[net.nlang.india] Indian X == OPERA.

mouli@cavell.UUCP (Bopsi ChandraMouli) (02/23/85)

Recently I went to see Amaedeus(it is an excellent movie,
especially for those who are lovers of classical music)
and the  following question came to my mind.

   " Is there an equivalent of OPERA in Indian tradition?". I excercised
my mind with my little knowledge on Indian Arts and Music and the
closest I can find is some of the Dance Dramas created by 
Bharatha Natyam artists like Padma Subramaniyam etc., Of course
I thought about the many folk dramas but they lack the classicism
in Music and organization in Action. My question is 

 "Is there a theatrical practise in India which combines
  Classical Music, Classical dance and Drama?"

Let us see what you guys come out with.

B. Chandramouli.
ihnp4!alberta!cavell!mouli

ravi@crystal.UUCP (02/26/85)

> Recently I went to see Amaedeus(it is an excellent movie,
> especially for those who are lovers of classical music)
> and the  following question came to my mind.
> 
>    " Is there an equivalent of OPERA in Indian tradition?". I excercised
> my mind with my little knowledge on Indian Arts and Music and the
> closest I can find is some of the Dance Dramas created by 
> Bharatha Natyam artists like Padma Subramaniyam etc., Of course
> I thought about the many folk dramas but they lack the classicism
> in Music and organization in Action. My question is 
> 
>  "Is there a theatrical practise in India which combines
>   Classical Music, Classical dance and Drama?"
> 
> Let us see what you guys come out with.
> 
> B. Chandramouli.
> ihnp4!alberta!cavell!mouli


What is called "classical dance" in India is really a synthesis of the 
elements constituting opera and ballet in the western tradition.  The
answer to your question is that Indian classical dance is the equivalent
of both opera and ballet in the west.

Traditionally, dance in India combines "nritta" (rhythm & form in the
abstract), "natya" (depiction of a theme), and "abhinaya" (emotive expression).
"Ballet" as known in the west combines music and form:  This is the equivalent
of what is called "nritta" in our tradition with elements of "natya".  Western
dance has traditionally not concerned itself with abhinaya at all.  Opera is the
closest the westerners come to "abhinaya" (and like in the Indian tradition,
visual impact supplements the emotive powers of music).  But then opera leaves
out "nritta" altogether (Pavarotti, for one, would never have made it 
otherwise).

Also, "dance dramas" (of the Padma Subramaniam/Uday Shankar variety) are not an
innovation.  There are, in fact, classical dance idioms (Kathakali, for one)
that are almost entirely structured around the "dance drama" idea.  There are
even ancient precursors to Kathakali (e.g. Kuttiyattam) that are traditionally
performed to depict epic and classical themes and stories.  (Kuttiyattam, by
the way, is performed exclusively in Sanskrit; at the moment, it is performed
only by a group or two in Kerala, and is hence a dying art form.  Its antiquity
has never been satisfactorily determined.)  All this is to merely illustrate
that the elements of "natya" are deeply embedded in the Indian dance tradition
(to an extent that goes far beyond what is usually seen in Bharatanatyam or
Kuchipudi recitals).  One must remember that these evolved in temples, and are
hence circumscribed by the limitations imposed by that environment; Kathakali 
outdoes Bharatanatyam by far in its "natya" aspect.

It is also interesting that the "Natya Shastra" deals with both dance (the
mudras, the technique), as well as with stagecraft.  It is possible that the
clear distinction that we make today between dance and drama never existed way
back then.  If true, then it would make it even clearer that Indian dance
has even traditionally subsumed the elements of what constitutes opera.  Even
the highly stylized costumes and exaggerated settings one sees in opera are 
present in some Indian classical dance idioms,  probably because they are
neccessary in the context of what is being attempted.

One reason that opera may have evolved as a separate art form in the west is
that the western theory of aesthetics lacks the notion of "rasa".  While the
"natya shastra" takes a more "holistic" view based on the Indian theory of
aesthetics, it may have been neccessary in the west to evolve two separate art
forms to accomodate rasa (which is closely linked to "bhava") and natya/nritta,
because the western theory of aesthetics has not identified rasa as part of the
aesthetics of art.  The west, to the best of my knowledge did not possess a
traditional theory of aesthetics of the Indian kind (I know the Greeks talked
about it, but their observations have not provided adequate theoretical basis 
to sustain a whole culture's artistic achievements).  Opera certainly deals 
more with rasa than ballet does.

Indian dance and ballet/opera are certainly different in form and structure,
mainly due to the differences in culture and context.  But there are bound to
be underlying invariants:  I am merely suggesting correspondences between the
two.

percy@amdcad.UUCP (Percy Irani) (02/27/85)

>    " Is there an equivalent of OPERA in Indian tradition?".

Is there an equivalent of Tagore or Karnatic (or for that matter
most Indian Classical musics ) in ``OPERA''? 

Roots???