Why did Madras High Court bar the use of MS Subbulakshmi’s name for award for TM Krishna? Controversy explained

The Madras High Court on Tuesday, November 19, barred the Madras Music Academy from presenting the 'Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award’ to TM Krishna. The court further clarified that the academy is free to honour the renowned vocalist and celebrate his achievements but the award cannot carry the legendary Carnatic singer’s name.?

The judgment comes nearly four months after V Shrinivasan, Subbulakshmi’s grandson, filed a plea to stop Madras Music Academy from presenting the ‘Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award’ to Krishna and emphasised that had had previously made several “vile, vituperative and scandalous” comments about the singer.? So, how did this controversy start and why did the court rule in Shrinivasan’s favour? Let’s find out

All you need to know about the two Sangita Kalanidhis

The Madras Music Academy instituted the original Sangita Kalanidhi title in 1942 to honour excellence in Carnatic music. The winner is announced in the first half of the year and honoured in December during the annual music conference. The Sangita Kalanidhi title was conferred upon MS? Subbulakshmi in 1968.?

In 2004, shortly after her death, The Hindu instituted the ‘Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award’ to honour her legacy.? Since then,the publication has been conferring this award on the receipt of the Sangita Kalanidhi title ? However, Madras Music Academy has maintained that it has no role play in selecting the recipient of this cash prize.?

Earlier this year, the Music Academy announced that Krishna would receive the Sangita Kalanidhi honour this time around. The announcement meant that he would also receive the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award. This led to a huge controversy as Shrinivasan objected to the development and brought up Krishna’s past remarks about Subbulakshmi. He then filed a petition to prevent Krishna from receiving the honour.?

What exactly did Krishna say about MS Subbulakshmi?

In his petition, Shrinivasan cited two articles written by Krishna in which he made strong remarks about Subbulakshmi. In the first piece, which was published by The? Caravan, the vocalist tried to explore how MS Subbulakshmi’s artistry was shaped by gender expectations and societal norms. Shrinivasan also pointed out that in the article a young anonymous musician described MS Subbulakshmi as the “greatest hoax of the twentieth century”.

Similarly, the second article— which was carried by The Wire— claimed that Subbulaksmi “erased her past” to gain respect in the world of Carnatic music.?

Shrinivasan also brought up a 2017 talk show in which TM Krishna? claimed that Subbulakshmi found acceptance as by “becoming an ideal Brahmin woman”?Krishna responded to Shrinivasan’s comments by claiming that he had taken his articles out of context.?

Why did the court rule in Shrinivasan’s favour?

Coming back to the present, Subbulakshmi’s will played a role in helping the court arrive at its decision. In its judgment, the court referred to her will and pointed out that she did not want her name to be associated with? any memorials or statues. According to the one-judge bench, this implied that? instituting an award in her name is a violation of her wishes.?

In case you did not know, Krishna began his career as a performer at the age of 12 and soon emerged as a force to reckon with. According to most critics, his music is full of ‘raga bhava’.?

MS Subbulakshmi, on the other hand, rose to fame at the age of 13 with a performance that features bhajans. She also acted in films such as Sevsadanam and Meera.?

For more news and updates from the world of?OTT, and?celebrities?from?Bollywood?and?Hollywood, keep reading?Indiatimes Entertainment.