Oh! We are drifting from the ‘Margam’ talk, are we? Just like the ‘Margam’ itself has drifted considerably from where it began and lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit that Tagore was anxious about. In today’s digital era when dance and music lessons are held on skype and social networking sites, who and what define a traditional ‘Margam’ or a proper guru? In a time when there are more festivals than dancers, who has the patience to sit and learn a ‘Margam’ the way it ought to have been done? This is the age of designer Margams. The economics of sabhas and festivals is directly proportional to a deterring performance. Dance is taught more in gymnasiums and human laboratories than in the custody of caring and concerned gurus. From obsession with lines to controversial content, anything can be presented. In an era of ‘Global baani’, anything can be patched to make an evening’s presentation. If one was to say that Bharatanatyam dance form in India was dying a slow torturous death, then the current state of the ‘Margam’ signifies its decreasing sluggish heartbeat. Who is accountable for this?
Veejay should first demonstrate that he is not one of those critics with abysmal knowledge of what goes on stage. Veejay Sai's article is indeed "a few random thoughts" and deals briefly with the concept of margam. He does not even specify which margam format he refers to (e.g. Tanjore, devadasi, etc.). The article is diluted with baseless abstractions that is not worthy of a dance critic who does not indulge in imaginations. He could not specify what are the various ways dancers have become touchy about anything and everything, who are these dancers and how they react. Does Veejay know any gurus who curse their students for leaving them? I am not aware of any institutions or gurus who claim to be the eventual custodians of the 'truth'. This is some mirage that Veejay saw in his bad dream......
ReplyDeleteThe complete posting available at
http://www.narthaki.com/info/articles/art321.html#rachna
(excerpts of the comment posted by narthaki.com on behalf of Rachana Sundaresan)
Brilliant article! Regarding the kind of gurus he has written about, I have personally been at the receiving end of such attitudes from gurus I have learnt from. Many a time I have wondered why on earth I was born with a passion for dance! They dont have to be performers to be bitter, have complexes etc. In fact what is worse is having daughters who perform! They should just be called teachers. 'Guru' is too sublime a word.
ReplyDeleteRachana Sundaresan's comments are neither apt nor praiseworthy. What does she know about the great legend smt.Rukminidevi,her works,teachings and kalakshetra. I REGRET for reading such a comment.
ReplyDeleteDancers should read how Bhishma won battle against his guru Parshuram. Arjuna went into battle against his own guru too. Dancers should read this story carefully and draw their conclusions (killing your own guru is a great accomplishment):
ReplyDelete================================================
Ekalavya was the son of a Nishadha chief (tribal), who came to Drona for instruction. Drona refused to train him along with the Kshtriya Princes because Ekalavya was not a Prince.
Ekalavya began study and practice by himself, having fashioned a clay image of Drona and worshiping him. Solely by his determination, Ekalavya became a warrior of exceptional prowess, excelling the young Arjuna.
Arjuna was worried that his position as the best warrior in the world might be usurped. Drona saw his worry, and visited Ekalavya with the princes. Ekalavya promptly worshiped Drona. Drona asked Ekalavya for a dakshina, or a deed of thanks a student must give to his teacher upon the completion of his training. Drona asks for Ekalavya's right thumb, which Ekalavya unhesitatingly cut off and handed to Drona, despite knowing that this would irreparably hamper his archery skills.
In my view, Pushpamala's comment and her finding "it totally unnecessary to take anyone’s names unless we only want things to get more rotten" resembles the standpoint of our darling Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, whose government struggled so hard not to disclose the names of those Indians who have stashed over $500 billion in banks abroad. You see... there is no need to make public these names... Taking any of those names (e.g. Rahul Gandhi's) does no good to improve the existing situation.... We live in a society where taking names only leads to other problems. You see, it leads to people filing defamation cases or earthquakes. There is no need to fight corruption because there there is no corruption in India. Everything is ok. There is no need to change anything. Please let's not name any names.
ReplyDelete"Keep quiet" is the coward's motto. Snivel on.
What happens when Shobha De plans to write on Margam , you get Veejay Sai's article .
ReplyDeleteDance criticism has always been in poor condition in India. What a sorry state of affairs, have we lost good journalists? Its better to not have "so called" critics , than having journalists who make their whole act "cathartic" !!!
Brilliant article ! Very well written about the gurus ! It is 100% true we are experiencing it !
ReplyDeleteThe margam is dead and so is dance writing. Never mind the 'half-baked dancers becoming gurus overnight', how about half-baked writers becoming dance critics overnight? The writer's grammar is appalling, and as another commentator pointed out, there is no focus to this article, nor does it address the topic it introduces.
ReplyDeleteThis 'in your face' tabloid style seems to be increasingly encouraged and supported by Narthaki. Like a 45-minute varnam, who wants to read through a well-thought out and well-written coherent essay with examples and backed-up agruments when you can read someone's random rants? A lot more entertaining!
The margam is dead and so is dance writing. Never mind the 'half-baked dancers becoming gurus overnight', how about half-baked writers becoming dance critics overnight? The writer's grammar is appalling, and as another commentator pointed out, there is no focus to this article, nor does it address the topic it introduces.
ReplyDeleteThis 'in your face' tabloid style seems to be increasingly encouraged and supported by Narthaki. Like a 45-minute varnam, who wants to read through a well-thought out and well-written coherent essay with examples and backed-up arguments when you can read someone's random rants? A lot more entertaining!
I feel sad , that nobody is questioning whether the content of Margam is outdated or not.
ReplyDeleteWhat is really shocking is the female dancers still find it respectful to portray the "Nayika" as the man would like to see. What about a woman's perspective? That also when most of the audience members ( except organizers) are female in gender.
I think the next community opinion post should be " Does the portrayal of female gender in the Margam relate to the changing gender roles in today's society?"
If the "Margam" is on the verge of dying then it should die. "Survival of the fittest" is what applies to art too. If dancers are the audience wants to get away from the Margam , why not?
ReplyDeleteWhy is the Margam supposed to be a"Dogma" ???
The question is do we choose to be victims of this kind of cultural talibanism or should Bharatanatyam become a language to explore new structures.
What is important is to understand that Margam is just a structure. We dancers can explore Bharatanatyam with our own structures.
All the ancient texts on dance talk about Margi - Deshi , anibaddha - nidbaddha . If the ancient authors were so liberated to understand the expanse of art, why are we dancers and critics so narrowminded ?
Why can't we use our mind and body and the beautiful language of Bharatanatyam to create new structures , new margams . Let every dancer create one's own margam . A path which gets charted by one's own aesthetics , one's own personalized aesthetics.
krupa's comment above about ekalavya is not in the context here. to set the record straight, that loss thumb does not affect archery skills, as it did not affect ekalavya's. ekalavya fought on behalf of kaurvas in kuruskhetra- speaks volume about his 'dharma parignana'.
ReplyDeletewhat he asked drona was to teach him royal archery. just like any tom dick and harry is not given access to nation's defense secrets, back then royal archery was not taught to everyone.
if ekalavya was so nice, why did he eavesdrop? if he considered drona his guru, then why did he disobey him and went on to practice the art that was not recommended for him?
why he was denied by drona? back then aptitude was a big deal - reason why drona did not teach brahmastra to his own son, until aswaththama made a big fuss about it and finally drona gave in because of his love for him.
when ekalavya shot not one or 2, but 11 arrows one after the other into a dog's mouth, an animal that survives on its mouth for all its needs, to what? show off his skill, should tell you that he did not have the right temperament to put the dhanurvidya he learns to right use at the right time.
hence stop demonizing drona, he was guru a great one at that. he was a great student too. and stop making a demi god out of ekalavya.
PS: After taking the thumb as guru dakshina, drona stays back and teaches him. this learning he what he later uses against pandavas, while fighting for kauravas in kurukshetra. this is written in mahabharata by vyasa.