Planning a 20-Minute Evening Programme: Rasa, Time Theory and Form Contrast
A candidate has a 20-minute practical at 7:30 pm. She has prepared four items: a vilambit khayal in Yaman, a madhya-laya tarana in Yaman, a Bhairavi bhajan, and a dhrupad in Bhairav. The marking scheme gives 8 marks for form variety, 6 for rasa continuity, 4 for time-theory suitability and 2 for a convincing close. Her current plan is Yaman khayal for 12 minutes, Bhairav dhrupad for 5 minutes and Bhairavi bhajan for 3 minutes. A friend advises her to open with the Bhairavi bhajan 'to settle her nerves', and another suggests replacing the tarana with a Khamaj thumri. The examiner has privately noted that the last two candidates both ended with a Bhairavi bhajan and that neither could explain why.
1. Critique the current 20-minute plan using time theory, rasa continuity and the marking scheme.
Read the worked answer
The plan has one strong element and two weak ones. Yaman at 7:30 pm is appropriate: it is an evening raga, and a vilambit khayal establishes a calm, expansive opening. The problem is the Bhairav dhrupad at night. Bhairav is traditionally a morning raga, with komal Re and Dha giving it a gambhir, austere character; placing it between an evening Yaman and a closing bhajan breaks the time arc and makes the programme sound like a list rather than a recital. The five minutes also give it too little room: dhrupad needs a stable alap and a clear pada to register as a form, and a rushed dhrupad will lose marks for both form and rasa.
The Bhairavi bhajan as a three-minute closer is defensible in practice - Bhairavi is traditionally used to conclude, and a bhajan can provide bhakti rasa - but the examiner's note shows the risk: a closing item must be justified, not merely conventional. If the candidate cannot say why Bhairavi follows Yaman, the close looks like a habit.
The marking scheme rewards contrast (8), continuity (6), time suitability (4) and close (2). The current plan gets contrast from khayal versus dhrupad, but loses time-suitability marks for Bhairav and continuity marks for the jump from Yaman to Bhairav to Bhairavi. The friend's suggestion to open with the bhajan would be worse: it would begin with the conclusion, flatten the rasa curve and leave the Yaman khayal with nowhere to go.
2. Propose a revised 20-minute plan with timings, and justify each item in terms of rasa and form.
Read the worked answer
A stronger plan keeps the evening frame and builds a single arc:
- Yaman vilambit khayal - 9 minutes. Establishes shringar/karuna, shows alap, bandish and a short vistar. The slow laya gives the examiner time to hear raga chhaya.
- Yaman madhya-laya tarana - 4 minutes. Provides rhythmic contrast within the same raga, so the listener stays in the same rasa while the form and laya change. A tarana also demonstrates bol-tana control and a clean tihai.
- Yaman fast khayal or a short tarana-based tihai - 2 minutes. Raises energy without changing raga; this is the 'lift' before the close.
- Bhairavi bhajan - 5 minutes. Functions as a deliberate conclusion, not a random third raga: Bhairavi's karuna/bhakti colour is traditionally used to close a recital, and the bhajan text adds a devotional frame. The candidate should announce the reason in one sentence, e.g. 'I close with Bhairavi as a traditional concluding raga.'
This plan scores better on every criterion: form variety (khayal, tarana, bhajan), rasa continuity (shringar to bhakti through a controlled close), time suitability (Yaman in the evening, Bhairavi as a closing convention), and a convincing close (the bhajan is prepared and justified). It also uses the candidate's strengths: she has already prepared the Yaman items, so the extra time goes into polish rather than into a new raga.
If the examiner insists on a dhrupad for form variety, the better move is to replace the Yaman tarana with a short dhrupad in an evening-appropriate raga, not to insert Bhairav at night. But with only 20 minutes, three items are enough; four would be a catalogue, not a recital.
3. The examiner asks, 'Why does almost every candidate end with Bhairavi?' Write the critical answer the candidate should give, including what a discerning listener actually rewards.
Read the worked answer
The honest answer is that Bhairavi's closing role is a convention with a history, not a rule of nature. Bhairavi is treated as a raga of farewell because its komal Re, Ga, Dha and Ni give it a karuna and bhakti colour that suits a valediction, and because it is flexible enough to absorb the phrases of other ragas in a final flourish. In concert practice, a short Bhairavi or bhajan signals 'the recital is over' and gives the audience a settled emotional close. That is a legitimate aesthetic function.
The critical point is that a convention becomes a cliché when it is used without function. If the performer has just built a strong evening arc, a Bhairavi close can crown it; if the performer has played three unrelated pieces, the Bhairavi is only a habit, and the listener hears the absence of planning. A discerning listener rewards intention, not the mere presence of Bhairavi: was the raga's vadi projected, was the laya transition controlled, did the close actually close something? The same listener will also notice if the Bhairavi is rushed, if the bhajan's text is unclear, or if the performer cannot name the rasa being invoked.
A good answer should also acknowledge the counter-case: a programme can end with a tihai in the main raga or with a different concluding raga, and that can be equally convincing if the arc is complete. The test is not 'which raga ends the programme' but 'does the ending follow from what preceded it'. For this candidate, the best answer is to keep Bhairavi but to say why - and to make the preceding Yaman items do the work that makes the close feel earned.