The Indian Broadcasting Service changed to the All India Radio only in 1936, which is when it came under the control of the Government of India. Consequently, if it was only seven years before independence that the harmonium was banned, we also need to note that it was only four years after the Government took over control on the broadcasting network.

Indeed, we have ourselves to blame for the present state of affairs, and I don’t think Shubha is ‘blaming’ the British or in any way pinning responsibility on them. The observation about the ban is a mere statement of fact, and needs to be treated as such. The British were receptive to the sentiments of the Indian elite when their interests were not challenged, and yet, they remained passive with regard to music and dance at a time when princely patronage to these arts was at an all-time low. The Anti-Nautch movement and British legislation related to prostitution adversely affected tawaifs, who played a crucial role in Indian music and dance.

I think we are all in agreement about the fact that events in history need to be seen as multi-layered.

I will check out the link you have sent.

http://tinyurl.com/5mcrvv

I confess the second part of my response is well overdue, and shall do something about it as soon as I can.

Compelling arguments have been advanced both for and against the harmonium as an accompanying instrument. Regardless of the respective merits of the respective stances, I feel banning it from AIR was a wholly inappropriate response, an attempt to mould culture according to personal proclivities instead of allowing it to grow organically. Something like making bonsais out of banyan trees. While the results might be considered “pretty” by some, they are partly artificial and undeniably stunted.

Where I would differ with Shubhaji is in her pinning responsibility on our erstwhile colonial overlords. I believe the Indian government machinery has been far more devastating in its indifference to the Indian ethos. And not just in music – a friend working on biodiversity once informed me that about fifty years of post-independence agricultural experiments had rendered extinct virtually all indigenous strains of cotton, something 150 years of colonial administration could not achieve.

It is a fact that in matters that did not concern their interests, the British administration had been very receptive to the sentiments of India’s indigenous elite (an example can be gleaned from JDM Derrett’s work on how Hindu personal laws were treated by the colonial administration and judiciary).

And so it is with culture. Since it did not directly affect them, they were content to leave it alone, by and large. And only when influential members of the Indian intelligentsia spoke against it did they see fit to ban it from AIR.

Let us also not forget that the ban was effected in 1940, only seven years before independence. After 1947 we independent Indians had every opportunity to revoke it. That we did not was due to the intransigence of people like Keskar (who I believed was essentially well-intentioned if deeply misguided and flawed in his perceptions). Like much of Nehru’s legacy, this too engendered a powerful and mindless bureaucratic stranglehold.

If all this (and the harmonium ban is only a small fragment of the story) has harmed India’s cultural development, maybe it’s time we acknowledged we have only ourselves to blame for it. And stoped blaming the Brits!

Furthermore, it is widely known that after independence, the ban was sustained largely at the initiative of I&B minister B V Keskar, who happened to be a student of Bhatkhande.