Skip to main content

Should we mourn the demise of folk music?

I am a city kid. Born, brought up in a city. Nowadays I get to hear a lot of positives of rapid urbanization of our lands. New, fancy buildings, cosmopolitan cultures, and heaps of aspirations.

But one thing that I feel is being let down is our music. And the style and uniqueness of our music. In earlier times, every region had it's own dialects and hence its own unique music. You had people holding whatever they could gather, and prepare songs and all, almost spontaneously. Someone would get a dholak,another one would get hold of a harmonium and just like that, a band would be formed. We now call it, folk music. And it is almost dead.

Now we have guitars in over priced coffee shops in large cities, and someone waiting to become center of attention would be singing an already popular song. All this, with little annoyance to the other clients of the same joint. Since we already have forgotten our own cultures and our own languages running so fast in this mega affair called life, our songs and their quality is now almost extinct.

True, we should praise, appreciate and enjoy music of the universe.
But does that also mean that we should do that at the cost of our own very music?
Richness of which, has been derived from our own soil and water?

Comments

Also read

Does India need communal parties?

I think, it was Tan's post on this blog itself, Republic Day Event, where this question was raised. My answer. YES. we need communal parties even in Independent, Secular India. Now let me take you, back to events before 1947. When India was a colony of the British Empire. The congress party, in its attempt to gain momentum for the independence movement, heavily used Hinduism, an example of which is the famous Ganesh Utsav held in Mumbai every year. Who complains? No one. But at that time, due to various policies of the congress, Muslims started feeling alienated. Jinnah, in these times, got stubborn over the need of Pakistan and he did find a lot of supporters. Congress, up till late 1940's never got bothered by it. And why should we? Who complains? No one. But there were repercussions. The way people were butchered and slaughtered during that brief time when India got partitioned, was even worse than a civil war scenario. All in the name of religion. And there indeed was cr...

Debate : Do the ends justify the means...

Note : Give it all a fair thought before you jot down... Flaming and religion-bashing will not be tolerated. Your participation is gladly appreciated. I dunno if you folks remember this incident; a couple of yrs back, the UPSC exam had a question where the emainee had to assert his views on *revolutionary terrorism* initiated by Bhagat Singh. As is typical of the government, hue and cry was not far behind... Anyway, let us look at some facts -   Bhagat Singh was an atheist, considered to be one of the earliest Marxist in India and in line with hi thinking, he renamed the Hindustan Republican Party and called it the Hindustan Socialist Revolutionary Party. Bhagat Finally, awaiting his own execution for the murder of Saunders, Bhagat Singh at the young age of 24 studied Marxism thoroughly and wrote a profound pamphlet “Why I am an Atheist.” which is an ideological statement in itself. The circumstances of his death and execution are worth recounting. Although, Bhagat Singh had a...

Inside Congress by Ronald Kessler: power, perks, and peril on Capitol Hill

This critical review of Inside Congress by Ronald Kessler reveals the shocking truth behind Capitol Hill's glitzy surface. Featuring real quotes, scandals, and systemic corruption, this article dissects the book’s revelations with historical, social, and political context. Get ready to question everything you thought you knew about America’s lawmakers. What is ‘Inside Congress’ about? Reading Inside Congress felt like sneaking into a backstage political theatre—only to realise that the actors were drunk, corrupt, and having affairs with the ushers. Ronald Kessler doesn’t just pull the curtain back on Congress—he rips it off, throws it on the floor, and sets it on fire. At its core, the book is a catalogue of misconduct, but it’s more than that. It’s a raw, unnerving look at a system so infected by self-interest and sleaze that the word “democracy” starts to feel like a punchline. The book spans sexual escapades, financial corruption, and outright betrayal of public trust. But th...