Melattur - harinie jeevitha

[smala]

Just came across this style - quite different from the usual - and then found out that this 15? year old has a slew of awards already (webpage) - the poses are striking, her vigor and supple dance is quite something. There seems be some sort of yoga involved.

I found a brief write-up on wiki on Melattur baani/style which mentions that is the devadasi style,as performed in temples for the deities [not the rajanarthaki style followed by others - pandanallur? vazhuvur? thanjavur? kalakshetra? bharatnritya? ]

Also checked the DeviNrithyalaya website, current guru Sheela Unnikrishnan.


Any links/more info on this unique Melattur style would be welcome, especially on the yogic poses.

[ganeshpv]

Pandanallur, Tanjavur, or vazhuvoor styles were also followed by Devadasis. TQ are said to trained both Devadasis in Tanjavoor temple and Raja Narthakis in Serfoji II's court.

[kannagi99]

My understanding is that the Melattur bani is from the Melattur area in Tanjavur district. Just like other banis that are from villages/towns such as Tanjavur, Vazhuvoor and Pandanallur. I don't think we have any actual historical evidence that one bani is more "authentic" than the other. I believe the Kalakshetra style which originated in the 1930s is actually a modified version of the Pandanallur bani. Bharatanrityam is solely Padma Subramaniam's vision and technically only dates back to the 1960s or 1970s. As to what the Devadasis actually danced, it depended on the temple to which they were attached. I don't think it's accurate to say that the Melattur bani is what Devadasis danced and the other banis were Rajanarthaki based. Each bani had its own mix of Devadasis/Rajanarthakis. It's silly for a dance school to claim that their bani is the original authentic Bharatanatyam. As much as I recognize what a talented dancer Harinie is, I really cannot wrap my head around the notion that that's how Devadasis really danced. The few videos and photographs that I have seen of Devadasis from the early part of the last century bring to mind such a different image for me. Thoughts???

[cacm]

Pandanallur was considered at least in the fifties&sixties as VERY authentic& classical rooted in tradition; Vazhuvoor WAS THOUGHT TO BE A DILUTED VERSION catering to demands of movies etc. ......For whatever its worth! ...VKV

[rshankar]

Kannagi, well said. I think it is very hard to validate claims such as these. That being said, I wonder if the mELattUr style is influenced by bhAgavata mELa that originated in the same place. It is way more sinuous than the other style, with pronounced hip and waist movements, like oDissI.
Talking about bharatanrityam, Dr. PS calls her style to be consistent with the original mAryam, and the others, bnATyam, kathak, kathakaLi as neo classical desi styles.

[smala]

Some digging throws more light on why this style is unique :- [natyanjali, australia]

[ this answers in the affirmative to the question of bhagavatamela tradition and influence]


MELATTUR STYLE

Between 1561-1614, Achyutappa Nayaka, a ruler of Thanjavur belonging to the Nayak dynasty, granted a village Achyutapuram (named after him), now called Melattur, to 501 refugee families of Kuchipudi dancers who migrated to Tamilnadu after the fall of the Vijaynagar Empire. Melattur is a small village 20 km from Thanjavur in Southern Tamilnadu, India.

Considered an offshoot of the Kuchipudi dance tradition, Bhagavatamela, a tradition temple dance of hereditary male dancers, is based mostly on plays written in Telugu by Melattur Venkatrama Sastry (1743-1809 A.D), a senior contemporary of Thyagaraja, the great saint, singer and composer of South India. He authored 12 dance dramas of which 6 are in vogue today, the most famous being Prahlada Charitamu.

The dancers and other cast members were originally recruited from the local Brahmin community. The mela's popularity waxed and waned till it stopped completely in 1937. It was then revived by V Ganesa Iyer. He presented Markandeya in 1938 in the local Ganesha temple and followed it with Usha Parinayam the following year. In 1940 they shifted the traditional venue to the Varadaraja Perumal temple.

The Bhagavatamela natakams of Melattur Venkatarama Sastry are performed annually, facing the sanctum of Lord Varadaraja, the presiding deity of Melattur village as a part of the Sri Narasimha Jayanti Vasantotsavam.

A classical Bharatanatyam performance is an indispensable part of Bhagavatamela. However, a unique style of Bharatanatyam is practised by the Melattur dancers. This Bharatanatyam style was developed largely out of the devadasi traditions and MelatturBhagavata Mela by Mangudi Dorairaja Iyer (1900 – 1980).

He re-established the Suddha Nrittam (intricate tapping footwork that explores different time measures in different tempos), Bhattasa Natyam and Perani Natyam (dance on the clay pot). Mangudi Dorairaja Iyer became interested in Shuddha Nrittam after watching a performance by devadasi of Cheyyur Sengalvarayar temple, who performed it along with other 71 types of items (e.g. Kavita, Nritta, Vadya, Sangeeta and others).

The distinctive characteristics of the Melattur style of Bharatnatyam are:

Themes

Unlike other Bharatanatyam gurus, Dorairaja Iyer avoided the items which glorified the poet's human patrons, as performing such items would be inconsistent with his adherence to spiritual practices of Srividya Upasana. It is only the deities or the great rishis who were deeped worthy of such glorification. Thus, the repertoire of a Melattur style dancer consists mostly of the ancient items performed in the temples.

Footwork

The Melattur style discourages stamping the feet hard against the floor. Instead, the dancer is expected to use the salangai (ankle bells) in a more sophisticated manner that produces a richer variety of sounds and highlights the rhythm.

Another distinctive feature is the presence of pancha nadais and extensive use of gati bhedas. For instance in varnam there would be gati bhedam in every jati. There is a special emphasis on crisp adavus, fluid variations or patterned korvais.

Abhinaya

Due to the Melattur Bhagavatamela influence, the style makes extensive use of the dramatic elements, i.e. characterisation, which requires highly expressive and intricate abhinaya. Unlike other Bharatanatyam styles, the facial expressions in of the Melattur style dancer are not rigidly defined, are not theatrical or understated, which requires a high degree of introspection and individual improvisation. Due to the devadasi influence, there is an emphasis on sringara rasa, rather than on a neutral bhakti.

The nritta abhinaya is different from most other styles in the sense that each body movement is to be reflected in a different facial expression in a spontaneous manner.

Other distinctive features

* The dance movements are supposed to be performed with a larger amplitude on a wide scale of tempos, making it physically the most demanding style of Bharatanatyam.
* The application of loka dharmi and natya dharmi is different from other Bharatanatyam styles.
* The Melattur style dancers wear a special protective cotton belt around their waist.

Some of the text in this article is taken from Wikipedia under Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License.

Bharatanatyam Styles

Over the past 150 years, various distinct styles of Bharatanatyam have emerged. These styles are specific to various regions of South India. The most important of these styles are:

* Melattur
* Pandanainallur
* Vazhuvoor
* Thanjavur
* Kalakshetra
* Mysore
* Kanchipuram

Each of these styles have unique aesthetic character and nuances.

[smala]

Main Differences in the Styles in vogue today.....

Styles of Bharatanatyam

Bharata-natyam styles that are over 150 years old are not many. The best-known among these are:

* Melattur
* Pandanallur
* Vazhuvoor (or Vizhuvur)
* Thanjavoor (or Tanjore)
* Mysore
* Kanchipooram

The distinctive characteristics of the Melattur style of Bharatnatyam are:

* feet are not stamped hard against the floor
* a complex variety of sounds are produced by anklets
* the items that were dedicated to medieval kings or patrons are not performed
* natural (spontaneous) and highly expressive abhinaya
* wide amplitude of movements
* emphasis on sringara bhakti
* emphasis on crisp adavus, accuracy of jathis / gathis,
* fluid variations of patterned korvais
* dramatic elements (characterisation) Bharata natyam
bharatanatyam
* original methods of application of principles of "loka dharmi" and "natya dharmi"

The Pandanallur style of Bharata-natyam stresses:

* its deep sitting positions
* its lasya (feminine dance style) of padams is rather slow and difficult to perform
* it is performed on three levels: in deep sitting positions, on the ground, in standing positions and while moving or jumping.

The Vazhuvoor style of Bharata natyam includes:

* wide range of dancing pace
* static postures are inserted, most often in the tillana, to break the monotony and to add the variety of rhythms
* softer facial abhinaya
* abhinaya is subtle with more natyadharmi (spontaneous expressions), so the presentation is not "overdone"
* the adavu's flow smoothly, with rare abrupt movements
* extremely elaborate movements
* deep sitting positions
* variety of positions on the floor
* rich sringar elements
* lasya dominates tandava
* the dancer's body from the waist up is slightly bent forward
* leaps are introduced into every jati
* the jati's have more korvais (intervals), which creates a suspense effect
* performance begins with a Thodaya mangalam in honour of Lord Gnana Sabesar of Vazhuvoor
* the dancer starts the performance while entering the stage from the wings

The modern Kalakshetra style is a simplified form based on Pandanallur and, to some extent, Thanjavoor styles. The Balasaraswati style, although derived from the authentic devadasi traditions, was still a relatively recent introduction. Note that, most recently, Dr.Padma Subramaniam's school, claiming to be the one which is the most faithfully reflects the techniques described in Natya Shastra, is called Bharatanrityam .

[kuchipudivaibhavam]

Just to add on to the general observations here:

1) It seems fluidity in the dance forms varies in sync with geography in India. While Melattur style of Cathir is more fluid than say Pandanallur style, Kuchipudi becomes even more fluid in Andhra Pradesh, finally culminating in the very fluid sampradaya of Odissi. Likewise for the Natyarambha position with respect to the spread of hands. As we go north, the fluidity in the dance form increases.

Even within Andhra pradesh, as Padma Bhushan and scholar Dr. Swapnasundari says, the Vilasini style of dancing (courtesan dancing) is more rigid down south in royal samsthanams of Vekatagiri, Chittoor etc. gradually becoming fluid as we go north culminating a very fluid style of Vilasini Natyam as observed in the Vizianagaram and Bobbili Samsthanams.

2) Melattur Bhagavata Mela and Kuchipudi share some undeniable similarities. So extending the analogy from how Kalavantulu (Andhra courtesans) and Kuchipudi Bhagavathulu learned from each other in a give and take which culminated in the new dance drama form of Veedhi Bhagavatham (performed by Devadasis on Bhakti themes for temple festivals), likewise Cathir and Melattur Bhagavata Mela could have possibly interacted to produce a new baani i.e. Melattur Cathir.

[madhan]

Are tanjore and pandanallur the same? Some say "tanjore/pandanallur" while a few others say they are different..! how are they different from each other?

[smala]

Continuing on my quest to understand this Melattur style better....I share below some highlights on the bhagaw(v)ata mela tradition, the basis for the evolution of the Melattur baani, as available online.

.....

"The Bhagavata Mela tradition, is believed to be in existence from the 11th Century. The unique features of Melattur Bhagavata Mela natakams are:


It is a pious art.

This day, it is the only surviving link in Tamil Nadu that connects us with our ancient Sanskrit theatre.

It came into being as result of Bhakti movement about 450 years ago. The tradition is still preserved in its pristine purity as a true temple art, in the worship Lord Vishnu.
The natakams, dedicated to Lord Sri Vishnu, are performed annually with religious fervour in the sannidhi of Sri Varadaraja Perumal temple at Melattur on the occasion of Nrusimha Jayanti, as has been the practice for centuries.

The sentiments of the natakams are expressed in classical music of high-class carnatic tradition and, the dance and abhinaya in Bharata Natya technique and, occasionally with poetic speeches, dialogues and appropriate dramatic action too. Abhinaya are more elaborate and incisive. Such a remarkable synchronisation of music, speech, dance and abhinaya produces a high aesthetic appeal leading to rasa realisation according to the conception of natya in the ancient treatises.

The natakams are taken seriously and not as a pleasant pass-time. No libertinism or low sensuousness is allowed in the name of "art for art's sake." At the same time, in the name of religious devotion no allowance is made for a slip-shod art, because what art is exhibited as devotional offering had to be of high aesthetic value without which no God of the Hindu Pantheon would be pleased. Hence high technique and good mastery thereof have been made a "sine-quo-non" in the exposition of this temple-art. Thus this art is a unique blend of Bhakti, music, dance and drama.

The utsav is a balance between true/pure devotion and aesthetic display of traditional art.

Visit to Melattur to witness the Bhagavata Mela natakams in the sannidhi of Lord Sri Varadaraja Perumal is considered a pilgrimage.

Only male artists portray the female roles and

All the dance-actors and the musicians are amateurs engaged in different professions in different parts of India including abroad who assemble at Melattur at their expense. Trained systematically in the art, these amateurs raise the level of their performance to that comparable with any professional troupe."

......

http://bhagavatamela.org/intro.html

[cacm]

STRICTLY on a technical basis I wish some one with more EXPERTISE would address the question of how only MALE dancers can adequately represent the Nayaka-Nayaki aspects I feel Women dancers can do better in my opinion. I think this has IMPLICATIONS for the different schools & approaches to Dance being discussed here......VKV

[ksl]

I would like to share my (turns out more than) two cents:

I encourage digging into Melattur style but i highly discourage reading and blindly believing anything that is on Sri Devi nrithyalaya's webpage or wiki for the following reasons. Also, I am going to address SDN style as SDN style and not Melattur style of Bharatanatyam or what they would like me to believe, authentic bharatanatyam.


1. No other Melattur dancer/dance school, not even Revathi Ramachandran who is a DIRECT disciple of Mangudi Dorairaja Iyer, unlike (SDN's director who is trained in both kuchipudi and BHaratanatyam, Kuchipudi more i think) dance like SDN dancers do. Since this link is titled melattur-harinie jeevitha, i would enourage everyone to watch a statistically significant number of melattur bharatanatyam dancers before they make any conclusions.

2. The wikipedia, the internet is flooded with SDN's propaganda about what is 'real' bharatanatyam, what is not, what is melattur style all about and what is difference between difference baanis. None of this is believable given that its their propaganda. SP, everything u posted is their writing. Their quoting is highly biased to make it look like they are the ones reviving the true art form. In reality, it's way too different from anything anybody dances in Bhagavata mela like. I suggest you talk to people who have been to Bhagavata Mela, who have talked to dancers in bhagavata mela and who have learnt directly under mangudi Iyer or practice melattur style.

3. Some examples of why i am very apprehensive about everything and anything they say:
1.SDN style is very fluid.
Given the fact that traditionally it was performed by males, i have no idea why kuchipudi and SDN's style of authentic Bharatanatyam is so 'fluid'. None of the other Melattur practitioners sway their hips or are always on their toes with sinusnoidal torso movements like kuchipudi dancers.

@ KuchipudiVaibhavam: Odissi is not more fluid than Kuchipudi. Please watch Sujatha Mohapatras videos. She shows more control than any Kuchipudi dancer. Kuchipudi is by nature fleet footed and mercurial. I have no idea how a male-only art became so languid. I am sure original kuchipudi dance-dramas which is what kuchipudi is, a drama style with vachikabhinaya (dilogues) and NOT a dance style as is portrayed recently had no such element. Kuchipudi in its original form is more close to yakshaganam in format. It is not a traditional DANCE form but dance was a tool for DRAMA and has very recent origins pertaining to Bhakti movement which is only 700-300 years old.

2. Dorairaja Iyer avoided the items which glorified the poet's human patrons
He wasnt the only one who did it. Every style except the Tanjore style and Mysore style didnt get influenced by compositions on Kings because there were no capitals and courts. There were a lot of nattuvanars who were orthodox enough to not compose on Kings. Every sadir branch has a devadasi lineage and none of those devadasis danced about kings in temples. There were Rajadasis but there dancing is no way inferior to present day SDN dancers only because their gurus composed one or two items on the patron who was either patronising them/or their temple. Their is nothing inherently great about SDN that is not great about a ton of other styles in terms of choice of compositions. Its just a big marketing gimmick. Only a handful people dance to those compositions on patrons even today. Tanjore quartret are the only famous nattuvanars whose compositions on such patrons still live to see the light of the stage.

3. Another distinctive feature is the presence of pancha nadais and extensive use of gati bhedas. For instance in varnam there would be gati bhedam in every jati. There is a special emphasis on crisp adavus, fluid variations or patterned korvais.

its a load of paperweight. Every nattuvanar worth his salt introduces gathi bhedas and pancha nadais. This has no basis whatsoever to be SDN specific. In fact, i can aruge otherwise that their nritta portions are very superficial and more close to languid-vazhuvoor/movie/kuchipudi dancing in the name of including Karanas. Mangudi Dorai Iyer did not use poses in the name of karanas. He was a sadir teacher and started with adavus like every other master does. You cannot just use his name wherever u want and pass a bunch of other stuff as authentic. In fact looking at SDN's same reused/unimaginative jathis with different varnams i am tending to think the choreographer is the dance teacher. She is by no means a nattuvanar. She is just another dance teacher like thousand others. Go watch Mangudi Iyer's, Kittappa Pillai's, Dandayuda Pani Pillai's, Adyar lakshman's and other nattuvanars jathis. Unless u are trained like these men in vocal music, conducting, and mridangam, there is no possible way on planet earth that you dish out better nritta than them.

4.The dance movements are supposed to be performed with a larger amplitude on a wide scale of tempos, making it physically the most demanding style of Bharatanatyam.
* The application of loka dharmi and natya dharmi is different from other Bharatanatyam styles.
* The Melattur style dancers wear a special protective cotton belt around their waist.

Sudharani raghupatis tanjore style dancers also wear protective belt.
The loka dharmi statement is too vague to draw a comment from me.
large amplitude, wide scale tempos...bottom line...not specific to you SDN! Please watch Kittappa Pillais choreography!!!

5.Unlike other Bharatanatyam styles, the facial expressions in of the Melattur style dancer are not rigidly defined, are not theatrical or understated, which requires a high degree of introspection and individual improvisation. Due to the devadasi influence, there is an emphasis on sringara rasa, rather than on a neutral bhakti.

Not theatrical or understated: Theres a third kind???
facial expressions are not rigidly defined: thats like the definition of abhinaya, that its not rigidly defined and left upto the dancer's mind to interpret and perform.
emphasis on sringara rather than bhakti: werent u born out of the bhakti movement? How can u call it neutral?? Again, u are not the only ones who lay a emphasis on sringara. Every baani has a great emphasis on sringara and a equally important emphasis on bhakti. Infact, they are not different as one leads to another as quoted in the Bhagavata mela website. There is no bhakti that doesnt lead to adoration and desire to unite with the Lord and there is no sringara that doesnt end in devotion. They ahve a different name for those things.
Logically speaking if u have greater influence on sringara, that would be the rajadasi lineage. Devadasi lineage would lead to an equal weightage, if not greater on sringara and bhakti.


6. Thus, the repertoire of a Melattur style dancer consists mostly of the ancient items performed in the temples.

I am sorry but Madurai Muralidaran's tamil compositions being danced to extensively as varnam items and overused padams in SDN's infinite number of videos that hog the internet are hardly ancient items. Am i the only one who notices that they predominantly dance only tamil items which are not more than 60 years old, especially varnams and padams and shabdams which is all there is to nritya. It was in the recent HJ concert that i saw 2 sanskrit items, sringara lahiri and one on Sadhanchitha. The latter probably cos they wanted to cash in more on that girl who can bend like nobody's business and were running out of shiva items which is the only place they use so called 'natya yoga' and karanas. Please leave sadir alone and do some orignial research like Padma Subramaniam and come up with a 'new dance style based more on Natyashastra than sadir' and stop calling it bharatanatyam. Bharatanatyam claims no responsibilty to follow natyashastra to word. Adavus dont even find a mention in NS. NS is a guide to DRAMATURGY. All Indian classical dances ARE BASED ON NATYASHASTRA. Still every one looks very different. Because everybody has their own interpretation of Natyashastra. Something that was born out of bhakti movement 400 years ago cannot claim to be more true to Natyashastra which is probably 1000-5000 years old.Please back up your rhetoric with some research on karanas and how they are not some few acrobatic poses but 108 in number out of which only 18-20 are really acrobatic out of which you perform conveniently 3-4 which serve as a cheap, annoying and overused publicity stunt.


7. The Melattur style discourages stamping the feet hard against the floor. Instead, the dancer is expected to use the salangai (ankle bells) in a more sophisticated manner that produces a richer variety of sounds and highlights the rhythm.


Vazhuvoor discourages that too. there is nothing more sophisticated about doing one or the other. Infact, read this article
http://www.narthaki.com/info/articles/art279.html

to see how not hitting flat on the floor and overusing poses, jumps, walks and other heel-toe based movements are so not classical and more characteristic of folk, kuchipudi and western. We are the only ones who use a unique footwork, as in Bharatanatyam and Odissi. When u just jump around the stage when a trikala jathi is being recited, u are not doing sathir aka bharatanatyam. Please refer back to what Mangudi Iyer taught his first class on. It was definitely a tattadavu.


And stop hogging the internet. You are not the only one who's authentic and with your propaganda i dont even want to believe u are authentic even if you truly are.


Harinie is a very graceful dancer like so many others. She is jsut more visible than others because of all the marketing by SDN. @SP: A lot of talented Chennai dancers have that many awards. I dont want to take any credit away from harinie whom i enjoy to watch but only in the context of a pesudo-bharatanatyam-pesudo-kuchipudi context. Just like i watch Alarmel valli in a pesudo-bharatanatyam-pesudo-something else context. But at least Alarmel vallis choreographies are authentic and only her execution defies definition. SDN choreographies are unique and defy any definition of bharatanatyam or melattur style for me. Harinies execution is noteworthy though. She is a bright kid definitely worth watching. it's just the propaganda i am highly allergic to.

Please make up your own mind with more exposure in reading and watching.

[priyalasya]

Nice to read the observations. Fluidity may not be the right word here!
Starting from Melattur as the key initiated discussion- the points are interesting.

[kuchipudivaibhavam]

@ KuchipudiVaibhavam: Odissi is not more fluid than Kuchipudi. Please watch Sujatha Mohapatras videos. She shows more control than any Kuchipudi dancer. Kuchipudi is by nature fleet footed and mercurial. I have no idea how a male-only art became so languid. I am sure original kuchipudi dance-dramas which is what kuchipudi is, a drama style with vachikabhinaya (dilogues) and NOT a dance style as is portrayed recently had no such element. Kuchipudi in its original form is more close to yakshaganam in format. It is not a traditional DANCE form but dance was a tool for DRAMA and has very recent origins pertaining to Bhakti movement which is only 700-300 years old.

@KSL

First of all, let us clarify what we mean by fluidity.

Fluidity does not mean languidly throwing around arms disregarding laya. Fluidity means the flow in the motion of the dance, i.e. the scale of sharpness of movements executed. In Cathir as it is danced today, the movements are noticeably sharper than in the other dance forms; with clear straight lines, no bending of torso, little or no hip movements. Kuchipudi is more rounded, with more hip movements, torso bends, bobbings and the motions are more curved in nature. Odissi incorporates even lesser sharpness in movements, extensive hip movements, and is said to be the very embodiment of lasya. "Fluidity" and "Control" are not opposites. Fluidity (what we termed it as) is the nature or the vritti of the dance form (Arabhati, Kaisiki etc.). Fluidity does not mean a loss of laya gnana.

Secondly basing your arguments on a single dancer's videos is as wrong as you proclaimed it to be (when you said statistically representative samples should be used).

You seem to also harbor some of the many misconceptions most Cathir practitioners today hold:

1) There is a dance form and a dance-drama form
Indian dance is itself a dance drama form. There is no concept of dance without drama - of shuddha nritta without characters or of subject matter. Bharata's "Natya" Shastra (the root "Nat" = drama) deals with dance as an aid to conveying a message incorporating four kinds of Abhinaya.It is a guide to dramaturgy. Inherent is the proclamation that classical Indian dance is medium of expression of thoughts. Otherwise his treatise would have been known as "Nritta Shastra". So saying Kuchipudi is a "DRAMA" form is as wrong as saying Kuchipudi is a "DANCE" form. It is a true blue dance drama form, and has been so since the beginning, incorporating all four elements of Bharata's Angika, Ahaarya, Vachika and Sattvika Abhinaya. Dance wasn't simply the tool for the drama, drama wasn't simply the aid to the dance, both are in perfect balance, always. Even in its solo avatar nowadays, the soloist essays the "pathras" or characters taken up from existing dance dramas (like Bhama Pravesham) etc. Shuddha Nritta items like a Tarangam or a Jathiswaram are modern innovations and/or influences.

Yes, Kuchipudi is a "recent" dance form. (So? :^) ) Its solo form is even younger than its near cousin Cathir recast as "Bharatanatyam". It is one of the interpretations of Natya Shastra, like the many others in this country. Nothing more nothing less.

2)Control/Rigidity is an essential part of dance. Every dance has to be "controlled" like in modern cathir. Kuchipudi being male dance could not have been languid.

Rigidity is not a necessary feature of every dance. Perfect laya gnana is a must, but rigour isn't. Infact as you rightly said, Kuchipudi is an outcome of the Bhakti movement (infact its predominantly Madhura Bhakthi, the love of nayika for God). Its crown jewel Bhama Kalapam which is among the oldest surviving items of the repertoire has a haughty queen who reforms at its core. So you can imagine, how unconvincing the portrayal would have been if Kuchipudi dancers incorporated tandava or male oriented movements for that character. Therefore lasya had been given predominance there.

The predominance of lasya or tandava or male dance or female dance does not depend on the gender of the dancer!!! It depends on the gender of the characters!! So Kuchipudi becomes all the more wondrous because these male dancers became adept at portraying female roles. Infact the living legend, Sri Vedantham Sathyanaraya Sarma is reputed to have recieved no less than around 20 proposals from infatuated youths after his portrayals of a smitten Usha in "Usha Parinayam"!!!!

Those wandering troupes of Kuchipudi Bhagavathulu were well versed in Rasa theory (right from color combinations of costumes for evoking moods to anukarana and parakaya pravesha), and Nritta texts apart from Alankara Shastras. As such, with their aid they excelled at developing the "Stree Veysham" which is why they became famous in those days! So a question of how a male dancer cannot don female roles by nature/instinct is irrelevant! By himself, of course he cannot! But by mastering the nuances of Abhinaya theory he can!

Likewise saying that since males only danced Kuchipudi should have been rigid is silly. Kuchipudi is not a martial male war dance. It had female characters in abundance, and when males were the only artistes available they had to don them! From there, this sophistication in doing so developed! People like Kala Krishna (SNA awardee for Andhra Natyam this year) and Vedantham Sathyanarayana Sarma are renowned for the protrayal of Stree Veysham!

We hope this also answered cacm's apprehension.

We on the other hand, even after drawing on authoritative sources and research would not dare to say we are "SURE" that such and such was the case in the olden days with respect to Kuchipudi or Cathir or any dance. Kindly desist from being so emphatic, especially when all of us are but mere learners.

3) Kuchipudi YakshaganaM is akin to the Yakshagana of modern day Karnataka, and is therefore somehow folksy or lokadharmi
YakshaganaM (the stress on M to differentiate both) first of all is not a Kuchipudi thing or a dance thing for that matter. It is a literary device as far as Telugu texts are concerned (which happen to be used in Kuchipudi). YakshaganaMs are dramas woven around themes incorporating classical Telugu (the olden one), with immense importance given to ensuring delicacy of Bhavas conveyed, and with a binding rule to ensure musicality of the lyrics, like in the Mahakavyas of Telugu, except that these were shorter. Some of the most famous Yakshaganams have been authored in the Tanjore court during Nayaka rule, by famous courtesans like Rangajamma, Muddupalani etc. That was the age of Telugu explosion all over South India as you know, and many poets were writing these classical YakshaganaMs. Kuchipudi Bhagavathulu take any subject matter which they deem is good enough for treatment. That is how YakshaganaMs crept into Kuchipudi art form. As such, saying Kuchipudi is close to Yakshagana or is based in a "Yakshaganam" tradition is not correct. YakshaganaM is a literary tradition. Telugu YakshaganaMs are simply one of the many subject texts taken up treatment in the Kuchipudi idiom of classical dance.

Something that was born out of bhakti movement 400 years ago cannot claim to be more true to Natyashastra which is probably 1000-5000 years old.

We ventured forth an observation as to how Melattur baani may have been influenced by the Melattur Bhagavata Mela, just like how Kuchipudi and the now reconstructed Vilasini Natyam have. We have nowhere said Kuchipudi is closer to the Natya Shastra than Cathir or Odissi or others. All are different interpretations of the same text, and Indian Classical dance is so much more better off for having this diversity and richness. Let us not judge one form through the prism of another, and try putting each other down. Each is great in its own right, and a "one size fits all" approach in this matter doesn't serve any purpose.

Best Regards,
Kuchipudi Vaibhavam

[KSDD]

@ksl: Thank you Like you I am also tired of the "authentic" claims...

[KSDD]

This is written in Wikipedia! Such nonsense!
" While the Pandanallur style, Tanjore or Thanjavur, Vazhuvoor, Mysore, Kancheepuram were based on the art of rajadasis and are exoteric in nature, some others, like the Melattur style and Balasaraswati's style grew out of the devadasis' distinctly different esoteric art."

[sathirdance]

As was told to me by my nattuvanar teacher - there was never any talk of “styles”. There was mutual respect, appreciation and exchange of thoughts between the nattuvanars of different bharatanatyam traditions.

“Tanjavur bharatanatyam”,”Vazhuvoor bharatanatyam” etcetera, was only used in the past as a reference to the place where it had originated. And not to point out which tradition was “authentic” or not.

Talk of styles only started when nattuvanar Vazhuvoor Ramiah Pillai decided that nritta in bharatanatyam needed even more speed, sparkle and poses. And bharatanatyam was introduced in films. Other teachers started distancing themselves away from that.

Each of the bharatanatyam schools had distinctive features but the differences were small. This was at least the case when the nattuvanars were the teachers. Only when performers and others started teaching everything got mixed up into what we have now, which is mostly a hodgepodge of Tanjavur, Pandanainallur and Vazhuvoor style of dance.
Also added to the styles of bharatanatyam are acrobatics and “stop - strike a pose”.

Today it doesn’t really matter which “style” you dance because there are no distinctive recognizable styles as such anymore. Only a few schools still strictly follow Tanjavur or Pandanainallur tradition of bharatanatyam in their teachings.
The Tanjavur repertoire I have learned from my nattuvanar teacher does not look the same as a performance which is announced today as “Tanjore style”. Yes it has elements of the Tanjore style but also of all the others including Kalakshetra style.

Prof. CVC told me recently – The Kalakshetra style of bharatanatyam which is danced today is not how I learned it during my days at Kalakshetra. The “style” which I learned was the Pandanainallur tradition of classical dance.

For those who have seen Prof. CVC dance the TQ padavarnam “Manavi” in Sankarabharanam - the choreography which he dances is almost exactly the same as how Pandanainallur Chockalingam Pillai or his son Subbaraya Pillai would have taught it.

Subbaraya Pillai once told me: “style style, what is all this talk of style?!” Good classical dance, with respect for the framework of what has been passed on by generations, is what matters. That is what I want to see. I do not appreciate speed just for the sake of speed or incomplete execution of the Adavus because of the speed. (beyond the 3th speed, that is.)
I can enjoy any style of bharatanatyam but when it comes to teaching, I only teach what has been passed on to me, and that is Pandanainallur tradition of dance. That’s all I know.

I don’t think any of the nattuvanar teachers ever claimed their bharatanatyam tradition was the only authentic one. They were not concerned with that, they only lived for the art.

[smala]

Thank you, sathirdance, for an elegant, balanced reply. This is what helps a seeker, one trying to understand the artform without being a practitioner or a student of dance theory.

The main thing that struck me as I watched the video of Harini - it seems quite different with some distinct features that set it apart. Found some info here (http://www.narthaki.com/info/rev07/rev458.html) but my curiosity led to a search on what else was available re. Melattur. Whether SDN accurately represents Melatttur, whether it is authentic or not, whether it is propaganda or not -- is not my active concern.

On Melattur, I did find Revathy Ramachandran, the direct first disciple, (http://www.narthaki.com/info/profiles/profl100.html) to be active in teaching (kala sadhanalaya) but without the specific info I am looking for.

I am still hoping someone like Prof. CVC or Revathy Ramachandran can elaborate on the how, what, why some outstanding features such as yoga type poses, some acrobatic moves, the ballet-type pirouetting, the supple deep arch bends etc. etc., came about and their significance/relevance to the repertoire. While all bharatanatyam requires stamina, the one performed by Harini is remarkable for its very exacting, seamless transitioning from one elaborate/complex move to the other, routines.

[sathirdance]

@ shyama-priya - Thank you.


The Devadasi’s attached to the various temples did not dance Tanjavur, Pandanainallur, Vazhuvoor or any other “style” of dance.
What they danced was not entertainment but rituals in the form of dance as an offering to the Lord. Devadasi’s as Rajadasi’s attached to the Tanjavur Palace came from many different temples. Tanjavur Sivanadanam was very well versed in the ritualistic temple repertoire and was a teacher to Devadasi’s from different temples. They were not taught any style of dance.

If one looks at the temple repertoire, that what is still available to us, one can see this was all ritual dances and content of the lyrics did not require for the dancers to stand in poses.
Also the bulk of compositions written at the Tanjore Palace by the Tanjavur Quartet – Margams – did not ask for the dancer to wrap her leg around her neck and stand in some difficult pose.

The costume of the Devadasi’s/Rajadasi’s was a heavy sari (which was not stitched), with heavy jewelry. How would they ever stand in those poses?

All these poses and acrobatic movements came only in vogue from the 60’s, last century. In the Tanjavur repertoire I have learned I was never taught to lift my left leg when the lyrics asked me to show Nataraja, but I was taught to cross my left foot over the right (swastika) and show Nataraja further through mudras and abhinaya.

Although I can appreciate some of the poses in performances I see today, they often make no sense. It’s often just the dancer striking a pose every five minutes and gets applause, every five minutes…
After the performance the dancer gets many compliments from mostly non rasikas – “wow! Your poses were great!” Nothing said about the dance itself…

[smala]

sathirdance, this deep arch bend pose is possible in a sari (not the leg lifting ones, I agree)...http://chennaionline.com/city360/events ... 063723.col

Holding judgements at bay, perhaps *some* of these poses were used by devadasis -even if they danced, performing to some rituals. There must be some reason for incorporating these in the dance. SDN must have some basis/research to support the inclusion and showcasing of this feature, and if there is someone from the Melattur - Mangudi school who can throw light - it might help. Agreed, SDN may have developed the feature a lot more but then as you quoted Prof. CVC - things do evolve over time just like Kalakshetra has, since his days (moving away from the pure Pandanallur style of his time to developing some distinct characteristics of their own).

[devadasi82]

I am going to address SDN style as SDN style and not Melattur style of Bharatanatyam or what they would like me to believe, authentic bharatanatyam.

There is no argument that the SDN have developed their own style that is based on Melattur. It is obvious there are as many variations among the "Melattur" style dancers as there are among the Vazhuvoor or Kalakshetra. As for authenticity, I remember reading somewhere that "it is authentic as long as it does not borrow from western dance or folk dances, and as long as it follows the spirit of the native tradition".

Subarraya Pillai and other orthodox nattuvannars who could only relay rather than develop what they had been taught, aimed at preserving the "framework" (which is the outer form) rather than the spirit (the inner substance). What makes up "the framework of what has been passed on by generations"? How many generations should we consider? 1, 2 or 3? Or go back to the Natya Shastra's framework?

In view of the above, it is certain that the Kalashetra style cannot be considered as authentically Indian since it is basically a form of Italian ballet taught to Rukmini Devi by Cleo Nordi, and mixed with the Kathakali circus, as openly admitted by Dhananjayan sir. It would be interesting if CVC could elaborate how the modern Kalakshetra style emerged out of Pandalallur. I guess nobody will argue that Chitra Visveswaran's English ballet tradition is authentically Indian, or that Sudharani Raghupathi's style does not rely heavily on the Martha Graham's technique. I don't want to mention Shobana or Anita Ratnam.

reviving the true art form. In reality, it's way too different from anything anybody dances in Bhagavata mela like.

I could not find any references that the SDN style is a form of Bhagavata mela dancing.

Given the fact that traditionally it was performed by males, i have no idea why kuchipudi and SDN's style of authentic Bharatanatyam is so 'fluid'.

I guess because we have not seen male dancers in the SDN performances. Expecting the girls to dance like males is the Kalakshetra's failed idea of the u-n-i-s-e-x "Bharatanatyam".

with clear straight lines, no bending of torso, little or no hip movements.

You are referring to the Kalakshetra style, not Cathir. Rukmini Devi had to bow down to the pressure of the Brahmin audience who considered Cathir as impure. "Fluidity" as you interpret it is the foundation of the Kaisiki, not Arabhati. The modern Kuchipudi is a "recent" dance form, but there is no evidence that Siddhendra Yogi created the style from scratch: on the contrary, it is obvious that he was developing much older traditions.

Rigidity is not a necessary feature of every dance.

Rigidity is not part of the Southern tradition of Kaisiki style. Rigidity comes from the Italian ballet and the British Army techniques that were incorporated in the Kalakshetra u-n-i-s-e-x style.

a question of how a male dancer cannot don female roles by nature/instinct is irrelevant

If it was irrelevant, then Brahma would not have to create the 26 apsaras. You may have read Bharata Muni's explanation of why Brahma had to do it.

large amplitude, wide scale tempos...bottom line...not specific to you SDN! Please watch Kittappa Pillais choreography!!!

Any concrete examples please?

Not theatrical or understated: Theres a third kind???

According to your own reference, the third kind is "spontaneous" and "natural".

emphasis on sringara rather than bhakti: werent u born out of the bhakti movement? How can u call it neutral?? Again, u are not the only ones who lay a emphasis on sringara. Every baani has a great emphasis on sringara

I guess it is a well-known fact that Rukmini Devi removed all sringara-evoking elements, such as neck, shoulder, hip movements, etc. from the Kalakshetra style so that it would conform to the European idea of pious worship.

Logically speaking if u have greater influence on sringara, that would be the rajadasi lineage.

I don't see any logic in what you say. Look at the carvings and statues in the temples. In the Christian churches the images are stern and austere just as in the Kalakshetra style.

Adavus dont even find a mention in NS.

They are not mentioned separately as these are part of lokadharmi.

All Indian classical dances ARE BASED ON NATYASHASTRA.

If Kathak is based on Natyashastra, then Flamenco is an Indian classical dance too. Now since Leela Samson is the chairman of SNA, she will probably recommend to the CBSE schools to consider even Tango as classical Indian dance.

A lot of talented Chennai dancers have that many awards

Perhaps you mean Aishwarya Dhanush?

Just like i watch Alarmel valli in a pesudo-bharatanatyam-pesudo-something else context

We should rather consider as pseudo-bharatanatyam the Kalakshetra ballet style.

But at least Alarmel vallis choreographies are authentic

Subarraya Pillai did not think so.

As to what the Devadasis actually danced, it depended on the temple to which they were attached

Perhaps, but the undeniable fact is that all the devadasis had to perform the 108 karanas.

The costume of the Devadasi’s/Rajadasi’s was a heavy sari (which was not stitched), with heavy jewelry. How would they ever stand in those poses?

How? You should see the ancient temple carvings and understand what clothes the ancient devadasis used to wear.
When Chitra Visveswaran was asked why her students dance in the skirt costume only, she said that this is according to the English ballet tradition.

[ardhanariswar]

Devadasi82, this is a discussion on the Melattur Style. No one here is arguing that one style is less authentic or worse than another. And neither should you because your partiality and bias completely derail the points you make.

That being said, I think its clear to everyone that one guru, one school cannot possible represent an entire bani. Humans are imperfect. The dance danced today is far different from what it was a hundred years ago because it's one big game of Telephone. In order to completely analyze the Melattur style, I think a discussion of dancers outside SDN is necessary. Like Revati Ramachandran and her daughter Manasvini:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r8RoHzB-Qg

Take a look at how she dances differently than the SDN kids.

I agree with KSL, the SDN website and bharatanatyam wikipage look awfully similar, and I too am having an allergic reaction to all of that. I think the dancers are amazing, I love the group choreography, and I love all the crazy 'poses' too. I just don't care for the talk.

[smala]

It might augur well if we maintained a civil discussion all around. I started this thread with the hope of understanding this style, its differing forms if there are some, better.

A provocative shrill tirade, going off the deep end into judgments of 'pseudo' this or that, drawing in other renowned persons unrelated to this baani will, most likely, fetch counter-attacks.

So hold off the stone-throwing, even with the "allergies". If a group writes passionately in their belief, as they understand it of reviving an artform and identifying with it, they can have their say too. One may argue with it, differ from it, but not put it down.

One thought that occurs is that Melattur baani could possibly have different aspects - some emphasized by SDN and others by Revathi Ramachandran's Kala Sadhanalaya.

After all, if the SDN style was really "pseudo" there are enough old-timers and dance experts around who would have jumped in by now and written it off. On the contrary, it seems to have been well-received, from all the press so far.

[rshankar]

S-P I think that you are missing an aspect of the point being made. One can be passionate and believe in the art form they practice without implicitly or explicitly casting doubt on the others.
I don't know about you, but IMO if one form or style is 'authentic', then it follows (implicitly) that the others aren't - you have to agree that all other forms can't be authentic.
So, all this claim to be authentic bharatanATyam seems to be in bad taste because it means that the others are not. I think what most people are trying to say is just that (some have said it with the sure stamp of the pandanallUr style (aDicci sollardu), and others with the soft footfalls of other styles (paTTum paDAdumAi sollardu)) - all these claims of being authentic by any one school or style clearly carry the implication that the others aren't - which is a TALL claim to begin with, and leaves a bad taste.

[smala]

rshankar, I have not paid any attention to the zero-sum game -- "being authentic" claim, therefore 'all else being not' - I disregard that aspect or statement simply because young as these kids are in the SDN group, I feel some of these youngsters with an over-zeal may have written it so, as they (over) excitedly present their videos. Would you not agree?

[On a fun note, I'd say that when one Indian restaurant says "authentic Indian cuisine" we find dime-a-dozen restaurants all claiming to be authentic this or that. Are we to believe any of them?]

It is a TALL claim, it need not be taken seriously. All these somersaulting (nearly!), gymnastic kids are just that - teenagers - with admirable agility and flexibility!

However, they/their school, may have hit upon some discovery (which I would like to know more about) about how some devadasi presentations were made, and may have taken the shuddha nrittya of Mangudi Dorai Iyer (followed strictly by Revathi Ramachandran) a level or two further, beyond mime-the-padArtha presentations, while digging into the past - IMO.

It is a TALL order to come up with something rigorous and unusual like what they do, without either a discovery or some patron alliance which would require decisions on :

1] what poses to adopt,
2] how and where to integrate them into pieces they perform,
3] how to perform them at the right moments,
4] how to seamlessly move into the next act from a complex move,
5] how to incorporate all the different elements of the dance in negotiating the padam without compromising its integrity,

You must admit not only do the dancers have to begin early and young, they must take years of hectic training to achieve the final result. I don't know how many years into their, say thirties, they may continue to perform their physically exacting routines. Most gymnasts are done by their pre-thirties, if not earlier.

Also, isn't Pandanallur the soft-footed style, a la Alarmel Valli, (the psuedo executor ?!) its direct exponent? Am yet to find a video of hers where her style comes across as (aDicci sollardu). I thought somehow the Kalakshetra (ex-Pandanallur) and Thanjavur coaching get folks to stamp the feet hard...no?

I still hope devadasi82 and others who I have never heard before feel encouraged to offer us better insights.

[devadasi82]

Devadasi82, this is a discussion on the Melattur Style. .

Not so much of the Melattur but of the SDN. Please read the subject.

No one here is arguing that one style is less authentic or worse than another.

It was KSL who started speaking of pseudo-Bharatanatyam.

your partiality and bias completely derail the points you make.

If some cannot comment on any of the points I raised, it demonstrates their intelligence or absence thereof.

That being said, I think its clear to everyone that one guru, one school cannot possible represent an entire bani.

Obviously.

If one looks at the temple repertoire, that what is still available to us, one can see this was all ritual dances and content of the lyrics did not require for the dancers to stand in poses.

How old is the repertoire you know of? The much older temple carvings, paintings and statues tell us a different story.

did not ask for the dancer to wrap her leg around her neck and stand in some difficult pose.

Why don't you go to the Chidambaram temple and erase all the difficult karanas on the basis that the Tanjavur Quartet and the Muslim rulers didn't like these?

All these poses and acrobatic movements came only in vogue from the 60’s

This is total nonsense. Statements like these usually come from physically unfit dancers who need some excuses.

if one form or style is 'authentic', then it follows (implicitly) that the others aren't

I don't see the logic in your statement.

come up with something rigorous and unusual like what they do, without either a discovery or some patron alliance which would require decisions on

A great choreographer is born as often as a great poet or composer. The truly artistic works come from the area above the reasoning mind: they come from the aesthetic mind and intuitive mind (higher buddhi). From a spiritual point of view, there is a certain hierarchy there. As Rukmini Devi put it, first you must reach a certain state of mind from which your physical movements will originate, not the other way around. Helping the students reach a certain state of mind is what the guru is supposed to do. How they do it is beyond the rational analysis.

[ksl]

This is my last post in this session about SDN. because i dont think it is important enough in the larger picture of wanting to know about Melattur style.

@ devadasi82: I knew you would do this. You created another profile just so you could come clear the air around SDN, bump them up and start your crusade against kalakshetra here, didnt you? You have never been a part of anything on rasikas other than to perform the same job of talking SDN and HJ up and Kalakshetra down. Being a non-dancer and not knowing your blogs and internet identities, SP had NO IDEA what this thread was getting into when he named HJ in the subject. You said this to SP:

Not so much of the Melattur but of the SDN. Please read the subject.

You know, she started this thread and gave the subject. He probably gets to decide what he wanted to talk about. He is a very well respected and consistent rasika who wants to learn. Not like you who shows up only to inflate SDN and associated choreographers and dancers under different identities. Mallika0 was your last username. And true to form you showed up only to talk for HJ, her concerts, make fun of dance competitions and their results and to show how SDN is more right than padma subramanyam about karanas. Did u forget the password for mallika0? Or is it the usual, "let's create more internet identities and make people like our dance school and dancers more" plan? Like i said to you on narthaki, I dont care about your baani bashing. You don't like Kalakshetra, fine with me. and when i speak of "I am allergic to the propoganda by SDN" i mean you and you only There is absolutely 0% doubt in any of the dancers using the internet today that u work for SDN. And boy! you must be close to do so much hardwork for them.

if you want us to listen to your rhetoric that 'No one every in the history of dance had teh vision to capture the real spirit and framework of Bharatamuni' because u are the ONLY guru who is PRESERVING the spirit of NS, please do it under any other name than Bharatanatyam. Call it SDN natyam. Why are we the victims of your infatuations to create something 'authentic'? PS called it bharatanrityam for a reason. Because Bharatanatyam IS SADIR. We are desi and thats what is 'authentic Bharatanatyam'. DESI AND NOT MARGI. If u want to make a margi 'natyashastranatyam' please feel free to do so. I will come to watch it and even stay if its interesting. Thats NO FREAKING REASON TO BAD MOUTH EXISTING DESI SADIR which is called bharatanatyam for no fault of bharatas or natyashastras.

In NS it is said that women of chaste brahmin communities do not take part in voluptuous display of physical attributes and hence apsaras were created. I want to see how you keep every word of NS alive. Then again, it says the Natyacharya has to be humble which is definitely not true given the SDN propaganda and its implications. Maybe i will not come watch it because Natyashastra doesnt allow me to and we cant afford to loose the spirit of NS, can we? karanas according to NS are in the Chapter 4 of 'characterisitcs of Tandava dance'. How can women adequately portray tandava if men are inadequate to portray kaisiki vritti? Please dont let any more girls do Karanas as it is against NS. The only time girls have their legs up are in the temple sculptures when they are with their man creating life. Chidambaram temple has sculptures of Shiva doing the Tandava and the Karanas. . Bharata Muni is full of contradictions. It must need a really supreme soul to not violate any of them. That is definitely you. Then again, you only choose the acrobatic karanas and leave the other 80 odd ones which dont involve gymnastics. ANd make sure u dont use any adavus form the low form of sadir. And make sure u have dialogues, drama and characters. Use only Karanas as Nritta. Please dont call the divine art form (only you have the vision to create after Lord Shiva and Bharata Muni), sathir/bharatanatyam. Sadir/Bharatanatyam obviously has over the years been caused to be inspired by western ballet by all the lesser souls and thus is a lesser art form. Come up with a new name and a new game! Gowri Ammal and Balasaraswati danced nothing like you. So no, this is not sadir and never was.

@ SP: I just wanted to tell you, please take everything u read on the internet that has been clearly manipulated by SDN with a pinch of salt. (yes, that's the word i use, manipulated because everything is implied to suggest rather tall allegations against everyone who has ever danced). They control the narrative on internet and the wikipedia. Every technical term related to dance including 'bharatanatyam' page on wikipedia and facebook is full of pictures of SDN dancers. The videos on youtube is not owned by any of the over-zealous students. They are not joking when they say they (are teh only) authentic bharatanatyam out there. It is SDN's stage, their show from start to end.. In fact they say on their facebook fan page (Yes theres a facebook fan page for Harinie jeevitha) that HJ doesnt even know she has a fan page, so its not the students (awww...that naive girl!). You are new to this whole mess. You just happened to see the tip of the iceberg. A lot of dancers feel will share my outrage because as rightly pointed by rshankar: Claiming your authenticity means every other dance school is non-authentic. Not to mention their open hatred and bad mouthing EVERY other dance form/school and teacher. Someone please give SP the link to that infamous blog source by our own Ms. I-have-a-1000-internet-identities.

@KuchipudiVaibhavam: I was not implying any authenticity issues with Kuchipudi. I have nothing against dance drama formats. I disagree with you that dance drama and drama are the same. Sathir dance traditionally is a solo format which is not mentioned in NS at all. Drama is a group format. Drama has dialouges/singing in addition to dance and music. Dance does not. I did say that NS is a treatise of dramaturgy. its an umbrella document that covers everything from magic shows to mimes to dances USED IN DRAMA. I did not mean Kuchipudi is not close to NS. All my statements from that post was directed towards SDNs claims about being authentic. Not towards you, kuchipudi, melattur or SDN's style. I enjoy any style as long as the dancer is good. I like Shantala shivalingappas kuchipudi. Thats my kind of kuchipudi where natyarambham is used, aramandi is maintained and everything is not about holding your hair and giving slanted looks but substance. I like Meera sreenarayans kuchipudi on youtube. I like dancers with substance.

We can discuss control, rigidity, fluidity and langour in another thread if u want to because i dont want to sway away from my point. All the differences in evolution exist for a reason.

Bottomline from me, since i dont want to be preaching on rasikas anymore than sharing and learning: Be careful as to what you read on the internet about "authentic Indian dance style called melattur". Wherever u see the word authentic with bharatanatyam, just know that that text is from SDN. And read it in proper context knowing its source and possible agenda.

[smala]

I think the "authentic" storm has just died.

Hopefully someone can now get to the nitty-gritty on the how, why, for the inclusion of the poses used in the SDN school. In dispassionate terms, please, someone! I seem to get the impression that the inspiration is from temple carvings and sculptures. But that does not bridge the gap with the devadasis as they, or some, performed as stated.

I also found illustrations of the 108 karanas - http://bharatanatyam.voila.net/natya_karanas.html - (has insert pics of SDN dancers and Medha Hari) - Classical Dance of the Ancient Tamils : The Role of Dance Sculptures in Tamilnad
by Padma Subrahmanyam, paper presented at Second International Conference Seminar of Tamil Studies
Chennai, Tamil Nadu 1968

Saw some of the poses used by SDN there. So maybe it's all about karanas not employed commonly?

Is bharatnatyam or its forms, only performed by brahmins - could others have danced, among devadasis ? Could they have been less inhibited, considering that the dance was performed strictly *without* an audience, only for the deities in the temples, as part of rituals?

Of course, I seem to be the only one who needs to sit down with a book on Natya Sashtra.

Could this be the blog being referred to...http://bharatanatyam2dance.wordpress.com/
by one Ashwini Kumar?

Aside:
Last I knew, SP was still a she. Nice footwork with the math.

[sathirdance]

@ devadasi82

Who is your teacher? Who has learned you dance, that is if you're a dancer at all.

I've been to the temples and seen the carvings.
I'm a male dancer who has learned from three nattuvanar teachers.
We can look at temples carvings till the cows come home but we will never know what they exactly mean. We will never know if it is actually dance what they represent. No matter what Padma and others say!

I'm based in Chennai. We can perhaps discuss this face to face. Lets see if you have such a big mouth then.

[ksl]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNc6NLsv ... re=channel
Melattur bhagavata Mela

[devadasi82]

A discussion is valuable when people try to address each other's points instead of ignoring them.

It is below my dignity to respond to the frustrated rant, so will instead focus on a few statements that are not purely emotional outbursts.

We are desi and thats what is 'authentic Bharatanatyam'. DESI AND NOT MARGI.

Who are "we"? The folk dancers who don't use the hastas and mudras in their dancing?

In NS it is said that women of chaste brahmin communities do not take part in voluptuous display of physical attributes and hence apsaras were created.

"Communities"? Considering the fact that in Kali Yuga even the so-called brahmins became shudras, any talk about the modern dancers' caste is irrelevant.

How can women adequately portray tandava if men are inadequate to portray kaisiki vritti?

It is true that women can't fully portray tandava. You can't go too far beyond your natural limitations.

The only time girls have their legs up are in the temple sculptures when they are with their man creating life.

This is a vulgar Muslim perception. Have you seen the statues of Kali in Urdhva tandava posture?

Bharata Muni is full of contradictions.

Although there are different manuscripts of NS, none of them is a faithful record of the original NS. At least 10% of the current texts are later additions and alterations.

Gowri Ammal and Balasaraswati danced nothing like you.

But the real devadasis did. You can ask your Kalakshetra professor Raghuraman, and he will introduce you to the devadasis who still perform all the 108 karanas.

A lot of dancers feel will share my outrage

Only some jealous dancers will do.

facebook is full of pictures of SDN dancers

If nobody wants to use your pictures, you don't have to be too frustrated.

Claiming your authenticity means every other dance school is non-authentic.

Nonsense.

Not to mention their open hatred and bad mouthing EVERY other dance form/school and teacher.

"Their"? "Every other dance form/school and teacher"? Really?

I've been to the temples and seen the carvings.I'm a male dancer who has learned from three nattuvanar teachers.We can look at temples carvings till the cows come home but we will never know what they exactly mean.

You are absolutely right that "learning" even from 100 nattuvanars who themselves admit they do not understand the temples carvings will not help the student. understand what these carvings mean. Whether they represent dance or not? They represent certain spiritual realities, entities and modes of existence (which, of course Leela Samson may deny), or, in the atheist terms, we can say that they represent certain states, relations, aesthetic traditions and patterns of movements. It is like sequences in math: if you get to know the formula, you will be able to continue the sequence and create new dance elements. Without knowing the formula (in Subarraya Pillai's case, for instance), there is no way to create new elements that would be part of the same sequence ("tradition"). Unfortunately, in case of dance, the formula cannot be understood with the rational mind (something that SP has to realise) that reasons and analyses objects one by one. In case of dance, it is your body's intelligence (thus, how sattvik your body is important) that is the primary instrument that will lead you the understanding (which requires sattva). If your body is unfit and you can't lift your legs, it will be much more difficult for you to understand. This is why nattuvanars never understood the temple carvings.

[sathirdance]

@devadasi82

Really? It seems you were alive during those times. only YOU seem to know EXCACTLY what they mean.

Its all so easy to trash nattuvanars in a forum like this now that they are dead. .

I would really like to get you a platform in the coming Chennai dance season were you can say all this in public.
I will suggest this to ABHAI. What do you think Dasi82? Wouldn't it be great if you could finally make us all understand true bharatanatyam.

Dasi's like you deserve a platform.

[devadasi82]

@devadasi82
It seems you were alive during those times. only YOU seem to know EXCACTLY what they mean.

I am aware of the fact that my knowledge is too limited and quite superficial, and that I am quite mediocre as a dancer.
Thank you for reminding me about that.

[sathirdance]

When is your performance Dasi82? I would really like to see you dance as the temple carvings.

I can get Padma, Revathi,....Sheela and likes of that to come and watch as well.

You should enlighten us all Dasi82.

[smala]

You know, devadasi82, I have repeatedly asked for insights to the specific style employed in the SDN school and its connection to devadasis. Not as a dancer, but as an appreciative audience. You could have tried to address some of the questions I have raised, yet it is you who chooses to ignore the points.

I am disappointed you take a grandiose tone...

"Unfortunately, in case of dance, the formula cannot be understood with the rational mind (something that SP has to realise) that reasons and analyses objects one by one...."

If you are unable to explain or offer any understanding, it would have been honest to say so. There are lec-dems, video-lectures on dance so even SDN should be able to find some way of communicating to others. The way you put it, as if ''the formula'' is something that not even nattuvanars were privy too -- but somehow imply that you or your group/guru has had a divine revelation of -- seems remarkable. Perhaps sharing is not your forte.

[smala]

Devadasis, a powerful lot, of beautiful single gifted women with artistic abilities, ones who excelled in song and dance. They were a glorious part of the arts in a traditional devotional temple culture. Then were reduced to s-e-x-exploited prostitutes with plebeian understandings of "morality" and licentiousness acquired under the Raj.

*****

August 6, 2008

The Decline of the Devadasis


Devadasis were extraordinarily powerful women years ago. Meddling reformers destroyed the status, respect and place that they held in society by having them outlawed.

For centuries the women that were not obliged to marry, the women that sang and danced and made love with whoever they chose, were very powerful and rich and had rights (such as the right to inherit property) that married ‘moral’ women did not have. This did not go down very well with the Europeans that ruled India or with the Indians who having received a western (christian) education failed to recognise the Devadasi system for the unique power and independence that it conferred on women and were obsessed instead with the ‘immorality’ and ‘promiscuity’ involved. Determined to regulate the Devadasis’ sexuality, they systematically wrecked the entire system and managed to reduce the most powerful women in India to exploited sex-workers.

William Dalrymple has written a beautiful piece in the New Yorker on the Devadasis. It rises from the current day wretched state of the devadasis (who are now regarded as prostitutes) to the glory and power that they once enjoyed, and comes back again to the wretchedness and the hopelessness that these women live with and to how they try (with little success) to cling to old social position of the Devadasis.


Read the article in the New Yorker here...

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008 ... rentPage=1

[devadasi82]

I have repeatedly asked for insights to the specific style employed in the SDN school and its connection to devadasis

I am sorry I am not such an expert that I can analyse their style in great detail and explain it to you. As for the connection to the devadasis, it was Mangudi who learnt many elements from them. Maybe not just elements but something greater. Another connection is that the devadasis' dance formed an integral part with other forms of the temple art (scupltures, carvings, frescos) - which is mainly karana-based, which seems the foundation for the SDN creativity.

There are lec-dems, video-lectures on dance so even SDN should be able to find some way of communicating to others.

You can tell them to do it. As for ''the formula'', it is not something that you can "learn" (intellectually?) from a day's workshop or lec-dem. This is a silly western idea. There was a reason for the gurukula system. The intellectual layer of knowledge has very little value and use.

somehow imply that you or your group/guru has had a divine revelation of

So far I have had just a handful of rather vague perceptions. But my vision is getting clearer and more complete. I will let you know when I get the complete and full divine revelation.

William Dalrymple has written a beautiful piece in the New Yorker on the Devadasis. It rises from the current day wretched state of the devadasis

The superficial western brain is incapable to understand that "According to the devadasis themselves there exists a devadasi 'way of life' or 'professional ethic' (vritti, murai) but not a devadasi jāti (sub-caste). Later, the office of devadasi became hereditary but it did not confer the right to work without adequate qualification (Amrit Srinivasan, 1985)"

[sathirdance]

Luckily for me there is a Sheela Unnikrishnan arangetram today at Krishna Gana Sabha. Will be boring of course...but I can ask Sheela about this discussion.

I hope the arangetram exactly has the dance as it was done in the temple thousands of years ago. With the lyrics and music they used in those days.

Hopefully this time Sheela's arangetram student is going to do abhinaya exactly as how they did it on the temple carvings...and not the KJ Sarasa teacher mixed with other teachers potpourri abhinaya her students usually do.

Will you be at the arangetram Dasi82?
Perhaps, during the varnam, we can have some juice at the canteen. I'll bring you a chill pill...

[mankuthimma]

Wow !
I could offer to wait on this table ....

[ksl]

@devadasi: Please enlighten me with one temple carving showing a woman in a foot raised above her thighs pose in one of those tandava-karanas. You cannot cite as exceptions making rule. If that were true, i would say Lord Vishnu is a woman because he took one odd mohini avataram or that Shiva was a grahastan because kama did manage to get him that one time.

Since when is the perception of kama vulgar in the minds of a hindu? I didnt say or mean vulgar at all. I just made an observation.

[kannagi99]

@shyama-priya. Here's my admittedly basic understanding - the poses used by SDN are their versions of the karanas. You can contrast SDN's karanas with those designed by Padma Subramaniam (look for Bharatanrityam videos). Very different. I also watched a Kuchipudi dancer some time ago with her own version of the karanas. I believe Adyar Lakshman has also worked on recreating karanas. As far as I know, we only have the Natyasastra's (and associated commentary) descriptions and temple carvings to look to in trying to make sense of what karanas actually looked like.

[rshankar]

Regarding karaNas, in my very limited understanding, I think Dr. PS' view (and she quotes the temple carvings in both cidambaram and Cambodia (?) as reference material) is that they are NOT static poses, but kinetic moves. In the temple she designed for Sri candarSEkharEndra saravati (in Maharashtra), each of the karaNas is represented in one panel - each panel has three figurines - with the first showing the start and the final one showing the completion of the movement, and the one in between capturing a time point in between. In many other forms, the karaNas are interpretted as static poses.

[smala]

Thanks to kannagi and rshankar for directing me to this informative video (below) to the DVDs on Karana

Dr P.S. in her intro to Karana Prakarana DVDs, says karana is NOT a pose bit is a set of movements and a culmination of hastha-pada-samayoga the conjoining of hand-body movements in dance.

The basic elements to be mastered **before** karanas are taught : angas, upangas, sthAnas, chAris (the jump/leap in the air) and the hasthas. These are demonstrated in the video.

[to the untrained eye like mine, the final pose freeze for the few seconds, is what registers. Now this DVD-lecture has helped understand that better]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNcMnQVQ444

[smala]

Here is clip on the Melattur Bhagavata Mela, re-posted in this thread where it has a better fit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNc6NLsvXls

The actor (as Lord Narasimha) is restrained and often held in check. He appears more upset and listless than angry as the role requires him to playact. The actor for Hiranyakasyappu is shepherded out of the space after Lord Narasimha appears breaking through the makeshift pillar.

Is there a realism involved here? Apparently this is more than a playact ?? with a deep religious fervor? Can someone expand?

[DancerK]

I think that every one of the points Kuchipudi Vaibhavam has made is Excellent.
All this worry about styles and what is pure and what is older, and therefore better, simply shows a lack of true understanding of ART. Our arts were not simply creations of movement-they have come down from the GODS (as it says in the Natya Sastra itself). For us humans to get so involved in the details of which is "really classical," which is "more rigid," which is "older," simply to win a superiority competition is absolutely pitiable. We must watch the Great dancers in each dance form that we have today and appreciate the art for what it is. Taking the example of dancers who are giving the style a bad name and using it to put down a whole art form is completely faulty as KV pointed out. There are dancers in every style who give their respective style a bad name. And I want to remind people today who are so caught up in technical/quantitative standards-- a dancer's technical perfection is absolutely No indication of their greatness as an Aritst. It is after all the aim of a good dancer to merge with every aspect of the music to the point that there is no such thing as "being good in nritta, being good in natya." It should, as KV explained so adeptly, all be one. So let's just focus on that.

[devadasi82]

@devadasi: Please enlighten me with one temple carving showing a woman in a foot raised above her thighs pose in one of those tandava-karanas.

You forgot how to google around? Have a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfHMIXF-XfA

Our arts were not simply creations of movement-they have come down from the GODS

Correction: from the Gods originated the margi, while the desi originated from the lower (local) spirits.

a dancer's technical perfection is absolutely No indication of their greatness as an Aritst. It is after all the aim of a good dancer to merge with every aspect of the music to the point that there is no such thing as "being good in nritta, being good in natya.

Laya is not the sole aim. There is a difference between a musician and a dancer. In case of the dancer, it is a case of the complete transformation of nature, including the physical body.

[DancerK]

Well if one thinks it necessary to make the distinction that the indian classical dances we know today were created by "lower (local) humans" and haven't come down from the Gods, then that's the type of dance that one will "see."

@Devadasi...The last line of your recent post--that's a nice way to put it.

[devadasi82]

Well if one thinks it necessary to make the distinction that the indian classical dances we know today were created by "lower (local) humans"

"lower (local) spirits" (fairies, etc) is not the same as "lower (local) humans".
I wouldn't categorise Vadivelu (the creator of Mohiniattam) as "lower human" - at least not by our Kali Yuga standards, just as I wouldn't the creator of the modern day Odissi (Kelucharan). These individuals were quite high up on the current scale. I would personally be excited to see some radical creativity (not just some minor modifications and variations or disfigurements and mutilations) in our century too .

Kathak was obviously imported from Iran, and Kathakali "dance" seems to be an offshoot of the Portuguese drama (the dress is definitely borrowed from a French clown!).
The Cricket and Football "dances" were imported from Britain, in case you forgot.

[DancerK]

Kathak was obviously imported from Iran, and Kathakali "dance" seems to be an offshoot of the Portuguese drama (the dress is definitely borrowed from a French clown!).
The Cricket and Football "dances" were imported from Britain, in case you forgot.[/quote]


You should just focus on your dancing-if at all you can be called a dancer-instead of trying to categorize the history of every dance form. If you are incapable of seeing beauty and divinity and would rather mock whole dance styles as a whole, you should simply speak for yourself.
Best of luck.

[ksl]

@devadasi82: I couldnt have seen the video that u obviously uploaded as a response to my question after i posed the question. At least i dont have divine insights like you do. You just probably rename the video parvati in lalatathilakam and not kali in urdhva tandava. Kali never managed to do the urdhva tandava inspite of the high capabilities of her alter ego parvati, according to PS. Probably because she was arrogant enough to challenge Lord Shiva (Point intended ).

I just realised u sound like Karunanidhi for Tamil from this video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6NKKU_1H1U
calling every dance form other than 'bharatanatyam' a work of junk or inspired by junk. I think I agree with PS more than you in everything including every language needs to be respected and studied. I also agree with her that bharatanatyam as it is danced today is desi. and so do u. We just disagree as to what it was in time immemorial.

As you are so into debating nothing but the substance (ahem ahem!), i ask you to enlighten me on the following based on your hypothesis that bharatanatyam was margi at some point and we, the 'low spirits' have turned it desi and you, the 'higher spirit' are turning it back towards margi.

1. Bharatanatyam is known to be a solo repertoire right from the descriptions in tolkappiyam, a 1st century work of literature. Natyashastra describes production of plays a.k.a group work with 3 main characters, the buffoon who opens the play, the sutradhar who narrates the play and actors (yes! plural!) who enact the play. Where in NS has it been said that a 'dance production' should strictly be a solo repertoire. You personally have attacked Kalakshetra for producing group work and insist on solo presentations. Please clarify you inherent conflict.
2. Bharatanatyam has been always performed in the sanctities of a temple as an offering to the god a.k.a as a ritual, whereas the Natyashastra describes that plays should be produced for the general public and performed to further their spiritual consciousness. Please enlighten us on how to reconcile these practices.
3. Devadasis were always dedicated to the temple right from 1000 A.D. the proof for which is in the Brihadeeshwara temple. Where in natyashastra has anythign been said about females only performing the art and they being dedicated to a temple for it?
4. Lord Shiva in Chapter 4.14-16 says after watching the play of the churning of the ocean and Sage Bharata and his disciples , "Let this (dance with karanas which he goes on to explain) be performed by you in the preliminary rites of the prologue properly..." Please enlighten us with what is the prologue to the play that you produce and how the karanas serve as an introductory nritta item in your play and not the play itself.
5. Bharata when he staged the first play written by none other than brahma, was told before the instructions for karanas were given by Shiva himself that, "what was performed by you (without any karanas) is sudhdha but on being combined with these (the angaharas supplemented by various karanas) they will become Chitra by name". So Bharata Muni staged a play with a prologue sans any angaharas and Siva was quote 4.11 (very pleased on seeing it). So Shiva obvoiusly has a tolerance for a prologue for a play being presented sans karanas and was also very pleased apparently. he must have been a low soul to appreciate such low forms of nritta.
6. Please also explain why natyashastra mentions ardhamandala as an obscure posture almost lost among myriad descriptions of angaharas,pindis, charis, brhamaris, other jargon and sthanakas and while bharatanatyam centeres around this foundation of a stance. How karanas are mentioned before even the mention of mandalas and how natyashastra considers ardhamandalam as just another detail. Bragha Bessel (the one u love so much) tells me Mangudi (who obviously learnt from devadasis according to you) started with the ardhamandala. He was her first guru.

I ahve a ton of other doubts but i wil let u upload youtube videos explaining these.

Just to be clear, PS and I stand that Bharatanatyam is desi and thats why her Bharatanrityam looks like a mixture of kathakali, bharatanatyam, kathak, odissi and manipuri and stands out in itself for its unique application of karanas too, because each of these dances is based on some thread of thought from teh NS (or maybe Bharatamuni travelled all over india and wrote every dance style he saw in one grand mythological story). If None of these were NS inspired and Western Arts inspired, someone like PS would have pointed it out. It makes sense that Russian ballet looks like Angaharas and so does chinese gymnastics as u uploaded because they comepletely lack footwork and rely on legwork as explained by her in the video u uploaded. Contemporary dance based on ballet also relies on legwork. Here is one apsara i really like who performs complex angaharas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVQv2re6 ... =1&index=4. Doesnt she remind you of Harinie Jeevitha? Esp the video icon?

So I am still not convinced that
A. natyashastra describes dance
B. Bharatanatyam has ever followed NS. It looks more like Bharata wrote the NS after looking at Bharatanatyam and Odissi dancers in Southern India full of Kaisiki vritti. He probably then travelled to andhra/karnataka and then got the idea of a play production and then maybe Russia where he got the divine insight of angaharas.