| Musings:
Dance, human gods and money!
(Excerpted from the narthaki Discussion Forum) December 24, 2007 |
What does your art mean to you? I am a Bharatanatyam dancer. I used to think my dance is a medium for me to get fame, money. No, I am not greedy; I didn't want to be world famous or anything. All I wanted and still want to is to have my own dance school and I want to continue my learning. But the greedy part is, I wanted to earn through the school I open. I am sure not many of you find blame with my intentions. But what I thought was wrong. I am a dedicated dancer, and for me my dance is as important as my daughter in my life. And I love it as much. My teachers never kept count of my classes and took several free tuitions on dance for me seeing my dedication, but it took me a while to learn this lesson from them. But I am glad I did. Now I again pose the above question, what does your art mean to you? Let's be honest for a change and that's the reason I stated my example so shamelessly. - Mallika, Dec 6, 2007
What I understood was that up to 5000 years ago there were plenty of depictions of communal dance found on pottery ware, dance in the stone age seemed to have been a very spiritual function for many thousand years. I believe this did not disappear suddenly, as they say, but when monotheistic religion started 5000 years ago I found that the music still preserved in Bharatanatyam came into being. To me this dance form had been transformed then and preserves a spiritual massage far above commercial exploit. So if this can raise your soul to some ecstatic level, you achieved all you need. It may be too hazardous to communicate this to others. Regarding talent, born with or not, I think little is understood. I once read 'Sangita Ratnakara,' it had much to say about how magical techniques can be employed to achieve excellence, but these are all not proven in any way. But I found that for instance those who had a long family tradition in some field, say devadasis, had developed so much natural talent that it might be impossible to learn that within one lifespan, no matter how much money one has available. This is probably not very much researched into yet. That's just how I muse about it. - Raga, Dec 6, 2007
I am still not against demanding money for performances, but when it comes to teaching, whether one can afford or not, money should not be an important thing. I know of at least 2 people- one a dance teacher and the other a classical music teacher- who do not charge a single pie. But most of the students can afford the fees. I feel the interest in the art itself should be important and not making bucks through teaching the art. I am not saying that one should do it even if it's the sole bread earning job, but for people like me, who are financially very secure, can go ahead do our bit. Again, I would still charge if one asked me to perform, but teaching... - Mallika, Dec 6, 2007
- Stella, Dec 13, 2007
I am not financially secure and have to struggle for a living, so I am happy whenever I get a free glimpse of the art. I found it extremely helpful that some people put a wealth of information on the net, like utube, to see samples. To name one, Prince Khaalid put some 2000 film clips over the last months for display and hundreds of them with some of the most famous Bharatanatyam film dancers ever; just to read the critics is educational to me. What I say is really off topic here, but I admire what you do, pay or not, it's OK. My interest is rather different; I discovered that within the tradition of Bharatanatyam there is so much undiscovered yet, that years ago I started to uncover the less disputable facts in the scripture, those that have some mathematical background like the 22 shrutis. I discovered there was a time when this knowledge was universal and that it got misunderstood later on, which explains to me differences in Indian music and religion to the western tradition. I have a half finished manuscript... For my pleasure I discovered some of the oldest melodies of mankind in the scripture and I believe that at one time they could have been used with dance. My interest is really in the very beginning of Bharatanatyam, but I know that nobody can help me in this inquiry. - Raga, Dec 7, 2007
I am not slighting the contribution. The technical excellence is now at its heights/or at least not lost. But sometimes I get a feeling that we don't get the same rasanubhava like before. As for charging fees towards art education - it may not be wrong. People pay 1000's for Math class, in what way is Dance inferior? The general attitude that Math coaching is essential and Art education isn't worth that amount, is unfortunate. But teaching driven by financial /commercial goals alone sounds preposterous. I have heard of unreasonable tuition and arangetram fees etc., that take dance beyond the reach of interested and talented but financially deprived children. If somebody is hosting a commercial show and are going to pull crowds to make money, it is the artist's right to charge a fee. But if the organizer is not doing it for commercial gain, say for charity or just promoting the art, the artist may consider lowering / negating her charges. Programs esp. with live music can really be expensive abroad. Payment terms aside organizers need to respect the artiste. No compromises on this one. Expecting classical artists to dance on streets, where people eat etc is depressing. What bothers me is that general people even slightly the types who afford, are willing to pay for most other entertainment (cinema, restaurants, parties, outfits etc.) - I am not talking about academic pursuits) - but think twice before they spend to see a dance performance. It may just be a matter of taste. Developing an awareness is key to tackle the prevailing sad state of affairs. - Sangeetha, Dec 7, 2007
- Padmanabhan, Dec 7, 2007
- Mallika, Dec 8, 2007
Some scholars find that Bharata's Natya Shastra was written from 400 BC onwards, I also read that some believe there were lost Bharatanatyam scriptures before that; some websites claim Bharatanatyam is 5000 years old but give no source for their information. But there runs a thread through these scriptures that first Bharatanatyam is connected to Urjvasi dancing in the court of her husband Indra. This may be regarded as fictional myth. The scripture also states that Indra was pleased by the recitation of the seven yatis. Many years ago, I reconstructed these yatis (melodies in which the ragas may be seen) from the scriptures, which presupposes the lost knowledge of the ancient 22 shrutis and I did research on Indra and Urjvasi, so to believe in the truth of the story. Urjvasi is still a title of excellence given to a Bharatanatyam dancer by official India, i.e. recently to Urjvasi Shobhana. May aim for the last decade was to find out what dance form might have been employed to the ancient yatis. I think it could have been a form of Thillana? Maybe someone here knows how yatis are performed today, so that I can trace the way backwards. It is a complex issue and takes time to ponder, more than one book can contain. - Raga, Dec 8, 2007
Natya Shastra is a relatively recent text. It is a smiriti, not shruti, text, i.e. it is a concise and simplified form of the Natya Veda. Urjvasi is an apsara, and apsaras
do not have husbands, in case you want to know. :-) Otherwise it would
be very immoral of Indra to send her to seduce Arjuna. :-)
'Titles of excellence' are a matter of political arrangements, and I do not care if they call Shobana or Jayalalitha as 'Urjvasi': they will not dance better because of the title, will they? I think that Urjvasi would not be bothered to hear that her name was “given” as a title even to the winner of a Chennai dog fight competition. These gandharvas are notoriously indifferent to the human world! It is outrageous! :-) Instead of spending the last decade trying to find out what dance form might have been employed to the ancient yatis, why didn't you meditate, meet Urjvasi in the invisible worlds and ask her to show and teach the yatis for you? After all, isn't it how things were learnt in the olden times? - Urmila, Dec 8, 2007
Urvasi was NOT sent to seduce Arjuna, she went by her own urges. The SHAPAM that she gave to Arjuna was actually made easy by Indra. I am a student of mythology and spirituality
- thanks to my family who are steeped in Vedas- that they perform at least
one major yagna an year - I have good knowledge about the popular black
magic too. And with that authority over knowledge, I am saying this.
The science was so developed at that time. With the scientific knowledge we have now, it is almost impossible to know how they possessed the knowledge they did. In fact all the Hindu norms are based on science, that's why Hinduism is not a religion, it's a lifestyle, the norms of which are termed trash by perverts with half baked information and immaturity. It was not only through meditation that they knew things they did; performing a yagna is the oldest form of experimentation. That's why they used to get rejections too - experiment failed. Yes, meditation is a way to increase spiritual power, but there is much to know. There is another theory that Indra was not one person, it's a post, just like a President's' etc. or else how can god forgive someone who tries to seduce somebody else's wife, runs away from asuras at the drop of a hat. If you have doubts on mythology or spirituality, please let me know. I can help you better than any swamiji asking for big sums of money. - Mallika, Dec 9, 2007
- Raga, Dec 9, 2007
Of course, that clip on youtube looks a bit too filmy :-) Apsaras probably have much more grace. If you look at how some girls of the age of 10 -11 dance, you probably will notice very interesting things. At this age the human soul (chaitya purusha) shines most strongly through the physical body, and influences the children's way of movement and behavior. Apsaras or other gods sometimes (even against their will) are born in human bodies to accomplish a particular mission, and then they go back to their loka. Otherwise, “human god” sounds a bit funny. :-) - Urmila, Dec 9, 2007
I'd say, through my meditation, so far I have reached a theory that god and humans are related in the same way, a super server is connected to various computers through Lan. The server tells each computer what to do and how to do it and guides it. The moment the Lan connected computer starts acting on its own (freedom to choose karma only given to human beings), as it can't see the big picture, it creates problem to others, as they are all connected to the same server- got the point, and that is the point where the server punishes or if required eliminates the funny acting computer. So it's not entirely wrong when swamijis say there is a bit of god in all of us. And we all are here on a purpose. On the whole, I feel there is only
one purpose of human race- to keep it going, that's all.
We know the Swamis then started to watch sun, moon and star cycles. Fortunately few years ago the first monumental buildings of mankind dating 10000 BC were uncovered near the Turkish / Syrian border. First time ever that a pair of standing human stone gods are found within a temple, male and female, who can say? From later use, we know they were often set at the rising sun at the summer solstice to shine through, like a door It's from then that 'gods' became known more often, together with pictures of dance - until around 3000 BC a new knowledge of music and writing appears connecting all to heaven. The history of this emergence is being repeated over and over again in countless myths, be they in the Bible, Vedas or through dance. I believe that this mighty experience of the all regulating sun (really the earth turning around the sun) was named later Thor, Tara, etc and came to be worshipped as one God, initiated by a human, the victorious ruler in the chaotic times with the same name. I find that he is associated with cultivated music and dance and that this is all within a plan for a righteous future for all, although we often fail to see that light in our miserable conditions. - Raga, Dec 10, 2007
People are willing to pay for cinema if the film is made professionally. People do not pay to go do the cinema to watch amateurish films. People go to restaurants if the food is professionally cooked there. Why some restaurants charge 100 times more for the same dish than others, is up to you to answer. People go to parties because these are not boring, unlike most classical dance programs. But then if some "professional" classical Indian dancers start complaining that nobody is willing to pay them, hmmmmm.... Here is the checklist for such dancers: - look in the mirror: if you do not look beautiful for other people, they will not come to watch your dance - try to find a trace of a waistline: if there is none, don't expect anyone to turn up for your program - look at how many karanas out of 108 you can perform: if you cannot bend in any direction, start teaching dance - look at how fast your jatis are: if any 12-year-old can do it twice faster, it is a sign for you to retire - look at your expressions at the end of your jatishwaram: if your face looks miserable, so do the rasikas feel - look at your choreography: if it looks like a bad copy of Bollywood dance, better start a modern dance career - Hemamalini J, Dec 9, 2007
- Mallika, Dec 9, 2007
- Lila, Dec 9, 2007
- Mallika, Dec 9, 2007
While other subject matter teachers do not get so emotionally attached to their students, Arts taught one on one at least at some stage over a long period of time, results in different dynamics between teacher and student. I guess the people dealing in Arts are very sensitive and therefore think long and hard about the question of money to share the joy of dance. Here are some thoughts. I have no
intention of hurting any one - charging reasonable money from people who
can pay is ok. Not charging from deserving talented children who cannot
pay is very, very good.
Not charging fees is a good strategy to avoid any pointed questioning on speed of teaching and creates a space for the teacher. This is really good. But making clear to the learners that the teacher is not doing this for money is better than not charging fees. If teachers are truly interested in spreading dance and not charging and dedicating their life to dance's cause, they should set up school in a poor slum neighborhood in India. It is there that their not charging is most useful. Depending on family resources for
self sustenance is not reason enough to think of other teachers who charge
for fees poorly. Even if is one is from a very wealthy family, desire to
make it on their own may drive charging fees. What is wrong with that?
People who charge exorbitant fees provide some feel good value to their following. Too good for them. Where is the question of cribbing about them? We need that time to make ourselves cool in our own way... I do not really intend to judge anyone. I am merely sharing my thoughts and truly hope this is useful. - Megha, Dec 10, 2007
"Not charging fees from people who can pay makes the rest of us look greedy and may be the teacher is insecure and wants to avoid questions on the quality of dance. It is like offering something for free so that the competition is washed out." - This I am not sure. This occurrence is a rarity. But on the contrary I know of so many Gurus who charge such exorbitant rates and even produce arangetrams at despicable-average levels. This means trouble. "People who charge exorbitant fees provide some feel good value to their following. Too good for them."- The second statement yes! But the first statement is debatable. I hope someone like Rukmini Devi and Balasaraswathi were here to share there views with us! I wish we had a glimpse of their past and their inputs. Megha's statement is true to a great extent that "those" that come free, art included, are no longer appreciated and have lost value... It is very sad. - Sangeetha, Dec 11, 2007
I would love to hear from more people as to whether they like such abhinaya rich slow pieces without much nritta too... Or am I so alone in this fast track world. In fact the youngsters are so good technically, no doubt about that. But I am sure there are times when you look for much more than technical perfection and visual excellence, isn't it? - Sangeetha, Dec 11, 2007
- Mallika, Dec 12, 2007
Shame on Bharata Muni for describing some of those unnecessary 108 karanas! I cannot do many of them! Let's forget all those stupid books! Of course, visual perceptions are not necessary to give you rasanubhava. My friend once told me that he once experienced rasanubhava while watching an old lady walking across a road with a walking stick. Politically well-connected people do not need good nritta or good karanas. They give you rasanubhava just like Jalayalitha does the abhinaya rich slow pieces. She is the greatest dancer who gives rasanubhava and some cash to thousands of the AIDMK activists! Personally, I prefer watching Charlie Chaplin. Everybody says his abhinaya is far better than Kalanidhi Narayanan's. - A Harish, Dec 11, 2007
|
 |