24 replies to this topic

[Mamallan]

i chanced upon "bharata natyam - what are you?" by avanthi meduri, Asian Theatre Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1. (Spring, 1988), pp. 1-22 while trolling JSTOR for something else.

meduri, a doctoral student at the time the article was published, covers a lot of ground - the history of transformation of sadhir into bharata natyam in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, the transformation of what was essentially a temple art practised by the devadasi patronized by both the temple and the court into a "respectable" art form on a secular stage, aided and abetted principally by the tamil brahmin establishment.  she talks of the devadasi's loss of her historical profession , the corruption of her status in society to earn a livelihood, and her anguish in fashioning a new identity.

she talks about the role of the male as a patron of the art in the historical and modern contexts and laments that the performer is yet to shake off the shackles of her dependence on the male patron (remember this was in 1988)

meduri talks about balasaraswati and rukmini devi, and the important roles they played in shaping twentieth century bharata natyam, their differing views of their art.

somewhere along the way, she tells her own personal story of trying to find her identity as a young, attractive performer in madras, the annuling of an arranged marriage and fleeing india to find herself.

it is a very interesting read. i plan to write some more later.

continuing...
this part really touched me, cracked me up and saddened me at the same time--

she talks about watching a performance of the kamba ramayanam in the music academy by padma subrahmanyam with the goal of understanding her own aesthetic experience as a member of the audience. she says she had to witness the performance four times. of her first time she writes:

Quote

i remember quite vividly, one particular moment in the play, the moment encompassing the lyric, "avanum nokkinan, avalum nokkinal" (he sees, she sees)..........i remember watching padma mime rama's motionless gaze, then sita's shy fluttering gaze in response. oh what a moment it was! time froze into mythical timelessness, into the root of my childhood life, gathered and defined in the ambiance of india and her mesmerizing gods.

the second time she was constantly disturbed by a wailing a child and of her third time,

Quote

i went back a third time and overheard two "upper-class" brahmin ladies exchanging cooking recipes for the fast-approaching religious festival. i looked at them quizzically and wondered about their presence in the theatre and the meaning of art

.

undaunted she went back a fourth time --

Quote

my favorite moment had arrived, "avanum nokkinan, avalum nokkinal". even as the musical cadence fell to its basic tone, i heard two teenage girls sitting next to me whispering. one said, "what is it, yah? do you understand it? hey, look at the ring on her finger". the second girl said, "shh, shh...look - that is how amitabh looks at rekha in the film silsila"............. i was quite literally shattered. i looked around me and realized that i was the outcast, the marked person, the initiated spectator who had neither value nor connection with the changing world

and then meduri asks, "what possible future can there be for an art form that a new generation cannot relate to except in the literal terms of the movies?"

this was as i said in 1988. i wonder what the status of bharatha natyam is in india and madras today. i am becoming somewhat aware of the pursuit of the art by NRI children here in the US, but don't know the situation in india.

Edited by Mamallan, 27 June 2007 - 06:48 AM.

[frangipani]

Mamallan, Meduri's article is indeed interesting. Do also check out Anne Marie Gaston's "From Temple to Theatre" (Manohar, 1997). Covers a lot of the ground that Meduri does, but with much more historical background. iirc, it spends a lot of time on the nationalists' efforts to 'reform' the devadasis, and the contribution of Arundale in particular in giving BN the form and direction it took in the 20th c.

[Wildflower]

Mamallan, on Jun 26 2007, 05:36 PM, said:

and then meduri asks, "what possible future can there be for an art form that a new generation cannot relate to except in the literal terms of the movies?"

this was as i said in 1988. i wonder what the status of bharatha natyam is in india and madras today. i am becoming somewhat aware of the pursuit of the art by NRI children here in the US, but don't know the situation in india.

Just piping in to say that a young person could have problems relating to Bharata Natyam for reasons that have nothing to do with the movies.  

I studied Bharata Natyam for 7 yrs, and quit when I was 14, mostly because I was just fed up with the women I got to play.  At the time, I thought all they did was look beautiful and pine (for the "lord"), and that wasn't my style at all.**  ManDodari was the only one who seemed like she had anything going on, but then of course she was stuck on Ravana.

That experience has given me a life long appreciation for the language of dance, but I doubt I'd ever take up classical dance again.

[FaustianBargain]

what is she doing listening to others when she should have been immersed in concentration?

at least, that is what my teacher would have told me....

Mamallan, on Jun 27 2007, 06:06 AM, said:

i chanced upon "bharata natyam - what are you?" by avanthi meduri, Asian Theatre Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1. (Spring, 1988), pp. 1-22 while trolling JSTOR for something else.

meduri, a doctoral student at the time the article was published, covers a lot of ground - the history of transformation of sadhir into bharata natyam in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, the transformation of what was essentially a temple art practised by the devadasi patronized by both the temple and the court into a "respectable" art form on a secular stage, aided and abetted principally by the tamil brahmin establishment.  she talks of the devadasi's loss of her historical profession , the corruption of her status in society to earn a livelihood, and her anguish in fashioning a new identity.

she talks about the role of the male as a patron of the art in the historical and modern contexts and laments that the performer is yet to shake off the shackles of her dependence on the male patron (remember this was in 1988)

meduri talks about balasaraswati and rukmini devi, and the important roles they played in shaping twentieth century bharata natyam, their differing views of their art.

somewhere along the way, she tells her own personal story of trying to find her identity as a young, attractive performer in madras, the annuling of an arranged marriage and fleeing india to find herself.

it is a very interesting read. i plan to write some more later.

continuing...
this part really touched me, cracked me up and saddened me at the same time--

she talks about watching a performance of the kamba ramayanam in the music academy by padma subrahmanyam with the goal of understanding her own aesthetic experience as a member of the audience. she says she had to witness the performance four times. of her first time she writes:

Quote

i remember quite vividly, one particular moment in the play, the moment encompassing the lyric, "avanum nokkinan, avalum nokkinal" (he sees, she sees)..........i remember watching padma mime rama's motionless gaze, then sita's shy fluttering gaze in response. oh what a moment it was! time froze into mythical timelessness, into the root of my childhood life, gathered and defined in the ambiance of india and her mesmerizing gods.

the second time she was constantly disturbed by a wailing a child and of her third time,

Quote

i went back a third time and overheard two "upper-class" brahmin ladies exchanging cooking recipes for the fast-approaching religious festival. i looked at them quizzically and wondered about their presence in the theatre and the meaning of art

.

undaunted she went back a fourth time --

Quote

my favorite moment had arrived, "avanum nokkinan, avalum nokkinal". even as the musical cadence fell to its basic tone, i heard two teenage girls sitting next to me whispering. one said, "what is it, yah? do you understand it? hey, look at the ring on her finger". the second girl said, "shh, shh...look - that is how amitabh looks at rekha in the film silsila"............. i was quite literally shattered. i looked around me and realized that i was the outcast, the marked person, the initiated spectator who had neither value nor connection with the changing world

and then meduri asks, "what possible future can there be for an art form that a new generation cannot relate to except in the literal terms of the movies?"

this was as i said in 1988. i wonder what the status of bharatha natyam is in india and madras today. i am becoming somewhat aware of the pursuit of the art by NRI children here in the US, but don't know the situation in india.

[Mamallan]

Wildflower, on Jun 27 2007, 07:55 AM, said:

Just piping in to say that a young person could have problems relating to Bharata Natyam for reasons that have nothing to do with the movies.  

I studied Bharata Natyam for 7 yrs, and quit when I was 14, mostly because I was just fed up with the women I got to play.  At the time, I thought all they did was look beautiful and pine (for the "lord"), and that wasn't my style at all.**  ManDodari was the only one who seemed like she had anything going on, but then of course she was stuck on Ravana.

yes i can see that, which brings up my next questions:

1) how elastic is the grammar of BN to explore contemporary secular themes and how willing is the current establishment to countenance such efforts?

2) is it even possible without destroying the basic aesthetic framework?

i have an opinion about this wrt carnatic music, but don't want to go off on a tangent this early in the thread.

fran: thanks for the reference. i looked it up and it looks interesting. will put it on my summer reading list.

FB: you can't be serious that it's possible to ignore your fellow audience completely.  my own appreciation especially of hindustani music in the very beginning stages was significantly enhanced by observing fellow audience members for cues on aesthetics, the giving of daads, etc.

Edited by Mamallan, 27 June 2007 - 05:22 PM.

[champa]

the dance - drama (opera?)  performance of shilapadikaram that i saw a couple of years ago was completely secular.


leela samson performed on a bare stage - no lamps, no nataraja - and evoked shiva getting ready to go for his wedding with his retinue - the ganas, the nandi - a scene from kalidasa's work, kumarasambhavam. it was magical - you could 'see' the procession, 'hear' the sound and dust, the bull, and all this with just one performer on stage.  you can view it as secular or whatever. but if one views this without contextualizing the mystery and the sheer drama of shiva-parvati grand love affair, one would only get a fraction of the richness of this portrayal.

Edited by champa, 27 June 2007 - 06:38 PM.

[Mamallan]

another thing i found very interesting in the article is meduri's psychoanalysis of the young indian male's reaction to the art and the performer. amongst other things she says,

Quote

he knows her power and recognizes that she is unlike her ancestor, who sublimated herself in philosophical energy to the medium. he is momentarily confused and even overawed, overawed by this unprecedented experience and confused by the new power and energy he perceives in the dancer, the woman who reveals herself as capable of being so many things at once.......................sometimes in silent resignation he calms his threatened  manhood, attributing all this to the changing sociological patterns of life.

i came of age in the era in which the article was published and i think she got it spot on. i am not sure a writer coming into the art from outside the culture could have nailed that one.

[champa]

Quote

he knows her power and recognizes that she is unlike her ancestor, who sublimated herself in philosophical energy to the medium.

how do we know this about the generation whose specialty was shringara? why deny their sexuality as if it is a new discovery of the modern girl?
acknowledging this would threaten his manhood?
something lost in translation or am i not reading this correctly?

[Mamallan]

champa, on Jun 27 2007, 09:35 PM, said:

how do we know this about the generation whose specialty was shringara? why deny their sexuality as if it is a new discovery of the modern girl?
acknowledging this would threaten his manhood?
something lost in translation or am i not reading this correctly?

i didn't intend to become meduri's spokesperson. she is a reader somewhere in the UK - you can read the whole article, look her up, and ask her yourself.

i was simply responding with a nod remembering my little corner of the world, at one specific point of time in my life as a teen/young tween male in madras.

wrt to the sexuality thing perhaps she was simply remembering balasaraswati who said something like, (and i am paraphrasing), "sringara in BN is never carnal sringara, never never" or something to that effect. in fact i think meduri herself makes a reference to the quote earlier in this article.

[shahpar]

Mamallan, on Jun 27 2007, 01:36 AM, said:

undaunted she went back a fourth time --

Quote

my favorite moment had arrived, "avanum nokkinan, avalum nokkinal". even as the musical cadence fell to its basic tone, i heard two teenage girls sitting next to me whispering. one said, "what is it, yah? do you understand it? hey, look at the ring on her finger". the second girl said, "shh, shh...look - that is how amitabh looks at rekha in the film silsila"............. i was quite literally shattered. i looked around me and realized that i was the outcast, the marked person, the initiated spectator who had neither value nor connection with the changing world

and then meduri asks, "what possible future can there be for an art form that a new generation cannot relate to except in the literal terms of the movies?"

hahahaha! boy am i glad meduri never comes to the cultural functions we bollywood loving common folk go to. condescending academic snobs like her make common people like me feel afraid of taking an interest in BN and trying to relate to it in the hopes of learning something. i dont get it why she is so worried about the popularity of BN among the non-experts, when its clear that in her eyes non-experts are sooo inferior as cultural agents.

next time maybe she should ask for a seat away from the common people who were unfortunate enough to want to come to see something they dont hold a degree in.
-shahpar

[Wildflower]

Mamallan, on Jun 27 2007, 06:51 AM, said:

another thing i found very interesting in the article is meduri's psychoanalysis of the young indian male's reaction to the art and the performer. amongst other things she says,

Quote

he knows her power and recognizes that she is unlike her ancestor, who sublimated herself in philosophical energy to the medium. he is momentarily confused and even overawed, overawed by this unprecedented experience and confused by the new power and energy he perceives in the dancer, the woman who reveals herself as capable of being so many things at once.......................sometimes in silent resignation he calms his threatened  manhood, attributing all this to the changing sociological patterns of life.

i came of age in the era in which the article was published and i think she got it spot on. i am not sure a writer coming into the art from outside the culture could have nailed that one.

I find this completely befuddling.  Threatened manhood??  I can't think of anything less threatening to manhood than classical BN.   What other performers are these men threatened by?  All actresses?  But then I have already stated my biases.

[champa]

Mamallan, on Jun 27 2007, 12:32 PM, said:

i didn't intend to become meduri's spokesperson. she is a reader somewhere in the UK - you can read the whole article, look her up, and ask her yourself.

i was simply responding with a nod remembering my little corner of the world, at one specific point of time in my life as a teen/young tween male in madras.

wrt to the sexuality thing perhaps she was simply remembering balasaraswati who said something like, (and i am paraphrasing), "sringara in BN is never carnal sringara, never never" or something to that effect. in fact i think meduri herself makes a reference to the quote earlier in this article.

well, you are quoting her and asserting that she got it spot on. then i think it is only natural to ask you to clarify.

as for bala, she was referring to only the dance as an art form, which in fact she viewed as sacred, and which it is, and therefore cannot be further purified, as it was already pure. this was in response to the attacks on devadasis at the time. dance is in fact part of traditional liturgy in shivan kovils.

this does not mean their personal lives were sublimated to some ideal as well. maybe some did but we don't know that. mostly they lived a complete human life, which is one of the reason they were called nitya sumanglis. the bhogam they plead for in dance  is both sacred and profane and they are both equally ligitimate.

[Mamallan]

champa, on Jun 27 2007, 11:39 PM, said:

well, you are quoting her and asserting that she got it spot on. then i think it is only natural to ask you to clarify.

i think i have and have nothing more to add. as far the rest of your post, i'll take your word for it.

[FaustianBargain]

Mamallan, on Jun 27 2007, 05:08 PM, said:

FB: you can't be serious that it's possible to ignore your fellow audience completely.  my own appreciation especially of hindustani music in the very beginning stages was significantly enhanced by observing fellow audience members for cues on aesthetics, the giving of daads, etc.

in jest, M.

[frangipani]

shahpar, on Jun 27 2007, 12:52 PM, said:

hahahaha! boy am i glad meduri never comes to the cultural functions we bollywood loving common folk go to. condescending academic snobs like her make common people like me feel afraid of taking an interest in BN and trying to relate to it in the hopes of learning something. i dont get it why she is so worried about the popularity of BN among the non-experts, when its clear that in her eyes non-experts are sooo inferior as cultural agents.

next time maybe she should ask for a seat away from the common people who were unfortunate enough to want to come to see something they dont hold a degree in.
-shahpar

Shahpar, I don't think recognizing that Bollywood has come to deeply influence the lenses through which many different cultural forms are understood by many age groups today is necessarily to be a condescending academic snob, is it? Was there something I missed in the rest of the article or was it simply the reference to Silsila in the quote that led you to conclude that she was seeing non-experts as inferior cultural agents? The article actually thinks quite seriously about how BN as an art form itself has to change according to changing audience tastes.

With some experience of the way so-called "Bollywood dance" has come to dominate the minds of young girls who come to learn BN at my sister's and other friends' classes in Pune at least, I can understand some of Meduri's anguish at the way it is so overwhelming in shaping attitudes to many different cultural forms, many of them much older than popular Indian cinema.

Plus, snobbery goes both ways - there are enough academics now (and others) who see Bollywood as the ultimate in popular culture, who do not wish at all to step outside its bounds (and not for fear of other snobs either) and wear its 'commonness' as some kind of proud badge, no?

[shahpar]

frangipani, on Jun 30 2007, 05:01 AM, said:

Shahpar, I don't think recognizing that Bollywood has come to deeply influence the lenses through which many different cultural forms are understood by many age groups today is necessarily to be a condescending academic snob, is it? Was there something I missed in the rest of the article or was it simply the reference to Silsila in the quote that led you to conclude that she was seeing non-experts as inferior cultural agents? The article actually thinks quite seriously about how BN as an art form itself has to change according to changing audience tastes.

With some experience of the way so-called "Bollywood dance" has come to dominate the minds of young girls who come to learn BN at my sister's and other friends' classes in Pune at least, I can understand some of Meduri's anguish at the way it is so overwhelming in shaping attitudes to many different cultural forms, many of them much older than popular Indian cinema.

Plus, snobbery goes both ways - there are enough academics now (and others) who see Bollywood as the ultimate in popular culture, who do not wish at all to step outside its bounds (and not for fear of other snobs either) and wear its 'commonness' as some kind of proud badge, no?

nah, i was referring to meduri's reaction to the teenage girls and the recipe swapping ladies. i can totally see myself say the same things that the girls were saying at a performance; they were trying to relate to an art form that they are not familiar with, they weren't being offensive or abusive (although talking during performances can be annoying for others). i find it hilarious that such everyday comments by everyday people leaves her "literally shattered" and wondering at the purpose of their (the common peoples') existence at the performance and the meaning of art. the quoted blurbs dont make me want to read the article. i'm sorry, but this does seem like academic snobbery of one kind. i'm glad that the BN dancers i've come across are much less fragile (as in dont feel shattered so quickly!) and are happy to answer questions about costumes, gestures, context etc.
-shahpar

[frangipani]

shahpar, on Jun 30 2007, 07:22 AM, said:

the quoted blurbs dont make me want to read the article.

Yes, I suspected as much from your earlier post that it wasn't the entire article that made you think she was being condescending and snobbish.

[seeker]

shahpar, on Jun 30 2007, 07:22 AM, said:

nah, i was referring to meduri's reaction to the teenage girls and the recipe swapping ladies. i can totally see myself say the same things that the girls were saying at a performance; they were trying to relate to an art form that they are not familiar with, they weren't being offensive or abusive (although talking during performances can be annoying for others). i find it hilarious that such everyday comments by everyday people leaves her "literally shattered" and wondering at the purpose of their (the common peoples') existence at the performance and the meaning of art. the quoted blurbs dont make me want to read the article. i'm sorry, but this does seem like academic snobbery of one kind. i'm glad that the BN dancers i've come across are much less fragile (as in dont feel shattered so quickly!) and are happy to answer questions about costumes, gestures, context etc.
-shahpar

I empathize with what Frangi is saying -  I watch a lot of Hindi cinema myself - but it frustrates me that the Bollywood aesthetic  appears taken over and homogenizing everything - music, dance, the way people dress. I can imagine how much more frustrated someone like Meduri would feel - I don't think she is snobbish  at all ( Please do read the article!).

Edited by seeker, 30 June 2007 - 06:55 PM.

[armagod]

seeker, on Jun 30 2007, 06:51 PM, said:

I empathize with what Frangi is saying -  I watch a lot of Hindi cinema myself - but it frustrates me that the Bollywood aesthetic  appears taken over and homogenizing everything - music, dance, the way people dress.

Does Bollywood provide a single aesthetic, or is it rather that audiences are cherry-picking from a variety of aesthetic cues (this dress from here, that move from there, that look from some place else)?

And while things may be different outside of TN, within the state surely any influence Bollywood has must be at best second-hand, with Tamil films having a far wider audience and viewership.

In the end, BN is hardly the first art where a section of the initiated feel frustration at their inability to express themselves to newer audiences facing other distractions. But in each case it's something of a failing on the performers' part: after all if they genuinely felt their passion and were so good at their art that they could genuinely express and convey the same sense of excitement, the flighty pleasures any latter-day pop culture provide would hardly be an issue.

In this sort of situation, as an aficionado, I frequently get frustrated that my own favourites get ignored for ferothier alternatives too.. but here I would blame the performers rather than critics or marketers or the purveyors of the alternatives or the audience.

[shahpar]

seeker, on Jun 30 2007, 02:21 PM, said:

I empathize with what Frangi is saying -  I watch a lot of Hindi cinema myself - but it frustrates me that the Bollywood aesthetic  appears taken over and homogenizing everything - music, dance, the way people dress. I can imagine how much more frustrated someone like Meduri would feel - I don't think she is snobbish  at all ( Please do read the article!).

i can empathise with what frangi and you are saying as well, but what i dont like is the snobbish way that the author dismisses non-experts in those two quotes.

-shahpar

[hibiscus]

I don't know Meduri or the girls or anything, and have only a viewer's understanding - if it can be called that - of Bharatanatyam, but I too would be very annoyed with people who attended a classical dance recital and proceeded to reduce it to the lowest common denominator of their knowledge**. This is part of something I observed today, that people don't seem to be willing to learn any more - they want to be fed bytes of ready-processed information. These girls really should not have been at the recital, if they didn't want to figure out what it meant (in non-film terms). I knew nothing - zero - when I saw my first classical dance performance too (it happened to be Kathak, subsequently other forms) and god knows I was obsessed with film at the time, but for some reason it didn't occur to me to measure everything in terms of Amitabh's accessories.

I haven't read the article but I wouldn't imagine a dance exponent/expert dismissing "non-experts". Still, there is a difference between an ignoramus who keeps mouth shut (presumably willing to learn) and an ignoramus who doesn't (and hence won't).


**That said I also get a little bugged with - and have learnt to switch off from - people who very obviously show off their "knowledge". The real gyaanis don't need to do that.

[shyama]

***

Edited by shyama, 01 July 2007 - 12:06 AM.

[Mamallan]

hibiscus, on Jun 30 2007, 11:02 PM, said:

**That said I also get a little bugged with - and have learnt to switch off from - people who very obviously show off their "knowledge". The real gyaanis don't need to do that.

hibi - i am not sure if you meant this in the context of the meduri article or in general. if the former, she was writing a scholarly journal article, presumably meant to be read by her peers in the field primarily, and as a matter of general interest secondarily. just though i'd chime in and provide a bit of context. amen to the rest of your post.

[hibiscus]

Mamallan, on Jul 1 2007, 02:54 AM, said:

hibiscus, on Jun 30 2007, 11:02 PM, said:

**That said I also get a little bugged with - and have learnt to switch off from - people who very obviously show off their "knowledge". The real gyaanis don't need to do that.

hibi - i am not sure if you meant this in the context of the meduri article or in general. if the former, she was writing a scholarly journal article, presumably meant to be read by her peers in the field primarily, and as a matter of general interest secondarily. just though i'd chime in and provide a bit of context. amen to the rest of your post.

No, I didn't mean the article; I meant audience members, specifically people who like showing off. (They're also often the people who applaud at the wrong moments. )

[paisa phek tamasha dekh]

if you all don't mind, i'm going to share my personal experience with the art. (for purposes of this thread, i am an indian-american.)

my sister has been doing bharatanatyam for years now, and because of that i have watched numerous performances and have slowly fallen in love with the art. i think having tamil brahmin roots and having constant exposure to it has helped me appreciate it that much more. my cousins also pursue the art, and i share many of the same sentiments as this author about bharatanatyam.

i think the rise of film in india has put a huge dent in the appreciation for bharatanatyam in general. this isn't necessarily a 'bad' thing, since there are legitimately good indian films out there.

i think in the U.S. for the majority of young practitioners of the art, it is merely another extra activity for them to put on their college applications and something to write about for their college admissions essays.

imo, if someone wants to learn the art form to its fullest with an arangetram and everything, they shouldn't just quit the minute they have their arangetram. an arangetram is NOT a high school graduation present, and it makes me angry/disappointed when people just quit the art after their arangetram.

i see nothing wrong with people using their experiences to be able to relate to the words and action taking place in a bharatanatyam setting. that is exactly what is SUPPOSED to happen with any art form. it is supposed to conjure something in the viewer, make them feel something, esp. with bharatanatyam.

one of my main caveats though, is that the roles for women are sorely limited, since the vast majority of the time they are merely 'longing' for the presence of a (male) lord.

however, i believe bharatanatyam can be used a medium to tell the stories of today, since in my opinion, it is an eternal art form and is a storytelling medium. there is a way to do it, but someone has to step up and do it, otherwise we are going to lose the art.

i never got the opportunity to learn bharatanatyam and i would LOVE to do so. i just feel like i need the time, money, & patience to commit to it fully and i can't do that right now.