A very intelligently crafted session on Vempati Chinna Satyam’s Kuchipudi approach by Ratna Papa, involved four generations of performers, with succinct explanations of how the master used the Suci padam, Anchitam and Vipareeta bhramaries; his accent on eye communication and fluidity of his style and clean body kinetics with torso bends and diagonal movements and how all his originality functioned within the boundaries of tradition and its theatricality.
From Keshav Prasad (from the Koochipudi village) to graceful performers Moorthy and Kishor Mosalikanti, to daughter-in law Srimoi and her precocious daughter, demonstrations incorporated Guru Vempati’s repertoire. The only drawback was the depleted voice of singer Kanaka Durga, a shadow of the once-upon-a-time nightingale.
The Kathak demonstration ( Lucknow /Jaipur gharana ) by students of the Kathak Kendra led by their Director and gurus Jaikishen Maharaj and Rajendra Gangani, with secretary SNA Jayant Kastuar supplementing explanations, was well received and the chosen senior students gave an excellent account of all Kathak nritta intra forms.
The most informative aspect, now knit into the training, was Jaikishen’s demonstration of contribution to the Kathak theory through movements, given nomenclature such as Utpatti, Urdhahasta chakra, Jal Hasta chakra, Urdhva kon soochita and Madhya kon soochita pushpak. Very few, even among Kathak scholars, are aware of this aspect. The abhinaya angle got its detailed treatment at the Kalakshetra auditorium the next morning.
Economics of fine art
The concluding session of the Natya Kala Conference was concerned with the ticklish subject of art funding, with Sabha bigwigs and benefactors expressing themselves. That there was a large sub-text to the polite responses, some voiced and others left unsaid, was understood.
Though artists cynically kept away from what they consider the least open and just aspect of the arts, the audience at the Krishna Gana Sabha was encouraging.
Most agreed that funds doled out to incompetent people managing sabhas, was counter productive. Parvati Bai referring to art patronage under the Travancore royal family said that the proposal for a trust fund for artists, when they had gone past the age of performing, had never materialised. As a music/dance events organiser now, she had to locate sponsors – while trying to get around their demands of promoting favourite artists and prominent logos displaying the donor’s name. Artists had ever- increasing demands, insisting on air fares, business class travel and five star accommodations.
Anmol Vilani, heading the India Foundation for the Arts, spoke about the problems of funding archival projects when persons wanting the money also insist on keeping the material in their own premises, denying accessibility to all scholars. How does one ensure security, or condone using of public funds for creating what will amount to a private asset? Maximising resources and ensuring accountability to the donor agencies are important. Artists with contacts, fame and a network of relationships automatically get the advantages of funding for obvious reasons.
The search is for new ideas of investing in and passing on artistic knowledge, and here one faces real paucity. Ultimately, funding has to lead to strengthening organisations to rely on themselves.
Benefactors such as the late Obul Reddy and now his family and Nalli Chinnaswamy Chetty are generous contributors. But perhaps there was a need to be more circumspect about the bona fides of the person or organisation being funded. Sabhas, with no track record of art service, mushrooming during the season to take advantage of sponsors and disappearing for the rest of the year only to resurface for the next season, should not be encouraged, said Mr. R. Krishnaswamy, honorary seceretary of the Narada Gana Sabha. Critical of artists who demand unreasonable facilities, he wanted dancers to adjust to what a performance space can offer. “Wanting 100 lights is unreasonable,” he said. He also emphatically denied the need for sponsors – his organisation depended entirely on the rasikas. Funding was only through art lovers and gate sales. Artist retorts were confined to the out-of-session moments.
A. Sambandam speaking of his 30 year hand-to-mouth experience with Natyanjali at Chidambaram, where the artists performing free have their stay and food looked after by the organisers, called this a unique artist/organiser relationship. As pointed out, what artists treat as an offering to Lord Nataraja, cannot be equated to other festivals.
Uttara Asha Coorlawala made the final statement that ultimately dance is about power and the State and even in the feudal times, it was always a political relationship. Today, dance as a symbol of nationalism representing orientalism, is soft power used by the State as a diplomatic tool, classicised, in the world of economic transactions. Can dance exist as just free art? When the India Festival in Britain was held, local artists in UK protested about funding not going to them. Today, what comes under the banner of South-east Asian art, for ensuring funds has to create new ideas of collaborative work with different art streams, veering away from the traditional repertoire.
In America, Indian classical dance is nurtured by a supportive Indian community. What is mainstream and what is not? The army marching band for instance in America gets paid more than a performing dancer.
Despite the bureaucrat’s stout defence, ICCR came in for much flak from dancers for what is believed to be its exaggerated support for the Delhi dancers, at the cost of the out-of-Delhi performers. The dancer in Chennai, who is never or poorly paid, yearns to perform during the Season at several sabhas because it is high profile, treats expenditure as a part of career promotion.
Art funding has much more to it than just money for an art event.
