Friday, August 16, 2024

A CONCERT AT CARNEGIE HALL

Though I have visited New York City many times, I had not attended a concert at the famous Carnegie Hall. It was always on my list but remained an omission till a few days ago.

I first came to know about this great venue for musical concerts more than 60 years ago when on board Khukri, we had a vinyl long playing disc, "Belafonte at Carnegie Hall", which was a recording of Harry Belafonte's live performance in 1959 at the famous Hall.  Belafonte sang many of his hit songs but the one that I shall always remember was "Matilda." A comic number, Belafonte added to the fun by extending it to nearly 13 minutes repeating again and again the catchy and humorous line, "Matilda, she take me money and run Venezuela". He got every section of the audience singing that line exhorting them with calls like "Everybody", "Sing out the chorus", "Once again now," "Women over forty", "Sing a little louder", "Sing a little softer", etc. etc. From then on, I wanted to see the venue where he sang the song.

During my present visit, I looked at the events at Carnegie Hall and was happy to find that the National Youth Orchestra (NYO) of the USA was performing there and the program included two pieces I am familiar with, Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" and Rimsky-Korsakov's "Scheherazade." That set up the much overdue visit to this Mecca of concert halls.

Carnegie Hall has three auditoriums with the main one named Stern Hall after the famous violinist, Isaac Stern. It has a seating capacity of 2804. The moment Akhila and I entered the auditorium, we were charmed by the elegance of its imposing 6-storey design. For the audience, the seating begins on the ground level called 'Parquet' with 1021 seats. Above that, there are four tiers with the top one, Balcony, reachable by 137 steps. Not to worry, there are elevators so you don't have to climb! The first and second tiers consist of sixty-five boxes and the third tier is the Dress Circle. All four tiers are artistically shaped in an arc of around 300 degrees extending from one corner above the stage all the way back to the rear of the auditorium ending above the other end of the stage.

Soon, the members of the Orchestra made their appearance. The NYO consists of young musicians ages 16-19 from across the USA. It was a delight to see the youngsters trooping in with their instruments looking every bit seasoned and confident. There was at least one member of Indian origin, Rishabh Das, a 16-year old violinist, now a resident of Philadelphia. 

The conductor was an adult, Marin Alsop, well-known and experienced. The program began with Barber's Symphony No. 1, something I was not familiar but found very listenable. And then Gershwin's Rhapsody In Blue, for which they wheeled in the biggest piano I have ever seen, a Steinway. It was played by another old-hand, Jean-Yves Thibauder, reputed to be one of the world's finest pianists. The Rhapsody, composed exactly 100 years ago, is like a jazz piano concerto and is particularly popular in the USA because of its American background. No wonder the audience lapped up the gusty playing of Thibauder ably accompanied by the enthusiastic young Orchestra.

An interval and then came the piece I was eagerly looking forward to. "Scheherazade" is one of the early compositions I listened to when I first developed an ear for Western classical music. In the early 1960s, the naval authorities allowed us to buy LP discs through our canteen at discounted prices. My first order of three LPs included "Scheherazade. Of course its composer, Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, is very famous but maybe what further attracted me to his works like this one, "Capriccio Espagnol' and "Flight of the Bumblebee", was the fact that he had for a while served in the Russian Navy. His older brother by 22 years was a reputed naval officer and explorer and Nikolai admired him. That explains Rimsky-Korsakov's love for the ocean which is reflected in many of his works particularly in "Scheherazade".

This brings me to a humorous, though perhaps unfair, story Vinnie Mama told me. It was said that in the Russian Navy, Rimsky-Korsakov was reputed to be a poor naval officer but a brilliant musician while in the musical circles, he was known as a poor musician but a great naval officer!

Rimsky-Korsakov based his symphonic suite "Scheherazade" on "Tales From The Arabian Nights" the storyteller of which was the legendary queen who married Sultan Shahryar of Persia. Deceived by his first wife, the Sultan used to bed a new virgin every night and in the morning, chop her head off to prevent her from being unfaithful. When the Sultan picked Scheherazade, she decided to engage him with a story but withheld the ending. Upon the Sultan asking her to complete the story, she said it was late and she would complete it the next night. That night she would complete the story and begin a new one, again keeping the end for the next night. 1000 stories later on the 1001st night, Scheherazade told the Sultan she had no more stories to tell. But by then he had fallen in love with her, spared her life and peacefully drifted off to sleep.

The story is told in musical arrangements with the growling trombone and woodwinds portraying the stern Sultan and a solo violin and harp providing a sensual theme for Scheherazade. The Sultan's theme with the addition of percussion is later used near the end to represent the heaving seas and Sinbad the sailor's shipwreck. Similarly, the two recurring themes, deep and ponderous for the Sultan and light and lyrical for Scheherazade, are interwoven throughout the suite to tell the tales.

All that was superbly performed by the competent teenage artistes mature beyond their years. And in conclusion, unlike most classical pieces which end in a frenzied crescendo, here a solo violinist casts a spell with the soft, dreamy and sensuous Scheherazade theme which would haunt one well into the night.






Friday, August 2, 2024

CAPSIZING OF INS BRAHMAPUTRA

On 21 July, a fire broke out on the Indian Naval Ship, "Brahmaputra", a 3850-tonne missile frigate, while undergoing a refit in the Naval Dockyard at Mumbai. After a long fight, the fire was brought under control but the ship listed to its port side and finally toppled over to lie on its side against the jetty causing much damage to herself. The Navy is hopeful of righting the ship but it will take time, effort and money to salvage the ship and make it operational. 

A Board of Inquiry (BoI) headed by a Rear Admiral has been ordered to look into the incident, find out the causes, affix blame and recommend steps to avoid such incidents in the future. Simultaneously, the Chief of the Naval Staff has set up a special task force to review safety, security and standard operating procedures of Indian Navy.

The incident is a strange one; fires occur and are fought, brought under control quickly or get out of hand to cause much damage and destruction. However, in this case, the fire was doused but so much water was poured into the ship that it caused its listing and capsizing. The matter needs a thorough examination which the BoI would do. 

Subsequently, the Navy shall take corrective steps and punish the guilty.

But the media and armchair critics, with only a layman's knowledge of ships and the Navy and scant information of the incident, are already busy pre-judging the issue, bringing out supposed errors and incompetence, and laying blames on all and sundry from top to bottom of naval personnel. 

Some said Navy should not be losing ships in peacetime. Apart from the false premise of insinuating that too many accidents are happening, it is also like saying that an IAF aircraft should not crash in peacetime. Incidents can be due to age, malfunction or human error. The cause needs to be investigated and corrective and, if required, disciplinary action taken whether in war or in peace. 

The cost of salvaging and repairing the ship will be worked out. Loss of lives, however, is priceless and sadly the ship lost a sailor. We can console ourselves with that number but cannot replace the life lost.  

The present incident is serious and deserves close scrutiny and strict action. That is why we should wait for facts and authentic information to emerge rather than wildly passing judgement and pointing fingers which would only detract from the seriousness of the incident. There should be no fear of a cover-up as the matter is in public knowledge and cannot be hidden. Nor would the Navy wish to do that as it would be aware that sharing its findings and action taken would be in its own interest as the public would know that the Navy has nothing to hide and means business.

This brings to mind an incident which occurred 63 years ago when I had just been promoted to the rank of Lieutenant. I was posted on board the frigate "Gomati" and the ship was due for a refit. The naval dockyard had its hands full with other ships and Gomati had to await her turn lying alongside idly. One day in July 1961, our Captain happened to be in the Command Headquarters when a distress message was received from a merchant vessel, "Maharashmi". For some reason which I can't recall, the ship had lost power and was lying helpless at anchor off Port Albert Victor in Gujarat, a few hours of sailing from Bombay.

Eager to be of use rather than inactive alongside, the Captain volunteered to sail to tow Maharashmi back to Bombay. He returned to Gomati a very happy man and ordered the ship to get ready to sail. 

We reached Port Albert Victor in the evening, located Maharashmi, communicated to her that we would take her in tow early morning, and anchored nearby. Our XO (second-in-command) went on the usual night rounds and discovered that there was a hole in the shipside causing water to leak in one of the aft magazines (ammunition compartment). Immediate action was taken to try and seal the leak and pump out water which, however, continued to leak in. After much effort and deliberation, it was decided that we should head back to Bombay independently before the situation worsened. We informed Maharashmi of our decision and set sail to Bombay.

Water continued to pour in faster than we could pump out and the stern of the ship kept going deeper into the sea. Along with stormy monsoon weather and rough seas, this affected the ship's speed which kept slowing down. The ship's staff worked constantly to keep patching up some new leaks and pumping out water. We managed to reach Bombay safely late into the next night with the seawater almost reaching our quarterdeck. We were immediately docked, the water pumped out and the leaks patched up. 

What if Gomati had sunk? ( There would have been casualties- I know there was at least one non-swimmer on board!) Would the ship's staff have been blamed for not knowing what to do in case of a leak? Should the Captain have foreseen that perhaps the ship had a weak hull and would develop leaks and not volunteered to take on the noble task of going to the aid of a stricken ship? Should the Headquarters have foreseen this and not allowed the ship to sail? 

Incidentally, it was finally decided that due to the heavy schedule of Naval Dockyard, Bombay, Gomati would undergo the refit at Garden Reach, Calcutta. After detailed examination, the ship was declared fit and we sailed from Bombay all the way to Calcutta stopping at Cochin, going around Sri Lanka and the choppy Gulf of Mannar on to Madras, and finally reaching our destination without any incident.

P.S. Admiral Chand would recall the Maharashmi incident; as a Lieutenant, he was the Navigating Officer (NO) on Gomati. 

I was the NO on the Bombay-Calcutta trip.