Abstract

Bharatanatyam, a classical Indian dance form, has undergone a transformative journey within cultural settings and temporal frames shaped by colonial influences and subsequent decolonization. This qualitative study employs historical scrutiny and critical discourse analysis to unravel the intricate interplay of spirituality, the arts, and socio-political dynamics in Bharatanatyam’s development. Colonial interventions obscured its spiritual essence, yet decolonial efforts sparked a deliberate resurgence, reclaiming its intrinsic spirituality and transcending imposed constraints. This exploration highlights spirituality’s pivotal role, illustrating Bharatanatyam’s resilience amid colonial suppression and subsequent decolonial resurgence. It underscores the enduring bond between spirituality, artistic expression, and cultural identity across shifting eras.

Keywords: – Dance, Bharatanatyam, Colonial, Decolonial, Spirituality.

Introduction:

आङ्गिकं भुवनं यस्य वाचिकं सर्व वाङ्गमयम्।

आहार्यं चन्द्र तारादि तं नुमः सात्विकं शिवम्।I

{“āṅgikaṁ bhuvanaṁ yasya vācikaṁ sarva vāṅgamayaṁ।

āhāryaṁ candra tārādi taṁ numaḥ sātvikaṁ śivaṁ।I”}

(Abhinaya Darpana and Sangeet Ratnakar- Chapter 7, Verse 1)

The above shloka is taken from Abhinaya Darpana, A scholarly text in Sanskrit that extensively describes the intricate movements and expressions found in Indian classical dance forms. which means Whose bodily movement is the entire Universe; Whose speech is the language (of the Universe); Whose ornaments are the moon and the stars; Him, we version the pure (serene) Lord Shiva!

The above Shloka encapsulates the essence of dance as a universal language that transcends temporal and cultural boundaries. This Sanskrit verse emphasizes the profound connection between the body (Aangika) and the world (Bhuvanam), suggesting that dance embodies the essence of existence itself. Scholars have interpreted this shloka in the context of temporal framing and cultural context, shedding light on its significance in understanding dance as both a reflection of its historical roots and a contemporary expression of cultural identity.

Bharatanatyam, revered as a classical Indian dance form, is a testament to the intricate convergence of temporal framing, cultural context, and spiritual expression. Across epochs, from its primordial roots to its contemporary rendition, Bharatanatyam has undergone a metamorphosis echoing the symbiotic relationship between tradition and innovation, cultural legacy, and artistic ingenuity. Through meticulous scholarly inquiry, the journey of Bharatanatyam unfolds, revealing an opulent fabric interwoven with the threads of temporal evolution and cultural resonance, imbued with profound spiritual significance.

Scholars, with a discerning eye, have meticulously explored Bharatanatyam’s odyssey, unraveling its narrative thread enriched with the complexities of time and culture. Their discerning analyses unveil the nuanced interplay of historical epochs, societal dynamics, and artistic expressions that have shaped Bharatanatyam into the multifaceted gem it is today. Rooted in the soil of ancient traditions yet branching out to embrace contemporary sensibilities, Bharatanatyam exemplifies a dynamic continuum of artistic evolution.

Dr. Sunil Kothari, a renowned dance scholar, illuminates Bharatanatyam’s temporal framing by noting, “Bharatanatyam is a timeless art that seamlessly weaves together past, present, and future.” This perspective emphasizes the dance’s ability to transcend temporal boundaries, drawing from ancient scriptures while dynamically adapting to modern sensibilities. Temporal framing in Bharatanatyam encompasses the preservation of traditional repertoire and the exploration of contemporary themes and styles, reflecting the evolving cultural landscape.

Dr. Priya Srinivasan delves into Bharatanatyam’s cultural contexts, highlighting its deep-rootedness in Indian mythology, folklore, and religious traditions. She emphasizes that each movement and gesture in Bharatanatyam carries layers of cultural symbolism, underscoring the importance of understanding its performance within broader socio-cultural narratives. Cultural context informs choreographic choices, costume designs, and musical accompaniment, enriching Bharatanatyam with layers of cultural significance.

The Periodisation of Bharatanatyam:

The periodization of Bharatanatyam offers a chronological framework to understand its historical evolution, characterized by distinct phases shaped by socio-cultural dynamics and artistic influences. Scholars have contributed valuable insights into these periods, illuminating the transformative journey of Bharatanatyam.

Bharatanatyam traces its origins to the temple rituals of ancient Tamil Nadu, where it served as a sacred offering to the gods. Dr. Padma Subrahmanyam, a prominent dance scholar, notes that Bharatanatyam flourished within the cultural milieu of the temple, evolving as a form of devotional expression deeply intertwined with religious practices and spiritual beliefs.

Pre-Colonial Period:

It is believed to be clear from historical accounts that dance and music played a significant role during the Sangam era and the Chola empire. The first recorded accounts of Devadasis date back to the Sangam period, which arose in the second century, demonstrating the existence of Bharatanatyam. Kovalan, the main character of the well-known Tamil epic Silapathikaram, written during the Sangam era, is the son of a successful businessman. Madhavi, Kovalan’s mistress, was a Devadasi woman treated with the same respect and deference as Kannagi, Kovalan’s wife. Madhavi was treated honorably even though violating monogamy was considered wicked (Shankar, 1994).

Bharatanatyam was performed throughout the pre-colonial period, from roughly the 6th century to the 17th century, by Devadasis, or female dancers committed to serving the temple. These Devadasis were well-respected community members, and the temple’s religious and cultural life benefited much from their performances. They had formal training in poetry, dance, and music, and their performances were offered to the gods as sacrifices. During the temple era, the dance style was known as Sadir or Dasiattam. Since Devadasis, who were ladies devoted to servicing the temple, practiced Bharatanatyam primarily, it was known as Sadir or Dasiattam during the temple era. The name “Sadir” derives from “Sadir-Pathu,” which refers to the ten songs that Devadasis customarily sang during temple rituals. According to thorough studies, the Devadasi system was widely used in the continents of Asia, Africa, and Europe. It is thought that this institution originated in Mesopotamia. It is mentioned in the first Babylonian dynasty as early as 2090 BC. Studies reveal that the Indus Valley Civilization in India is the system’s original home.

Bharatanatyam in the Colonial Period:

According to legend, India’s ancient and medieval eras began and ended between the fifth and sixth century A.D.[i] Beginning during this time, specific economic circumstances were critical in opening the door for new political, social, and religious developments. Early in the Middle Ages, a feudal economic structure began to take shape, and its most significant aspect was the system of extensive land transfers to various types of political, military, and religious personnel who had previously received monetary payments.

The situations of many nations in our world that we have labeled “third-world countries” are due to imperialism and colonialism. However, a closer examination reveals that similar elements have also permeated the colonization victims’ culture and way of life.  According to Davesh Soneji, ‘a careful analysis of the available data indicates that courtesan dancing dates back to the late 16th or early 17th century, during the Tamil Nadu Nayaka period, and is a feature of the modern age’.

Despite being an art form, Bharatanatyam was not exempt from colonialism’s stigmatization and denigration. The British effectively divided the castes throughout the Victorian era and set them against one another. Similar to how white supremacy is one of the leading systems in the United States, the caste system in India is sometimes used as an excuse to discriminate against members of different castes. This harmful system, which tragically is no closer to disintegrating than when it was initially founded since it is so embedded in Indian society, was strengthened by the United Kingdom’s imperialist control over India (formerly known as Bharat). Colonialism also impacted Bharatanatyam, even though the British wiped out the Indian population and used up all of the country’s natural riches.

Devadasi culture during the colonial period:

In Tamil, the words “Devaradiyal” or “Devadasi” both imply “servant of God.” They were dancers who dedicated their lives to serving God in temples. In-depth research reveals that the method was standard in Asia, Africa, and Europe. It is thought that this institution originated in Mesopotamia[ii]. It was mentioned in the first Babylonian dynasty as early as 2090 BC. According to Khokar, the studies reveal that the Indus Valley Civilization in India is the system’s original home. Devadasis were employed as part of the religious services in the temples. Temples were a crucial component of medieval life. During this time, temples grew to be enormous organizations with extensive lands, properties, and a large workforce of both religious and secular functionaries. The number of ceremonies and festivals held at the temple increased as its financial resources grew. Devadasis’ participation in the temple was financially advantageous to both the state and the temple. The Devadasi dance presentation in the temple or at the royal court also had a clear structure. The music was needed to evoke a sense of devotion and good fortune, just like the dancer’s ritual performance in the temple glorifying the resident temple god. Mangala-isai or Mangala-vadyam were the names given to this. The custom of playing the Nagasvaram and Tavil is still a crucial part of Tamil Nadu’s temple culture. Music plays a significant role in temple rites.

The mysterious devadasi occupies a crucial place in the history of Bharatanatyam. Devadasis, typically organized in guilds called melams, have worked as temple servants and secular courtesans from the fifteenth to the early twentieth centuries. On the one hand, women in these cultures had some social agency because they were free from patrifocal familial standards. They were literate at a time in history when the majority of South Indian women weren’t; they interacted sexually with upper-caste men, and they lived in matrilineal houses. These documents prove that courtesans were frequently traded as commodities with the court’s assistance. In other circumstances, as the mistresses or ‘second wives’ of South Indian aristocracy, they were involved in a broader realm of slavery centered on satisfying male wants. Vocal social reform campaigns in South India started in the middle of the 19th century, intending to free communities of professional dance women from their inherited performance customs.

For the next 100 years, their non-marital sexuality — which reformers mistook for prostitution — was used to justify the criminalization of their lifestyle. The Madras Devadasis (Prevention of Dedication) Act, enacted in 1947, officially prohibited devadasis’s social, religious, and aesthetic practices (Sonaji, pg. xii).

Transitions of Devadasi Parampara:

Devadasi and their artistic presentation were typically inseparable. The devadasi’s capacity to perform was crucial to their way of life. According to Frederique Apffel Marglin, the dance was highly similar to devadasi[iii]. However, the early 20th century’s abolition and stigmatization processes called into doubt the devadasi women’s existence. Strong opposition to the Devadasi system led to widespread disapproval of Devadasi women’s societal roles. Reformers, radicals, missionaries, medical professionals, journalists, and social workers believed that the practice severely threatened the community and society. The dasi and her art could not be accommodated by the moral and sexual economy of nationalist modernity, according to Sundar Kaali, an art historian.

The artistic qualities of the Devadasi dance performance were fine with the Self-Respecters. In addition, they considered the exploitation of the feminine body through the performance. Devotees’ minds will be disturbed by devadasi’s performance during the puja hours, according to Kudi Arasu.[iv] Younger dasis were reportedly singing and dancing during the wedding procession for payment, according to Kuppusami, a journalist for Kudi Arasu.[v] However, they did not consider modesty or social propriety, and their performance attempted to seduce the audience. Kudi Arasu criticized the behavior of devadasi. It was claimed that although the devadasis were devoted to performing dances in temples, they invited the devotees to their homes and stole their money by dressing nicely and baring their bodies.[vi] These types of performances entice our young pupils and damage the reputation of the nation.[vii]

The attitude of the masses towards polygamy and loose relationships between men and women was changing due to the influence of Western education, Western ideas, and the emergence of a national spirit in India, and the princely and Southern parts of India could not avoid its effects. Over time, there was a tendency to judge persons with extramarital affairs negatively. Social reformers in various parts of India initiated the arti-nautch movement, or movement against the system of girls entertaining men with dance and music, in the late 19th century to stop the decline of the Devadasi system. This long-standing practice was actually outlawed by law. On the occasion of Sri Bhoganandishwara Swamy’s automobile festival in Nandi in February 1892, the government eliminated the employment of professional women due to the social degradation of Devadasis.[viii] The muzarai superintendent and secretary instructed that the allowance due to the dancing girls born on the temple establishment should be continued during their lives and that the vacancies left by their deaths should not be filled during the revision of the tasdik patti of Sri Srikanteshwara Swamy Temple at Nanjungud in 1899.

However, they were not permitted to perform service in the temple.[ix] Whatever the original purpose of the institution of Devadasis in temples, it was noted in the government order of April 1909 that the action taken to bar the Devadasis from all types of service in temples was fully justified by the state of immorality in which these temple servants were found.[x] The government forbade the performance of the gejje-pooje ceremony, or ceremonial introducing of a female to that profession, in the muzarai temples in 1910 because it was closely connected to women’s dedication to the prostitution trade. But many who had followed such customs could only give them up after a while.

Tulasi, the sister of Hanumantha, a worker at the Sri Anjaneya Swami Temple in Mulbagal, filed a petition with registration number D.728 dated January 28, 1909, asking for permission to perform gejji-pooje to her sister Lakshmi in that same temple.[xi] However, under the Government Order of 1910, the Government rejected approval.[xii] Therefore, it is evident from the restrictions mentioned above that by the end of the 19th century, the institution of Devadasi had degenerated and had turned into an immoral system.

Cultural Scenario in Post-Independence:

In the post-independence Indian setting, culture and hegemony are easily convertible. Culture and tradition is a fabrication; truthfully, it is solely derived from an affluent, Brahmanical viewpoint. The Indian elite began to orchestrate a deliberate transition from experienced histories to imagined pasts in the later half of the 19th century (Anderson, 1983), which sparked the emergence of Indian nationalism and national identity. This change, which was carried about by redefining the embodied practices that India currently takes pride in, namely Bharatanatyam, disenfranchised the enigma and mystery that underpinned many of our procedures and turned puritanical morality into a critical determinant of Indian culture.

A spiritual dance “aesthetic” and the concept of an “aesthetic” distinct from the traditions and practices of the form came into life when the consensus that maintained Sadir collapsed, ending the easy cohabitation of eros and art. The dance was hailed as “divine,” “revived” in accordance with this aesthetic, and assimilated into the projects of cultural nationalism at the very moment that the magical, propitiatory, ritual, and priestly functions (taken both literally and symbolically) of the devadasi were rendered obsolete by a new moral order. The cultural nation-building process further aided the reception of the changed dance, which supplied an ethos and an audience.

In Indian culture, sexuality has traditionally been explored through the arts and literature. This liberal philosophy applies to all of India’s flourishing religions and is not only limited to Hinduism. The nurturing of such passionate fantasies revitalizes our creativity. This was a theme in the devadasi’s artwork. According to social anthropologist Martha Nussbaum, Nehru prioritized science because he believed that people would eventually lose their desire for poetry and religion. Therefore, he was not responsible for creating a pluralist.[xiii]

The Revival of Classical Dance with a focus on Bharatanatyam:

To accomplish its goals sustainably, the reform movement used the British apparatus of regional party politics and empiricism discourse. On the other hand, the revival movement purposefully deviated from Western scientific traditions and state political systems to achieve its own goals. Theosophical Society’s interest in Indian Home Rule and its well-known anti-official stance tied them to the dance’s resurrection. The reformers and revivalists strongly disagreed. At the Madras Music Conference in 1932, reformist C.N. Muthuranga Mudaliar came under fire. He claimed that the anti-nautch party’s goal was to outlaw prostitution, which was common among those of the class who were involved in the practice.[xiv] He continued by saying that reformers were making a concerted effort to end it. However, the process of abolition did not stop the practice of prostitution. So, it made it clear that dancing had nothing to do with prostitution.[xv] The colonizers and radicals’ pressure forced the conservatives to oppose reform efforts. The conservatives, including Brahmins and revivalists, attempted to bring back their cultural and religious components. Ideologues from the Music Academy of Madras and Theosophical Society mostly agreed with their arguments.[xvi]

The devadasi dance form was renamed Bharatanatyam due to colonial politics’ overall impact on devadasi practices. Typically, the revivalists declared that the devadasi art had been “sanitized” and “revived.” Kaali Sundar observed that the so-called respectable upper caste-well-read Brahmin men and women took on the mission of resurrecting the devadasi dance heritage.[xvii] The practice and politics of Bharatanatyam, according to art historian Davesh Soneji, “make tangible both realist and utopian visions of culture, nation, religion, and aesthetics.”[xviii] The Devadasi statue occupied the core of the conversation on Bharatanatyam.[xix] According to Frederique Apffel Marglin, the nationalist elite who were concerned with the ‘revival’ of Indian arts were able to resolve a contradiction by viewing devadasis as morally degenerate women and the royal courts and kings as the agents of this degeneration. The West had brought about this contradiction.[xx]

Dance, viewed at least by a portion of society as another form of engagement with decorative exercise, was considered another form of engagement with decorative movement. Suppose we were to apply this statement of the nationalist wing about poetry and its relevance or imagined irrelevance in modern, independent, industrial India to dance. In that case, we might infer why to dance, and the crucial discourse on the economic status of hereditary dancers was never an agenda on national reform forums. India was struggling with colonialism, poverty, strife at the time, and the immediate effects of industrial development. The national agenda did not think it was essential to address the concerns of a community of women, allowing for the complete dislodging of their identity.

Renaming from Sadir to Bharatanatyam:

The renaming of Devadasi’s dance sparked a heated debate. It is challenging to identify the precise person who coined the term “Bharatanatyam.” Art historian Kimiko Ohtani noted that “Bharatanatyam” was first used sixty years ago.[xxi] She believed that the word “Bharatanatyam” first appeared in use around 1935 and had gained widespread usage by 1940.[xxii] Generally speaking, the revivalists took credit for it. The key figures in the process were E. Krishna Iyer, V. Raghavan, a musicologist, and Rukmini Devi. Earlier articles frequently referred to Rukmini Devi dancing as Indian classical dance and seldom used the term Bharatanatyam.[xxiii]

Gowri Ramanarayan, however, claimed that Rukmini Devi was the one who first used it. She contended that E. Krishna Iyer originally referred to his dance as Natya, which is Sanskrit for “drama.” According to Rukmini Devi, the name Bharata is a compound word made up of the letters bha from the Sanskrit word bhava, ra from the Sanskrit word raga, and ta from the Sanskrit word tala.[xxiv] Rukmini Devi acknowledged her contribution to the rebranding of the devadasi dance genre. She said that, as far as she was aware, Rukmini Devi was the first person to give the dance its (new) name after she started dancing in the early 1930s, and that ever since, the term “Bharatanatyam” has been accepted in everyday speech.[xxv]

The Music Academy’s Madras Music Conference adopted a resolution in 1932 rebranding Sadhir as Bharatanatyam. The goal was to eliminate the derogatory associations that the names sadhir, dasi attam, etc., had in the past. The ‘depraved’ sadhir entered a respectable Brahmin aristocracy family.

It was reported in the Krishna Iyer Centenary Issue that the publication had a new name and a fresh lease of life.[xxvi] It was clear that dance’s association with its previous image had been greatly aided by adopting the new name.[xxvii]

Evolution of Techniques in the Bharatanatyam repertoire:

The evolution of techniques in Bharatanatyam repertoire is a dynamic process that has unfolded over centuries, reflecting cultural, social, and artistic changes. From its ancient origins to contemporary practice, Bharatanatyam techniques have undergone significant transformations, influenced by various factors.  Over centuries, Bharatanatyam has evolved as more than just a dance form; it has become a medium through which practitioners embody spiritual concepts, experiences, and beliefs.

Bharatanatyam originated as a sacred art form performed in temples, where it was intricately linked to religious rituals and spiritual practices. Techniques were characterized by precise footwork, graceful movements, and expressive gestures (mudras), all of which were designed to convey devotional themes and invoke divine presence. The repertoire consisted of traditional compositions (padams, javalis, tillanas) that depicted mythological narratives and devotional poetry. Bharatanatyam flourished under the patronage of royal courts during the Chola and Nayaka dynasties, leading to further refinement and innovation in its techniques. Dancers were trained in complex choreographic sequences, intricate hand gestures, and subtle facial expressions, showcasing the luxury and sophistication of courtly culture. The repertoire expanded to include new themes and styles, incorporating poetry, music, and drama elements.

The colonial period brought challenges for Bharatanatyam, as British colonial policies sought to suppress indigenous cultural practices. However, efforts were made to preserve and revitalize Bharatanatyam techniques, with scholars and practitioners working to reclaim its cultural heritage. Revivalists like Rukmini Devi Arundale played a crucial role in reimagining Bharatanatyam techniques for modern audiences, incorporating elements of yoga, spirituality, and classical aesthetics.

During the Golden Age of Bharatanatyam, scholars and practitioners codified and systematized its techniques, laying the foundation for its recognition as a classical dance form. Techniques were refined and categorized into distinct elements, including Nritta (pure dance), Nritya (expressive dance), and Natya (Dance-Drama). Choreographic compositions became more elaborate, emphasizing rhythmic intricacy, emotional expression, and aesthetic beauty. In contemporary times, Bharatanatyam techniques continue to evolve and adapt to the changing cultural landscape. Dancers explore new choreographic possibilities, drawing inspiration from diverse artistic traditions and contemporary experiences. Techniques are infused with elements of innovation, experimentation, and cross-cultural exchange, reflecting the dynamic nature of Bharatanatyam as a living art form.

Conclusion:

Exploring temporal framing and cultural contexts unveils a profound narrative of resilience, adaptation, and transformation in the intricate tapestry of Bharatanatyam’s evolution. This dance form, deeply rooted in the ancient traditions of South India, has traversed centuries, absorbed diverse influences and embodied spiritual truths that transcend temporal boundaries.

As we reflect on Bharatanatyam’s journey, it becomes evident that temporal framing plays a pivotal role in shaping its evolution. From its sacred origins in temple rituals to its contemporary expressions on global stages, Bharatanatyam has continually responded to the rhythms of time, embracing tradition while embracing innovation. Scholars and practitioners alike have delved into the dance’s historical epochs, uncovering the threads that connect past, present, and future. Through their meticulous research and critical inquiry, they have revealed the dynamic interplay between tradition and modernity, heritage and innovation, anchoring Bharatanatyam within the rich tapestry of Indian cultural heritage while envisioning its potential to transcend cultural boundaries and resonate with audiences worldwide.

Moreover, cultural contexts provide a lens through which Bharatanatyam’s evolution can be understood and appreciated. Each era, marked by unique socio-political dynamics and artistic sensibilities, has imprinted on the dance form, shaping its repertoire, techniques, and aesthetics. Colonial encounters, post-independence revival movements, and contemporary global exchanges have all contributed to the rich mosaic of Bharatanatyam’s cultural identity, reflecting the complexities of India’s diverse cultural landscape.

At the heart of Bharatanatyam’s evolution lies its embodied spirituality, a transcendent quality that infuses the dance with depth, meaning, and resonance. Embedded within its movements, gestures, and expressions are profound spiritual truths, drawn from ancient scriptures, philosophical texts, and mystical traditions. Through the medium of dance, practitioners connect with the divine, embodying spiritual concepts and experiences that transcend the limitations of language and intellect. Bharatanatyam becomes a sacred offering, a vehicle for self-realization and transcendence, inviting both dancers and audiences alike to embark on a journey of inner exploration and spiritual awakening.

In conclusion, exploring temporal framing and cultural contexts in Bharatanatyam’s evolution unveils a multifaceted narrative of continuity and change, tradition and innovation, heritage and adaptation. As scholars and practitioners continue to unravel the mysteries of this ancient art form, they uncover new layers of meaning and significance, enriching our understanding of its cultural significance and spiritual resonance. Through their efforts, Bharatanatyam emerges not merely as a dance form but as a living embodiment of India’s rich cultural heritage, a testament to the enduring power of art to transcend time, space, and cultural boundaries. In the words of Rabindranath Tagore, “The highest education is that which does not merely give us information but makes our life in harmony with all existence.” With its exploration of temporal framing and cultural contexts, Bharatanatyam epitomizes this highest form of education, offering a pathway to harmony, unity, and transcendence in a world of ever-changing flux.

Bibliography:

1. O’Shea, Janet. “‘Traditional’ Indian Dance and the Making of Interpretive Communities.” Asian Theatre Journal, vol. 15, no. 1, 1998, pp. 45–63. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1124098 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
2. Shah, Purnima. “State Patronage in India: Appropriation of the ‘Regional’ and ‘National.’” Dance Chronicle, vol. 25, no. 1, 2002, pp. 125–41. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1568182 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
3. Ganser, Elisa. “THINKING DANCE LITERATURE FROM BHARATA TO BHARATANATYAM.” Rivista Degli Studi Orientali, vol. 84, no. 1/4, 2011, pp. 145–61. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43927263 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
4. Chatterjea, Ananya. “In Search of a Secular in Contemporary Indian Dance: A Continuing Journey.” Dance Research Journal, vol. 36, no. 2, 2004, pp. 102–16. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/20444595 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
5. Meduri, Avanthi. “Bharatanatyam as a Global Dance: Some Issues in Research, Teaching, and Practice.” Dance Research Journal, vol. 36, no. 2, 2004, pp. 11–29. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/20444589 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
6. GANESH, SWARNAMALYA. “RENAMING ‘SADIR’ AS BHARATANATYAM: What’s in a Name?” India International Centre Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 2, 2015, pp. 116–25. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26316557 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
7. KHOKAR, ASHISH MOHAN. “LEADERSHIP IN THE ARTS: Rukmini Devi Arundale.” India International Centre Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 3/4, 2012, pp. 186–200. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24394284 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
8. Allen, Matthew Harp. “Rewriting the Script for South Indian Dance.” TDR (1988-), vol. 41, no. 3, 1997, pp. 63–100. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1146609 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
9. O’Shea, Janet. “At Home in the World? : The Bharatanatyam Dancer As Transnational Interpreter.” TDR (1988-), vol. 47, no. 1, 2003, pp. 176–86. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1147037 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
10. Coorlawala, Uttara Asha. “The Sanskritized Body.” Dance Research Journal, vol. 36, no. 2, 2004, pp. 50–63. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/20444591 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
11. Browning, Barbara. “Global Dance and Globalization: Emerging Perspectives.” Dance Research Journal, vol. 34, no. 2, 2002, pp. 12–13. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1478456 . Accessed 25 May 2024.
12. Pillai, Shanti. “Rethinking Global Indian Dance through Local Eyes: The Contemporary Bharatanatyam Scene in Chennai.” Dance Research Journal, vol. 34, no. 2, 2002, pp. 14–29. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1478457 . Accessed 25 May 2024.

End Notes

---