Dancing Mirrors Spirituality – Part 3

Guru Rukmini Devi Arundale

One key player in Bharatanatyam’s ‘‘revival’’ was Rukmini Devi Arundale who institutionalized Bharatanatyam with her establishment of Kalakshetra Dance Academy in 1936. Devi ‘‘purified’’ Sadir-cum-Bharatanatyam and replaced sensuality and its narrative with religious emphasis in the dance’s overall affect. This raised objections, especially regarding the representation of sringara (love in various manifestations – as mother, lover, devotee).

“When the dance becomes an art that transcends the physical, it becomes art, giving pleasure to all, to the devas as well as human beings. It is equally an art that pleases all tastes.”[1]

It was with the efforts of Rukmini Devi Arundale that Bharathanatyam achieved a global standard from being an art that expresses ones divinity to an art that established the concept of spirituality globally that was attainable by the dancer herself, or the audience who was watching the dancer attains it.[2]

“In my own dancing there are certain expressions which I have changed- I have attempted to create a more simple and a more direct depiction on stage. The audience’s knowledge arena is changing and so should a dancer’s portrayal. But I have tried to do this in the spirit of India and her glorious traditions, so that I could go further along that road towards the great signpost of ancient India has ever pointed.”[3]

Guru Mrinalini Sarabhai

Mrinalni Sarabhai at the opening of Creations[4]writes of the necessity for the dancer to be trained in the body and the mind so the movement itself (tells the story) is the conveyer of wisdom. She adds, it is not enough to merely imitate the technique but that the dancer must experience it, so the dance comes alive through that particular dancer and it becomes a ‘living tradition’.

“One begins with the basic technique. Each component of a movement has to be analysed in relation to the whole and made purposeful in its particular situation. Then the movement has to be studied in relation to space. A visual impact becomes a contemplative experience and has then to be transformed into a kinetic composition.”

“What are the tools with which a dancer works? Primarily the body. The intellect contemplates, the body expresses. The body has to be perfectly trained in order that the mind can use it whichever way it will The choreographer evaluates each movement and finds its unique quality the ‘sat’ or essence. Dancing is the dancers search for a true identity through the body, mind, and imagination. But in order to dance significantly the instrument, in our case the body, has to do the talking, and this can be done only when the body is trained austerely to the technicalities of Bharatham. Having said that, practicing only technique, without understanding its nuances and only showcasing the ornamental aspect of dance will bring in disharmony to the art and will never evoke the rasa in the audience.

Guru Chandralekha

Chandralekha trained under traditional Bharatanatyam gurus like Ellappa of Kanchipuram and for the first two decades of her life, tried to dance pure Bharatanatyam. Then she spent half her life learning and the other half, unlearning! But for all posturing, she still used the same positions, stances and format as in Bharatanatyam grammar and just replaced solo dance with group work. After this too became stale, she added kalari and yogic poses, but as supplements. Chandra was and will remain the first one to break the body of Bharatanatyam from being the art of the soloist to becoming a group or ensemble work. 

“I see dance as a visual tactile and sensual language, structured with a specific vocabulary and idiom, with a space/time, with organic bind, principles and most importantly related to the dynamics of energy and flow with a capacity to recharge human beings. First of all, dance is an expression of physicality. In the course of human evolution, for a long time, physicality was a communal passion to be collectively expressed. Dance is a language that needs no words to decipher, it is evident that when a society is asking for change, showcasing traditions alone cannot bring in any effect. To evoke the sentiments of the audience the dancer needs to use new methods and a new language to communicate.

In this cosmology, the arts and sciences too are independent and richly cross-referenced. Dance, music, architecture, yoga, sculpture, medicine, martial arts, linguistics and grammar, are not isolated and mutually exclusive. The issue for me is not tradition versus modernity. I do not see them as two different things. The task of the artist is to modernize the tradition through the narrative process.” [5]