iconic blue brahminkattu image, which has remained significant across over eight generations of historical memory.
The music community criticised TMK’s sexist and ‘casteist’ Brahmin bashing depiction of MS’s professional attire, intended to occlude MS’s unique cosmopolitanism and commitment to diversity, which earned her the prestigious Magsaysay award in 1974.
Critics noted that despite wearing the brahminkattu style saree, MS did not hide her devadasi heritage and proudly embraced the same by using her mother’s name, Madurai Shanmukhavadivu, and adding it to her own.
MS’s devadasi background is evident profoundly in her complete name, Madurai Shanmukhavadivu Subbulaksmi, her MSS initials, signature, pitch-perfect voice and historical identity.
Furthermore, MS was born to a Brahmin father, Subramania Iyer and a Devadasi mother. MS’s mixed heritage complicates any simplistic categorisation of her identity, making claims about either her acquired Brahmanism or innate devadasi-ness historically inaccurate and misleading.
TMK denied MS’s hybrid history, refused to amend his MS Brahminism factoids and distributed these widely on social media platforms. “The moving finger writes, and, having writ moves on, not all thy piety nor wit shall lure it back to cancel half a line, nor all thy tears wash out a word of it–” Omar Khayyam.
Cultural Hybridity and Historical Paradox in MS Legacy
For my generation’s academics, MS’s cultural hybridity, embodied in her hyphenated Brahmin-Devadasi background, is crucial to her twentieth-century legacy. Because Sadasivam respected MS’s Devadasi heritage, he did not require that she change her name after marriage, a rare decision of huge historical significance. MS rose prophetically like the mythical phoenix from the ashes of her complex hybrid history to become the Queen of Song, the Nightingale of India, and MS Amma inclusively. Understanding her cultural hybridity is key to grasping the MS Phenomenon, whose glory, as prophesized by Maha Periyava of Kanchi, ‘will last as long as the Sun and Moon remain in the sky.”
Earlier generations viewed MS’s cultural hybridity as a historical paradox, encapsulated poetically in her MSS initials, voice, and brahminkattu saree. They refrained from examining it through modern identity politics and caste lenses. TMK, however, examined MS’s legacy through these reductive lenses, deconstructing her legacy along caste, gender and identity lines, which many find unfortunate.
A Cultural Shift is Approaching Delhi
TMK’s decadelong deconstruction of MS and Carnatic music can be seen as part of global identity politics activism and social media Wokeism.
In March 2024, a new tremor was heard in the ground of Carnatic music following the announcement of the Kalanidhi Award. Renowned musicians, including Ranjani and Gayatri, Chitravina Ravikiran, Palghat Ramprasad, Dushyant Shridhar, Vishaka Hari, Trichur Brothers, and Arjun Kumar voiced their opposition to TMK receiving the award. They accused him of politicising the music community along caste lines. In protest and a further display of solidarity, Chitravina Ravikiran returned his Kalanidhi award, and the family of the legendary Mridangam Vidwan Palghat Mani Iyer, too, did the same by returning the Sangita Kalanidhi award the veteran had received 57 years ago. This noteworthy collective dissent marks a significant shift in the traditionally non-confrontational Carnatic music world.
Shrinivasan’s SC petition will be heard in New Delhi in 2025. The outcome will impact TMK, Shrinivasan, and discussions on global Indian culture, national heritage, and the ethics of historical representation.
Leave a Comment