From: Todd Michel McComb <[log in to unmask]>

>Janos Gereben writes:
>
>>I had eyes (and ears, especially) only for U. Shrinivas, a musician
>>so unique that it doesn't matter whence he comes or what traditions
>>he melds.  He doesn't cross over, being an entity onto himself, not
>>a representative of a particular culture or genre.
>
>Do you have any basis for this claim, i.e.  that Srinivas is not drawing
>upon his background in Carnatic (South Indian classical) music in his
>work with Shakti?
>
>I think that you are merely trying to show enthusiasm above, but I also
>think that the implication -- intended or not -- is very much a slap in
>the face.
>
>Perhaps you would like to hear one of Srinivas' Carnatic recordings.

What slap?  In whose face?  Being an "entity onto himself" may be a
clumsy, but certainly not insulting statement.  Nowhere did I say that
he is not drawing on this, that or the other.  I have heard his Carnatic
recordings, I recognize that he is from where he is.  Carnatic is good.
Srinivas is better.  If I wrote than "Bernstein was more than a `Jewish
composer'," would you find something sinister in that?  Probably yes.
Oh well.

If you really want to find fault, how about the faulty (hurried) "so
unique" structure, instead of "unique in that..." Or how about my fudging
Srinivas' age or not identifying what the "U" stands for?  Since publishing
the review, I heard from his manager - who had absolutely no problem
with my praise for the man rising above a single identification - and
the word from him is Srinivas is 34, and the U is for Uppalapu.

Janos Gereben/SF
www.sfcv.org
[log in to unmask]