Naming a Theatre in Tamil Nadu

Naming a Theatre in Tamil Nadu Author(s): Hanne M. de Bruin Source: Asian Theatre Journal, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring, 2000), pp. 98-122 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1124206 . Accessed: 25/03/2013 19:43 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Asian Theatre Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Naming a Theatre in Tamil Nadu Hanne M. de Bruin

Perhapsa rosebyany othernamewouldindeedsmellas sweet,but a lot ofpeoplemight beupsetif theysuddenlyhad to call a rosebysomethinglessfamiliar. How theymight that continueto swirl around the feel may be measuredby the emotionalcontroversies appropriatenamesfor certainforms of Asian theatre.ATJ has morethan once discussedthe problemwith regardto traditional Chinesetheatre.In the presentarticle, Hanne M. de Bruin examinesthe issues surroundingthe namefor thefolk theatreof TamilNadu, India-usually knownas terukkuttu (oneof severalpossiblespellings), but which some now preferto call kattaikkuttu. De Bruin's position as a theatre researchernot onlygives herfirsthand insights basedon her own participationin the debatebut, as she notes,also cloudstheissuesbecauseof herstatus as aforeignscholar. In her essay,De Bruin closelyexaminesthe sociopoliticalramificationsof the naming problem. Hanne M. de Bruin has publishedwidelyon Indian theatre.Sheis a research fellow at the InternationalInstitutefor Asian Studies,Leiden, theNetherlands.

In November 1990 a group of seventeen rural actors and musicians founded an organization to promote their theatre in the provincial town of Kanchipuram in Tamil Nadu (South India). They called this grassroots collective the Tamil Natu Kattaikkuttu Kalai Valarcci Munnerra Cankam (henceforth the Cankam),' using the name "kattaikkuttu"rather than one of the current terms "kuttu"or "terukkuttu" to refer to the theatre.2 The introduction of the name "kattaikkuttu" has invited criticism from Tamil researchers and representatives of the urban arts establishment. The ensuing debate about the theatre's Asian TheatreJournal,vol. 17, no. 1 (Spring 2000). ? 2000 by University of Hawai'i Press. All rights reserved.

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING

IN TAMIL

NADU

99

name appears to have driven a wedge between the members of the Cankam, who represent a part of the rural, largely informal sector of the folk performing arts, and representatives of a social group called variously the "middle class (or classes)," "literati,"and "intelligentsia" (Beteille 1998, 151; Chatterjee 1993, 35-37). Without suggesting that the intelligentsia constitute a homogeneous group whose boundaries can be strictly defined, this elite can be described as formally educated city-dwellers employed in modern professions. Members of this elite play an important role in the creation and consolidation of dominant forms of public discourse and in establishing aesthetic and moral standards and tastes. They also occupy essential positions in regional as well as national cultural and social institutions. The issue of the theatre's name was one of the themes that figured prominently during a workshop organized by the Cankam as part of its third annual KattaikkuttuFestival held in Kanchipuram in 1993 and attended by Tamil research scholars and theatre people. Furthermore, members of the intelligentsia have openly criticized the naming of the theatre during other public events as well as in the popular Tamil and English press, including specialist magazines to which Cankam members have either no or only limited access.3 Even though representatives of the urban intelligentsia admit that the theatre's name is subject to debate,4 most of them are reluctant to explain their reasons for preferring the term "terukkuttu" or rejecting the term "kattaikkuttu," thus forestalling a truly open debate. The subsequent discussion draws on publicly available sources. My own prolonged presence in the local arena-through my academic, practical, and personal involvement in the theatre, the Cankam, and the lives of rural artists in general and that of my actorhusband in particular-appears to have been pivotal in the emergence of the debate. In combination with my "Western identity," my presence has sometimes served as a focus on which members of the intelligentsia could project critical arguments. Involvement always generates emotions. Conforming to academic convention, researchers usually try to distance themselves from such emotions to avoid endangering the "objectivity"of their work, but we may well ask to what extent this is really possible or even desirable. Investigating contested issues-even issues as simple as a theatre's name-involves messy relationships with the outside world and accommodation of the personal within the analytical framework of academic research (Pandey 1998, 2)-a matter with which I am still struggling.5 Without laying claim to a final solution-for it should be clear that my representation of the issue is just one among the many possi-

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

100

ble views throwing light on the problem of naming-the aim of this essay is to point out some of the sensitivities involved in the naming issue as I have perceived them, in particular on the part of the performers representing the Cankam.6 By initiating this discussion, I wish to create a space for the memories and opinions of the people most directly involved in the theatre, that is, the rural, professional performers whose voices have been marginalized in the dominant discourse and in Tamil theatre's written history. Even though, ideally, these voices should be heard directly, constraints of a social and practical nature prevent their direct expression. Consequently, like other subaltern voices these voices, too, continue to depend on mediation in order to be heard outside their immediate environment. Whether or not I am the most appropriate mediator remains a moot point, but I hope that the following observations will stimulate others to take this role upon themselves.

About the Cankam The main objectives of the Cankam-an officially registered society-are to promote kattaikkuttuas a theatre form in its own right and to further the interests of professional performers.7 Since its small-scale inception ten years ago the Cankam has developed into an umbrella organization with a number of activities, including training in kattaikkuttu,the organization of an annual theatre festival, and the production of new and often innovative plays (de Bruin, 2000). To implement these activities, the Cankam has to operate not only within the informal sector comprising rural professional performers and their regular village audiences, but also at the interface between the rural society and the bureaucratic state. Most kattaikkuttuperformers are well aware of the various advantages offered by the state and its institutions. Few of them, however, are able to gain access to these privileges. Bureaucratic support for the folk performing arts has been unequally distributed on the basis of somewhat vague criteria concerning the standards of performance. Only a few selected theatre companies have been patronized by these official institutions and profited from the new possibilities for support offered by them.8 The existence of most other companies has remained hidden-which has helped to reaffirm the idea among the urban middle classes that the kattaikkuttutradition is dead or dying (de Bruin 1999, 155-156). Membership in the Cankam is voluntary and on an individual basis rather than on the basis of "companies," the organizational unit for this kind of theatre. Of the local performers who know of Cankam's existence, some have joined it while others have not. In 1998 the association had 184 members, who live in villages and provincial towns of

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

101

northern Tamil Nadu and the southern part of neighboring Andhra Pradesh.9 Performers seeking or rejecting membership in the Cankam appear to be influenced by practical reasons, such as their geographical distance from Kanchipuram, as well as by the internal divisions within the occupational group-divisions that can be traced to differences in caste and professional competence, as well as to the competitive nature of the local performance market. In order to safeguard their access to performance opportunities, performers representing a particular theatre company maintain strategic alliances with patrons they do not wish to share with other performers. Most of these alliances are bonds between performers and rural patrons. But they also have come to include the strategic links formed occasionally between leaders of rural theatre companies and members of the urban intelligentsia. From the point of view of the performers, these alliances represent opportunities to secure nontraditional performance venues and "official" honors-for instance in the form of awards and pensions from the state government-and as a means to present their dramatic performances to an urban audience. Kuttu and Terukkuttu During the course of my work I gradually recognized that the naming of the theatre was problematic. My changing ideas with regard to the theatre's name and its implications for the performers and the theatre form are illustrated by my having used the names "terukkuttu" and "kuttu"to refer to the theatre before opting for the name "kattaikkuttu."10Among representatives of the urban arts establishment and the Tamil bureaucracy the theatre was popularized under the name "terukkuttu," probably from the moment of its introduction to the urban arts scene during the late 1950s.11 "Terukkuttu"is sometimes translated as "street (teru)theatre (kuttu)."The term "terukkuttu "is used in the north of Tamil is the which Nadu, occasionally by villagers homeland of the tradition, and it may occur in the official names of local theatre companies (as in the Mariyamman Terukkuttu Nataka Capa). In everyday parlance, however, rural spectators and performers generally refer to dramatic shows in this style as "kuttu"without any prefixes.12 Even though the term "kuttu"denotes dramatic as well as dance performances in general,13 village informants in my fieldwork area tacitly understood it to refer to performances whose style was defined by the presence of kattai ornaments. The founders of the Cankam, however, disqualified the term "kuttu"on the grounds that the term's generality would fail to identify their specific theatrical style outside the homeland of the tradition.14

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

102

The Performers' Point of View The name "kattaikkuttu" refers to the most important visual features of the theatre: the kattai ornamentation. Kattai (or kattai camankal) is a technical term that is used by performers and spectators in my fieldwork area to denote the head, breast, and shoulder ornaments worn by a special category of heroic characters, usually male, who are known as kattai vesam (Plate 9). The presence of the kattai ornamentation in performances requires special stage entrances for the characters wearing them and a style of acting that emphasizes the heroic. Furthermore, it distinguishes kattaikkuttufrom the other full-fledged theatre genre that is popular in the same region, the dramaor natakam, which does not employ this ornamentation. The drama style of acting, costumes, and stage conventions combines elements from indigenous local theatres and Western (European) melodrama introduced to India during the nineteenth century (Plate 10). The hybrid-popular drama style provided the model for the early Tamil films. Although some performers claim that kattaikkuttuwas one of the old names of the theatre,15 until quite recently it was not used by members of the local audiences traditionally exposed to it. Yet the name "kattaikkuttu"is readily understood and has been accepted by many villagers in the area where I carried out my research, exactly because it emphasizes the presence of the kattai and the performance style associated with them. Nowadays the name "kattaikkuttu" frequently appears on leaflets announcing dramatic performances in this style. Furthermore, it has been adopted by several theatre companies, among them professional and amateur groups of rural actors (Plate 11), and by a group of spectators near the village of Vallimalai who started a fan club called the KattaikkuttuRacikar Manram. This is not to say that all rural performers agree on the use of the term "kattaikkuttu": their internal divisions, played out and played upon by the various agents active in the local Tamil field of the performing arts, appear to prevent such a consensus.16 The coining of the name "kattaikkuttu" should be seen as the outcome of the interplay between the findings of researchers such as myself and the aspirations of the performers involved in the foundation of the Cankam. These findings concern in particular the distinction made in my fieldwork area between, on the one hand, complex, all-night dramatic performances involving a group of about fifteen actors and musicians and, on the other, the now almost obsolete practice of terukkuttu.This practice refers to processional dramatic presentations by two actors-a male character wearing kattaiornaments and a female character-who precede the karakamor pitcher symbolizing

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

103

the goddess Mariyamman when she is taken out in procession during her annual festival.17According to performers, the two players used to be deputed by the same theatre company, which would then perform the all-night show on the night following the performance of the terukkuttu. The mistaken association of contemporary all-night theatrical performances with the mobile dramatic presentations acted out in the streets or teru during daytime-that is, the terukkuttuproper-and, consequently, the absence of a stage or well-defined performance area is, in the eyes of performers, one of the main reasons why their performances are treated so disparagingly by the urban elite.18 Another reason-grounded in the theatre's historical development and cited with some reluctance by hereditary performers-is the fact that the practice of terukkuttuappears to have been the prerogative of a few Vannar (washermen) lineages of performers. Performers who belonged to these lineages felt that the name "terukkuttu" drew attention to their caste background and, by implication, to their former subordinated position in the feudal mamul system of hereditary and locality-specific rights-cum-obligations to perform-a system of which they preferred not to be reminded. This system of interdependent client/patron relationships distributed occupational, ritual, and dramatic tasks thought necessary for the well-being of the entire village. In return it conferred relative status, respect, and a remuneration in kind on its participants determining their status within the village community (de Bruin 1998b, 268). The gradual collapse of this system during the later nineteenth and early twentieth centuries appears to have undermined the economic and social position of rural hereditary performers who had trouble adjusting to commercial relationships between performers and patrons in which the remuneration, conditions, and quality of performance became the subject of negotiation. Economically it was no longer rewarding for hereditary performers to fulfill their performance duties (and claim their performance rights)-certainly not in view of the competition they experienced from the emerging commercial dramaor natakam companies. At the same time, they found it difficult to dissociate themselves from the social pressure and social control associated with the rural mamul system that had always governed their performances. on the grounds Many performers rejected the name "terukkuttu" that the word has a derogatory connotation in Tamil.19The negative implications of the term are linked with the low status of the rural Tamil stage of which this theatre tradition forms part. Stimulated by the advent of pan-Indian and regional forms of nationalism, the newly emerged urban middle classes embarked on a search for indigenous

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

104

forms of modernity. This development, in combination with the collapse of the mamul system and the concomitant social and economic transformation of the rural society, appears in Tamil Nadu to have contributed to the construction of an image that presented the local stage as primitive, backward, and antimodern. The urban elite's negative perception of professional performers-both male and femalewas also influenced by social reform movements such as the antiNautch (anti-Devadasi) movement during the 1930s and 1940s. This movement sought to ban the practice of dedicating girls to Hindu temple deities for whom they had to fulfill ritual tasks, including dance performances. "Progressive"opinion tended to emphasize especially the "excesses"-for example prostitution-that were perceived to result from such traditional (backward) customs and the lifestyles associated with them.20 In the discourse of the urban middle classes, the theatre's exponents themselves were to be blamed for having brought about the deterioration of the Tamil stage in general and the rural stage in particular. The intelligentsia tended to attribute the theatre's degenerate condition to a complex of factors, including the performers' low social status in terms of caste and income, their lack of formal education, their "immorality,"and the impropriety of Tamil as a language of the legitimate stage.21The disrespect for the rural stage and its exponents was especially strong during the first half of the twentieth century, but it lives on-in a more subdued form-today.22 Performers insisted that the low status of their tradition, and that of the rural stage in general, have frustrated their efforts to gain the government recognition to which they feel entitled (especially in view of the physical hardships their profession entails) and to carve out a "respectful"niche for their theatre in the competitive field of the performing arts in Tamil Nadu.23 While the term "terukkuttu" evokes a particular set of connotations and values for the hereditary performers whose personal and professional lives were (and to a lesser extent still are) inextricably bound up with the local village society, these perceptions may not be shared by members of the urban arts establishment. At present, the urban elite uses the name "terukkuttu" to denote one of Tamil Nadu's officially "recognized" folk forms, foregrounding an interpretation of the term that fits the frame of reference they entertain with regard to the preservation and promotion of India's rural folk art forms as important aspects of Indian and regional Tamil culture. These differences in perception of the theatre's identity and status have played a key role in the naming debate.

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

105

The Debate Part of the debate revolves around the use and interpretation of the prefixes "teru"and "kattai."T. Iramacami, a Tamil scholar of the performing arts, argues that terukkuttuappears to be the theatre's appropriate name because it is derived from the arena where it is performed;24 in other words, the theatre should be called terukkuttu because it is performed in the street (teru). In the perception of performers, however, the prefix "teru"did not match the reality of their performance practices. The spatial frame-which may form part of a street or road within which a performance takes place-is defined through its location (often opposite a temple), its orientation with regard to the cardinal points, and the dramatic conventions governing the use of this space for the time of the performance.25 Therefore, they felt that instead of reflecting the transformation of ordinary space into a well-defined (and hence more prestigious) performance area, the prefix "teru"created a suggestion of disrespectability and could be easily misinterpreted. Not only did it leave the actual performance space undefined ("terukkuttuperformed somewhere in the street"), it also carried the risk of misrepresenting their performances as mobile dramatic presentations-events belonging to an earlier feudal system in which most of today's performers are no longer involved and with which they do not like to be associated. Ilaiya Patmanatan, a prominent Sri Lankan Tamil theatre director who worked in exile in Madras, is one of the few to have spoken out with regard to the naming issue. Describing kuttu as the "only fullfledged theatre form in Tamil (Nadu) today," he wonders how the prefix "teru"came to be attached to such a "total" art form, who introduced it, and how the performers could have brought themselves to He says that nowhere in the Tamil agree to use the word "terukkuttu." literature, which is more than two thousand years old, can one find references combining the word "kuttu"with the prefix "ter." Observing that the respectability of an art form is inherently related to the social status of its practitioners and spectators, he finds, as do many performers, that the prefix "teru"lends "kuttu"a connotation of poverty (elimai) and disrespectability (ilivu). But, putting aside the localized meaning ofkattai when used in the context of the theatre, he objects to the use of the name "kattaikkuttu" on the grounds that the term "kattai" in Tamil means "block (of wood), piece of timber" (Tamil Lexicon 1982, 2:665). He argues that this word does not do justice to the majesty and richness of the wooden ornamentation worn by the actors. Instead he proposes the name "Tamiltecikkuttu"(Tamil desi koothu).26 Journalist V. R. Devika provided the following explanation of

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

106

de Bruin

the term "Tamil desi koothu"in one of the major English-language Indian newspapers: Desi is the term given to regional theatreforms in the dramatreatise but in colloquialTamilit denotes national.So Tamil the Natyashastra, desikoothuwould simplymean Tamil national theatre to Tamilsand Tamilregional theatre to the rest of India.27 This quote introduces a second theme pervading the naming debate: the local intelligentsia's search for an "indigenous" Tamil theatre form. This search links up with the ideals of the nationalist Tamil movement as well as with pan-Indian ideas of a modern, indigenous theatre idiom.28 During the last decades of the nineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth century, this search tended to emphasize the "modern" identity of newly emerging urban theatres. Drawing inspiration from Western stage techniques, theatre conventions, and theatre repertoires, in Tamil Nadu this movement contrasted itself with the popular (rural) stage-which, as we have seen, was projected as degenerate and "disrespectable."29While Western drama (and to a lesser extent Sanskrit drama) served as a model for the urban elite Tamil stage in earlier days, it seems that this function is slowly being taken over by models provided by "indigenous" folk arts, among them kattaikkuttu.Parallel to the perception of kattaikkuttuas a dying theatre form, a view has emerged among members of the urban arts establishment-among urban theatre people in particular-which sees kattaikkuttu, rather than the earlier urban stage inspired by Sanskrit and Western models or the popular drama, as an appropriate candidate through which to realize the desire for an indigenous Tamil theatre.30 Recent urban theatre productions have borrowed from the kattaikkuttu idiom and used some of its performance practices, while some theatre people claim that their production is rooted in "(folk) tradition."31 Although the notion of "(folk) tradition" is not very clear, it is sometimes perceived as being the closest, albeit degenerate, remnant of a theatrical past of greater authenticity and purity-as represented, for instance, by the Tamil classics or, in the case of the South Indian dance bharatanatyam,by the collection of "rules"found in India's oldest work on dramaturgy, the Natyasastraof Bharata. Popular and scholarly works frequently contain allusions to kattaikkuttu's ancient roots, most of which remain undocumented.32 Such references apparently enhance the idea of the theatre's authenticity, while the assumption of a dramatic "paradise lost" encourages the invention of new cultural identities and forms (Clifford 1986, 112-114). Finally, the rhetoric involved in the construction of kattaikkuttu

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING

IN TAMIL

NADU

107

as an almost extinct and degenerate theatre form that must be rescued from the hands of illiterate exponents in order to be restored to its previous glorious state is a powerful instrument by which to legitimize, for example, practices of biased patronage as well as other forms of appropriation of the theatre by members of the urban elite. The depiction of kattaikkuttuperformers-on the basis of their lack of education or moral character-as incapable of representing the theatre in its "appropriate"form creates the need to have the tradition represented by knowledgeable outsiders (representatives of the arts establishment and researchers) in order to salvage, redeem, and promote it. Consequently, the credit for the revival and reform of such a threatened, deteriorated theatre in an "authentic" or "adapted"form tends to be attributed to representatives of the urban intelligentsia rather than to its rural exponents. Kattaikkuttuperformers, by contrast, are interested in winning appreciation for their profession and their individual artistic contributions-especially from the urban intelligentsia and the government -rather than in the creation of a Tamil "national" theatre. Proud of their art form, they do not share with their urban counterparts the idea that kattaikkuttuis a dying form.33 A modest survey in my fieldwork area revealed that the number of kattaikkuttuperformances per year as well as the remuneration for performances is steadily increasthe theatre's vitality as ing (de Bruin 1999, 145-149)-underlining well as the fact that India's urban elite has lost touch with the rural reality in which most of these folk arts operate. To counteract the notion entertained by the urban middle class of kattaikkuttuas an endangered theatre form, the Cankam has been organizing annual kattaikkuttufestivals in Kanchipuram and several other rural locations since 1990. Even though the target audiences of these festivals have been local villagers supporting the theatre, Cankam members consider the publicity generated by these events to be an important side-effect that has helped to communicate the vitality and dignity of the tradition to the urban elite. During these festivals the Cankam has presented different styles of kattaikkuttuto demonstrate the theatre's aesthetic richness, heterogeneity, and flexibility. Preferring not to rest on their laurels, members of the Cankam have actively claimed their rights as practicing exponents of the theatre who are entitled to decide upon the "appropriateness" of the theatre's constantly evolving forms, content, and repertoire through the production of traditional and innovative plays in kattaikkuttustyle. One of the highlights of the Cankam's efforts was the mega-production of the Mahabharatain 1998 by a cast of sixty males and females. The production was presented as the association's contribution to the celebration

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

108

de Bruin

of India's fifty years of independence. P. Rajagopal, hereditary kattaikkuttu actor, playwright, and director, took the extraordinary step of training a group of professional natakam actresses in kattaikkuttuthereby contesting claims of performers and scholars that the theatre is the exclusive artistic and ritual domain of male performers. Another theme in the naming debate-one that emerged alongside the urban elite's claim on kattaikkuttuas a representative of the national Tamil theatre-is the perception that renaming the theatre constitutes a violation of "tradition."In the following quote from a newspaper article by V. R. Devika, the notion of an attack on the theatre termed "traditional"is suggested in particular by the qualification of the renaming attempt as having taken place "suddenly": Koothuis the traditionaltheatreof the Tamilpeople. The totaltheatre form has been known as Therukoothufor severaldecades. Suddenly there is an attemptto rename it as Kattaikoothuand an associationof Koothu groups called the KattaikoothuMunnetraValarchiSangham has been formed in Kancheepuram.34 The quote emphasizes that the name "terukkuttu" is well established while simultaneously maintaining a sense of ambiguity by referring to "the traditional theatre of the Tamil people" as "Koothu"-without any prefix-and by not making explicit the causal relationship between the attempt to rename and its agent, the Cankam. The newspaper article from which this quote is taken appeared in 1993-three years after the foundation of the Cankam and the introduction of the name "kattaikkuttu." By that time the term "kattaikkuttu" had become quite well known in addition to being associated with the activities of the Cankam. The description of the attempt of renaming as "suddenly" taking place might imply that this act came from an unexpected side-that is, from a section of the rural exponents of the theatre themselves-rather than referring to its timing.35 The unexpectedness of the renaming, and the establishment of the Cankam, may have been perceived by some as threatening to the balance of powers in the Tamil field of the performing arts. Moreover, the word "suddenly"might also implicate the audacity of the subaltern perpetrators in challenging and claiming control over something "traditional," something that is presented in the quote as the national property of the Tamil people. T. Iramacami, in an essay on the Tamil folk performing arts, invokes a similar feeling of an endangered "tradition" symbolically expressed by the change of the theatre's name:

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

109

Because someone who has come here from abroad to conduct researchhas told them so on the ground that they [the actors] wear ornamentsmade of wood, some have begun to refer to the theatreas These persons are trying to change something which kattaikkuttu. came to be knownunder the name terukkuttu havingbeen performed in [that] performancearea for a verylong time ... 36 In contrast to the ambiguity of agency that characterized the earlier quote, this author clearly attributes the attempt to change tradition to a "foreign" hand. Implicit in the fear of something well established being threatened by change is the idea that perceives tradition as static, homogeneous, and well defined-a notion encountered frequently in the rhetoric of the politics of culture and national identity. Ashis Nandy has argued that the fear of the violation of tradition, which in order to function as an insurance against change should be constructed as static and resistant to change, appears to be a psychological reaction of members of the urban middle classes to the effects of rapid modernization. In this perception, traditional art forms are seen as antidotes that can somehow counteract the anxieties generated by the "amoral"frame of contemporary modern life-fears that appear to affect the urban middle class in particular (Nandy 1998, 5). Attempts to influence tradition violate the imaginary safety fence offered by tradition's constructed stability. Such attempts, whether believed to come from a subaltern "inside" or a Western "outside," constitute an attack on what Partha Chatterjee has called the "inner" domain of culture mediated by the urban intelligentsia and perceived by them as the "essence" and "sovereign part" of Indian culture and Indian national identity (Chatterjee 1993, 6-13).37 Looking back, I can only speculate about the reasons why the issue of the theatre's name took the shape of a subdued polemic. The differences in perceptions between the Cankam members and the representatives of the urban intelligentsia demonstrate that the theatre's name can never be a "neutral"issue. Although linguistic theory tends to perceive the relation between an "object"(or "event")and the word that denotes it as fairly arbitrary (Hanks 1996, 7), when applied in a real-life context the act of naming expresses the relationshipsimbued with greater or lesser power and authority-between the phenomenon it denotes and its "reporters" (including performers talking about their profession). The schism between representatives of urban and rural interest groups and their different agendas, expectations, tastes, and reception of artistic performance (de Bruin 1998a, 35), in combination with the

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

110

differences in social status of the "contestants"in the debate, may have contributed to the controversy. In discussing the monopoly of legitimate naming, Pierre Bourdieu distinguishes between two strategies by which agents try to impose their vision of the divisions of the social world and their position in that world: "the insult, that idios logos through which an ordinary individual attempts to impose his point of view by taking the risk that a reciprocal insult may ensue, and the official naming, a symbolic act of imposition which has on its side all the strength of the collective, of the consensus, of common sense, because it is performed by a delegated agent of the state, that is, the holder of the monopolyof legitimatesymbolicviolence"(Bourdieu 1994, 239). Even though the positions in this issue cannot be formulated in terms of extreme opposition, the attempt by a collective of performers to rename their tradition-on the basis of their particular point of view and their particular self-interest-clearly falls into the category of idios logos.Their attempt to rename the theatre, and their success, are complicated by the fact that they lack the authority, personally and institutionally, to gain recognition for the perspective they are seeking to impose. Being less advantaged than members of the urban arts establishment and academia in terms of social and economic background, education, and other forms of cultural capital, their effort to establish a new, less "loaded" name of the theatre is pitted against the elite's authorized perspective of the tradition.38 This authoritative version backs the "official"name terukkuttu-ignoring, consciously or unconsciously, the negative connotations of this term for the exponents of the theatre-or proposes alternative names. Therefore the performers' attempt to rename the theatre tends to invite, at least at this moment, what Bourdieu terms "insult"rather than recognition. Furthermore, it seems that urban theatre people and researchers have associated the renaming of the theatre with my academic work and my active involvement in the foundation of the Cankam and its subsequent activities. This act of involvement-or intervention-of a Western research student and the use of this theatre for the development of innovative productions appears to have raised concerns among representatives of the arts establishment and the local scholarly community with regard to its legitimacy and authority. Legitimacy and authority are relative notions, of course, bound up as much with the academic practice of transforming culture and experience into text as well as with the wider debate about the "contestation of culture" that rages-with respect to different art forms and different intercultural contexts-both inside and outside India.39But when suspicions about the intentions of researchers are introduced into the

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

111

discussion, open debate is foreclosed-either by creating an unnegotiable stalemate between parties or the exclusion from the discussion of the "accused." Whatever the true nature of their intentions, researchers cannot control the reading of their ethnographic texts, which are open to multiple interpretations (Clifford 1986, 120), though they can control their interactions with other people, especially their informants and colleagues, by observing rules of basic respect. Suspicions about intent can be given emotional force when a researcher's "foreign identity" is brought into play.40Stressing the foreign nature of a cultural intervention-and all research about culture involves intervention-offers scope to change a subaltern voice from the "inner"domain of culture (or its representation) into the voice of an outsider. This has been a well-tested tactic used by the colonized to subvert colonial power and hegemony, but it continues to be relevant in a postcolonial context involving different parties both inside and outside the nation-state (Chatterjee 1993, 3-13, 120-121). Used in this way, different readings of written and performed texts, and their authors' (perceived) intentions, can become powerful instruments stirring up political and ideological antagonisms in a debate.

Behind the Debate In this essay I have described a contemporary debate about the naming of a rural folk theatre in Tamil Nadu in South India. The debate reflects the dynamics of the Tamil field of the performing arts and the conflicting forces and vested interests at work within this competitive arena. I have drawn attention to the problem of naming because, underlying this sensitive linguistic issue, there appear to be other issues at stake with far-reaching consequences for those engaged in the rural theatre. These issues concern, in particular, two questions: Who can claim to be the theatre's "legitimate" representatives, and who will ultimately decide its form and content? The sensitivities involved in the naming or renaming of this particular Tamil theatre do not present an isolated case. The problem of naming an art form is encountered in other cultural settings as well -as demonstrated, for instance, by the discussions in Asian Theatre Journal about the appropriate term for the type of Chinese traditional theatre associated with the city now called Beijing, formerly Peking.41 Apart from the interests of the exponents of the contested formswhich more often than not seem to be easily overruled by representatives of the arts establishment and academia-the naming of art forms involves questions of local and national identities, researchers' desires

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

112

to systematize, standardize, and universalize terms denoting a particular genre (including, in the case of non-Western scripts, the problem of transcribing these terms into roman script), the general public's familiarity with the terms, and the desirability of translating non-Western terms denoting genres and styles into the English language and into performance categories recognized in the Western world. Within the Tamil field of the performing arts, renaming an art form in order to divest it of some of its negative associations was also at issue in the case of South Indian dance. While the dance was known variously as nautch, cinna melam,taci (dasi) attam, and catiror catirkkacceri,in the mid-1930s it was renamed bharatanatyamby the upper-class Hindu elite in Madras as part of a strategic move to "revive"the dance. During the process of transforming the dance from "untouchable" activity to national art form, the hereditary community of non-Brahmin dancers was disenfranchised and replaced by members of this elite, which was dominated by high-caste Brahmins.42 In the case of kattaikkuttu,however, the act of renaming was engendered by a group of rural, mostly hereditary, performers of the theatre. Their subordinate position within the social hierarchy-and, consequently, in the tension-ridden and competitive Tamil field of the performing artsmay have made this act politically less acceptable because it threatened the authority of the arts establishment and the local academia. Consequently, the controversy about the theatre's name manifested itself, not at the village level that has produced and supported this theatre, but at the opaque interface between the urban intelligentsia and the Cankam. The Cankam represents but one segment of rural folk performers-the recent organization of which appears not only to have strengthened local audiences' pride in the theatre genre but also to have made the performers more acutely aware of the various forces operating within the Tamil field of the performing arts. The debate about the theatre's name shows the schism within this local field, which is divided into an urban subfield, dominated by an educated elite representing academia, the arts establishment, and the state, and a rural subfield representing the largely informal sector of the folk performing arts. (See Bharucha 1992, 10.) Operating within the same domain, these subfields show opposition and dissociation as well as mutual attraction and continuity. The internal divisions within and between these subfields are continuously (and often subtly) exploited by various agents in order to protect and augment their share of the limited material resources and symbolic power generated by the field. Thus it is the dynamics of this field that will ultimately determine the name of the theatre, as well as its future shape and con-

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

113

tent, its "legitimate" exponents, and its "legitimate" researchers. Both exponents and researchers will have to be content with living in awkward symbiosis with a few "illegitimate" members of their species who will continue to do their work and voice their deviating opinions.43 NOTES I wish to thank Stuart Blackburn, Gauri Viswanathan, Rupalee Verma, and Martin Ramstedt for their comments on earlier versions of this essay. To facilitate the readability of the text I have omitted the use of diacritics in the transliteration of Tamil and Sanskrit words. While different spellings of these words are possible, I have used the transliteration-without diacritics-provided by the TamilLexiconand Sanskrit dictionaries. The translations of Tamil quotes are mine. 1. The name means "Association for the Growth and Development of the Art of Kattaikkuttuin Tamil Nadu." The use of Tamil Nadu in the name of the association is somewhat misleading as the kattaikkuttutradition performed by professionals is basically confined to the northern parts of the state and to the southern part of neighboring Andhra Pradesh. It was added on the insistence of the Registrar's Office at the time of registration. Similar attempts at organizing rural kattaikkuttuperformers have been undertaken by A Code Land in Ulunderpet, an NGO which is now defunct, and by the Dharmapuri District Terukkuttu Kalainar Cankam in Krishnagiri. 2. Alternatively spelled as "kattaikoothu,""koothu,"and "therukoothu." Outside my fieldwork area, in the region around Pondicherry, performances in the style were sometimes announced in the printed advertisements as kelikkainikalccikal. 3. See, for instance, Devika (1991; 1993), Patmanatan (1991), and Iramacami (1996, 4). In addition to these public statements, comments on the naming issue have been conveyed to me through personal letters. 4. See, for example, the review of one of the Cankam's new plays by A. Mankai in which she writes that "although discussions about the question of [naming the theatre] terukkuttuor kattaikkuttuhave emerged, I will use here the name kuttu so as to avoid problems" (Mankai 1993). 5. The direction of a social scientist's interest, and his or her relations with the social phenomenon being studied, determine the problem selected for study as well as the analytical concepts employed as tools for study (Weber 1970, 12). An approach that tries to make the researcher's relationship with the "object of study" an integral aspect of its analytical framework links up with the notion of "subjectivity"in cultural and social studies. Max Weber considers subjective or interpretative understanding, as distinguished from external observation, a specific characteristic of social knowledge (Weber, as cited by Eldridge in Weber 1970, 15). Recent discussions of subjectivity/objectivity and the researcher's position can be found in Bourdieu (1993a), Clifford and Marcus (1986), and Tedlock and Mannheim (1995).

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

114

6. I do not deny that the naming issue has aroused emotions in members of the urban elite, too. But since I am associated more closely with the performers, whose voices tend to be less well represented in the dominant discourse, I have chosen to highlight their perspective with regard to the naming issue. 7. "Professional"refers to the fact that most of the performers depend on all-night performances for their livelihood. Professionalism has not always been viewed positively by the urban middle classes-in particular in the case of women performers. Early modern Tamil theatre-as promoted, for instance by Pammal Campanta Mutaliyar (1873-1964)-explicitly stressed the amateur status of its urban-based, intellectual performers while contrasting their artistic efforts and devotion to the art favorably with those of rural professional performers. 8. An article in the Indian Express reports on the government of India's self-assessment of the functioning of the zonal cultural centers (ZCC) set up by Rajiv Gandhi in 1985. The investigating committee concluded that "vested interests" had led to the same groups participating in all the ZCC crafts and performing arts festivals (melas). The committee recommended that greater effort be made in selecting crafts/textiles/handicrafts artisans instead of inviting the "same groups who become experts in participating in melas" (Indian Express,December 22, 1998). This conclusion appears to apply also to the selection of representatives of the folk performing arts. 9. It is nearly impossible to estimate the total number of professional kattaikkuttuperformers as many of them have not been identified. The core area of the theatre covers, as far as we know, the (former) Chingleput, North Arcot, South Arcot, and Dharmapuri districts of Tamil Nadu with perhaps more than two hundred professional exponents in each of these districts. 10. See, for instance, de Bruin (1987, 56-73) and de Bruin and Brakel-Papenhuyzen (1992, 38-70). 11. E. Kirushnayyar,a judge and well-known theatre person, was chosen by the Tamilnatu Cankita Nataka Cankam (Tamil Nadu Music and Theatre Association), established in 1955, to preserve and promote the terukkuttu tradition. He recounts the organization of three village theatre festivals by this association in Thanjavur, Madras, and Coimbatore in 1956, 1957, and 1961 in which-apparently for the first time-terukkuttu groups were invited to perform (Kirushnayyar 1978,4). 12. See Frasca (1984, 96; 1990, 25). 13. The TamilLexicon(1982, 2:1071) provides the following meanings for kuttu: "dance, dancing"; "dramatic performance, action"; "droll or ludicrous action, as a pantomime." 14. The term "terukkuttu" involves a similar problem because theoretit ically could refer to all kinds of performance (kuttu)acted out in the streets (teru).Arivunampi defines this term, therefore, as follows: "In spite of the fact that terukkuttucan denote several different forms of drama (natakam),it refers here only to the theater (kuttu)performed with kattaior wooden ornaments" (Arivunampi 1986, III and 2-3). 15. Other names used to denote the theatre were, according to these

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING

IN TAMIL

NADU

115

performers, "carnatic kuttu"and "nattaikuttu."Both terms refer to the musical style of the theatre (respectively Carnatic music and nattai raga, the latter being one of the most important heroic ragas used in kattaikkuttuperformances). 16. The "local Tamil field of the performing arts" represents the diffuse forces generated by the various agents involved in the performing arts during their attempts to maximize their share in the limited material and symbolic power (prestige, authority, legitimacy) produced by the field. I have adapted the term "Tamil field of the performing arts"from Bourdieu's concept of the "field of cultural production" to refer to the local situation encountered in Tamil Nadu (Bourdieu 1983, 311-356; 1993b, 1-25). 17. De Bruin (1999, 63-71); Frasca (1984, 96; 1990, 25). A practice that appears similar to processional terukkuttuhas been described for the bhavaitheatre of Gujarat in India (Desai 1972, 173-176). 18. Other reasons, such as the urban elite's unfamiliarity with the performance style and the praxis of kattaikkuttuperformers, were hardly ever cited by performers. 19. According to the Tamil Lexicon (1982, 4:2037), terukkuttumeans "dramatic performance of dance in a street" and "that which is a public disgrace." See also Campanta Mutaliyar on the negative connotation of the word "terukkuttatikal" or "performers of terukkuttu"(Campanta Mutaliyar 1962, 84, 98). 20. Anandhi (1991, 739-746); Srinivasan (1985, 1869-1876). 21. This attitude is illustrated by the following quote found in a Government of India publication of 1956 (republished in 1981): "In the eighties and nineties of the last century a drama in the Tamil country was something to be looked down upon not only for its lack of any intrinsic value but for its lack of character, respectability, and purity in those who were connected with it. For a multitude of reasons no parent in any decent family would willingly allow a member of his family of any age or sex to see a play" (Gopalratnam 1981, 119). A similar opinion is expressed by Perumal (1981, 138-139), who comments on the deterioration of Tamil drama which, consequently, had to be rescued from the hands of "streetdancers"who had caused its ruin; see also Baskaran (1981, 23-25) and Rangacharya (1971, 112-113). For a discussion of the low status of Tamil theatre see de Bruin 1998b, 266-269; 1999, 94-96. On the perceived unfitness of Tamil-as compared to English, Sanskrit, and even Telugu-as a stage language, see Campanta Mutaliyar 1962, 98-99. 22. See, for instance, the introduction to a collection of essays on modern Tamil theatre that describes the Tamil stage as having been rescued from the hands of its illiterate exponents by representatives of the intelligentsia who are then praised for its renaissance (Ca. Cu. Iramar Ilanko in Tamilil navina natakam1996, introduction). 23. For many performers, recognition involves the possibility of enjoying the fruits of the bureaucratic state, such as entitlement to old-age pensions for artists, awards, and opportunities to perform at regional, national, and international cultural festivals. 24. "Arankattai vaittu peyarittate cirappanatakum; terukkuttutan

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

116

de Bruin

cariyana peyarakum" (Iramacami 1996, 4). Fashioning a literary translation of such Tamil quotes into English is often problematic-and hampers the representation of the arguments. 25. A temporary kattaikkuttustage consists of a ground-level square area about fifteen by fifteen feet marked off by four poles. Between the two poles at the front corners of the stage is a rope from which are hung two light bulbs or gaslights provided by the village. Between the two poles at the back of the stage is a curtain, owned by the theatre company, separating the stage from the greenroom-a simple temporary structure, made of coconut thatch, consisting of three walls and a roof, the fourth side being the curtain. The audience is seated on the ground along three sides of the performance area. The absence of a clear separation between performance area and audience (and between the domain of the performance and the domain of actuality) is illustrated by the fact that the audience is often addressed by actors as the "capa,"a term referring to the regal assembly of kings, sages, and gods figuring in the kattaikkuttunarratives as well as to the assembled crowd of village people. 26. Ilaiya Patmanatan in Tinamani, March 14, 1991. 27. V. R. Devika in Indian Express,March 16, 1991. 28. The search for a modern Tamil theatre has been characterized by the ambivalent-and sometimes hostile-attitude toward North Indian, in particular Sanskrit, influences, which tend to be regarded as Aryan or Brahmin dominance of the Dravidian South. (See, for instance, Ramaswamy 1997 who describes the political history of the Tamil language movement from 1891 to 1970.) 29. This urban-elite movement introduced Western dramatic techniques and conventions and built up a repertoire featuring Indian puranic and epic themes, Tamil translations and adaptations of English and French plays (Shakespeare, Moli&re) and the Sanskrit classics, as well as plays on social themes relevant to the times. New stage techniques that took their inspiration from the nineteenth-century European theatre were transmitted through the mediation of Parsi, Kannada, and Telugu commercial theatre companies visiting Tamil Nadu from about 1880 to 1920. While some exponents of this movement continued in the tradition of musical plays, others promoted prose plays of limited duration emphasizing a more realistic performance style. (See, for example, Encyclopaediaof Tamil Literature1990, 1:491-505, and Campanta Mutaliyar 1998, originally published in six volumes during 1932-1938, presenting this modern Tamil playwright's memories of his theatre career.) 30. Kattaikkuttuis sometimes promoted as the paramount form of indigenous Tamil theatre even though the tradition performed by professional exponents belongs to the northern parts of the state and is virtually unknown to audiences further south. 31. "Marapinveril tulirtta navina pataippu" ("a new creation sprouted from the roots of tradition")-a quote from a review of the modern Tamil play Auvai written by Inkulap, dramatized and directed by A. Mankai, and

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

117

performed by the theatre group Voicing Silence based in Madras (Varsa 1998). See also the review of the play GodHas ChangedHis Name,which relates the story of the Devadasis under British rule, conceived and written by Avanthi Medhuri and performed by the theatre group Koothuppattarai from Madras (Usha 1998). 32. See, for example, Arivunampi (1989, 43); Gargi (1966, 133); and Raman (1987, 6-7). 33. Yet a notion of nostalgia with regard to the theatre and its (recent) is maintained past by contemporary rural performers and spectators, too. This notion emphasizes the (perceived) higher standard of earlier performances and the greater ability of audiences to appreciate performances. 34. V. R. Devika in TheHindu, February 7, 1993. 35. A similar reaction from "within"directed toward attempts by the urban elite to appropriate subaltern cultural expressions has been documented by Rustom Bharucha in his article on the politics of indigenous theatre in Manipur (Bharucha 1991, 747-754). 36. "Kattaiyalanaanikalankalai anivatal, inru melai nattiliruntu inku vantu ayvu natattiyavar connar enpatarkakac cilar itaik kattaik kuttu enru alaittu varukinranar. Kalan kalamaka arankattaivaittu itarkut terukkuttu enru alaittu vantatai marra ivarkal muyanru varukinranar" Iramacami (1996, 4). When I offered my Ph.D. thesis to an Indian publisher for publication, one of the reviewers of the manuscript criticized a foreigner's intervention in the tradition and accused me of favoring a particular theatre company (the company that formed the case study of my research). 37. Chatterjee uses this term in the framework of India's colonial and postcolonial history to describe the domain of the spiritual, the family, and the national culture as distinguished from the material domain of the "outside" (the economy, statecraft, science, and technology). According to Chatterjee, Indian nationalism declared the realm of the spiritual its sovereign territory and refused to allow the colonial power to intervene in that domain. 38. Because of the controversy over the naming of the theatre, the term "kattaikkuttu" has become loaded as well. 39. On the contestation of culture see, for example, Bharucha (1992), Gross (1987, 71-75), Pavis (1996), Peabody (1997, 559-584), Richman (1995, 631-654), and Solomon (1994, 323-347). 40. Iramacami (1996, 4). For other examples of the antagonism between Indian and foreign intellectuals, which has become an academic reality, see the reactions-provoked by an article by Eugene van Erven (1989) about the actor Safdar Hashmi's violent death-of Sudipto Chatterjee and KavitaNagpal, as well as van Erven's subsequent response to these two critics, as pursued in several issues of The Drama Review (Chatterjee 1990, 16-18; van Erven 1990, 18-19; 1991, 17-19; Nagpal 1991, 11-12), and the opposition, analyzed by Rustom Bharucha, between Shivaram Karanth and Martha Ashton with regard to the nature and form of yakshagana,a performance tradition in Karnataka (South India) (Bharucha 1992, 261-266). 41. See Nancy A. Guy's article, "Peking Opera as 'National Opera' in

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

118

de Bruin

Taiwan: What's in a Name?" (Guy 1995, 86-87), and Samuel Leiter's subsequent discussion in "That Chinese Name Thing Again" in Asian TheatreJournal 15:1, iii-vi. 42. Allen (1997, 68, 94); Anandhi (1991, 739-741); O'Shea (1998, 45-63); Srinivasan (1985, 1869-1875). 43. For examples of illegitimate practitioners who do not enjoy the recognition and authority conferred by the center of a tradition, see Phillip Zarrilli's illuminating discussion about changes at the periphery of a tradition (Zarrilli 1992, 130-140). REFERENCES Allen, Matthew Harp. 1997. "Rewriting the Script for South Indian Dance." Drama Review41(3) (T155, Fall):63-100. Anandhi, S. 1991. "Representing Devadasis: 'Dasigal Mosavalai' as a Radical Text." Economicand Political Weekly26(11-12) (March) :739-746. Arivunampi, A. 1986. Tamilakattilterukkuttu.Karaikkuti:Amutan Nulakam. 1989 "Atukalam: malai vental."Nattupurakkalaikal.Karaikkuti:Amutan Nulakam.

Bamzai, Kaveree. 1998. "Rajiv'sCultural Pets to Get a Makeover." Indian Express (Madras), December 22. Baskaran, S. Theodore. 1981. The MessageBearers:TheNationalist Politics and theEntertainmentMedia in SouthIndia, 1880-1945. Madras: Cre-A Publications. Beteille, Andre. 1998. "Caste in Contemporary India." In C.J. Fuller, ed., CasteToday.SOAS Studieson SouthAsia: Understandingsand Perspectives, New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Bharucha, Rustom. 1991. "Politics of Indigenous Theater: Kanhailal in Manipur." Economicand Political Weekly26(11-12) (March) :747-754. .1992. Theaterand the World:Essays on Performanceand the Politics of Culture. New Delhi: Manohar. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1983. "The Field of Cultural Production, or the Economic World Revisited." Poetics12:311-356. 1993a. Outlineof a Theoryof Practice.Translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING

IN TAMIL

NADU

119

? 1993b. TheField of CulturalProduction:Essayson Art and Literature.Edited and introduced by RandalJohnson. New York:Colombia University Press. ? 1994. Language and SymbolicPower. Edited and introduced by John B. Thompson. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bruin, Hanne M. de. 1987. "The Art of Terukkuttu." Frontline (Madras) 4(15) (July 25-August 7):56-73. 1998a. "StudyingPerformance in South India: A Synthesis of Theories." South Asia Research:SpecialIssue on the PerformingArts of Asia (New Delhi) 18(1) (Spring):12-38. 1998b. "Different Perspectives on Folk Theater's State and Recent History." InJ. Assayag, ed., TheResourcesof History,Tradition,Narration,Nation in SouthIndia. Pondicherry: Institut Francais de Pondichery and L'Ecole Francaise d'Extreme-Orient. 1999. Kattaikkuttu:The Flexibilityof a South Indian TheaterTradition.Gonda Indological Studies 7. Groningen: Egbert Forsten. .2000. "The Right to Communicate and the Right to Perform." In Guy Poitevin, ed., CommunicationProcesses2: Defianceand Dominance.Pune: Centre for Cooperative Research in Social Sciences. Hanne M. de, and Clara Brakel-Papenhuyzen. 1992. Bruin, "The Death of Karna:Two Sides of a Story."Asian TheatreJournal9(1) (Spring) :38-70. Campanta Mutaliyar, Pammal. 1962. Natakat tamil. Madras: Arulperum Jothi. Reprinted in Pammal Campanta MutaliyarinUrainataiNulkal, pt 1. Chennai: International Institute of Tamil Studies, 1998. .1998. Nataka metai ninaivukal. Chennai: International Institute of Tamil Studies. Chatterjee, Partha. 1993. The Nation and Its Fragments:Colonialand PostcolonialHistories.Princeton: Princeton University Press. Chatterjee, Sudipto. 1990. "Postcolonial Imperialism?"Drama Review 34(3) (T 127, Fall) :16-18. Clifford, James. 1986. "On Ethnographic Allegory." In James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds., WritingCulture.

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

120

Clifford, James, and George E. Marcus (eds.). 1986. WritingCulture:ThePoeticsand PoliticsofEthnography.Berkeley: University of California Press. Desai, Sudha R. 1972. "Bhavai:A Medieval Form of Ancient Indian Dramatic Art (Natya) as Prevalent in Gujarat."Gujarat University thesis, Ahmedabad. Devika, V. R. 1991. "RevivingNative Art." Indian Express(Madras), March 16. 1993. "A Collective Expression of the Masses." TheHindu (Madras), February 7. Encyclopediaof Tamil Literature.1990. Madras: Institute of Asian Studies. Erven, Eugene van. 1989. "Plays,Applause, and Bullets: Safdar Hashmi's Street Theater." Drama Review33(4) (T 124, Winter):32-47. .1990. "Response of Eugene van Erven to Sudipto Chatterjee's Letter." Drama Review34(3) (T 127, Fall):18-19. 1991. "Ill-Informed White Male Academic Critic Gets Kicked in the Balls?" Drama Review35(4) (T 132, Winter):17-19. Frasca, Richard Armand. 1984. "The Terukkuttu: Ritual Theater of Tamilnadu." Ph.D. dissertation, University of California. 1990 The Theaterof the Mahabharata:TerukkuttuPerformancesin South India. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Balwant. 1906. Gargi, Folk Theatreof India. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Gopalratnam, V. C. 1981. "Tamil Drama." In Indian Drama. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Gross, Joan E. 1987. "Transformations of a Popular Culture Form in Northern France and Belgium." AnthropologicalQuarterly60(2) (April):71-76. Guy, Nancy A. 1995. "Peking Opera as 'National Opera' in Taiwan: What's in a Name?" Asian TheatreJournal 12(1) (Spring) :85-103. Hanks, William F. 1996. Language and CommunicativePractices.Boulder: Westview Press. Iramacami, Tulaci. 1996. "Nattuppurak kalaikalum karuttuppulappatum." Cilampam(Chennai, Loyola College) 37 (September):1-10. Kirushnayyar,E. 1978. "Terukkuttu."Vaikai (Madurai) 9:2-8.

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAMING IN TAMIL NADU

121

Leiter, Samuel L. 1998 "Editor's Note." Asian TheatreJournal15(1) (Spring):iii-vi. Mankai. 1993. "KalaiUlakam: 'Pancaputam' putiya kuttu." Tinamani (Madras), February 25. Nagpal, Kavita. 1991. "Another Angle on 'Plays, Applause, and Bullets."' Drama Review 35(3) (T 131, Fall):11-12. Nandy, Ashis (ed.). 1998 TheSecretPoliticsof OurDesires:Innocence,Culpability,and Indian Popular Cinema.Delhi: Oxford University Press. O'Shea, Janet. 1998. "'Traditional' Indian Dance and the Making of Interpretative Communities." Asian TheatreJournal 15(1) (Spring):45-63. Pandey, Gyanendra. 1998. "In Defence of the Fragment: Writing About Hindu-Muslim Riots in India Today." In Ranajit Guha, ed., A Subaltern Studies Reader, 1986-1995. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Patmanatan, Ilaiya. 1991. "Tamil teciyak kuttu." Tinamani (Madras), March 14. Patrice Pavis, (ed.). 1996. TheInterculturalPerformanceReader.London: Routledge. Peabody, Norbert. 1997. "Inchoate in Kota? Contesting Authority Through a North Indian Pageant-Play."AmericanEthnologist24(3):559-584. Perumal, A. N. 1981. Tamil Drama: Origin and Development.Madras: International Institute of Tamil Studies. Raman, K. L. 1987. Introduction to Enrum valum terukkuttu.Ulundurpet. A Code Land. Ramaswamy, Sumathi. 1997. Passions of the Tongue:Language Devotion in Tamil India, 1891-1970. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. Rangacharya, Adya. 1971. TheIndian Theater.New Delhi: National Book Trust. Richman, Paula. 1995. "Epic and State: Contesting Interpretations of the Ramayana."Public Culture7:631- 654. Solomon, Rakesh H. 1994. "Culture, Imperialism, and the Nationalist Resistance: Performance in Colonial India." TheaterJournal46(3) (October):323-347. Srinivasan, Amrit. 1985. "Reform and Revival: The Devadasi and Her Dance." Economicand Political Weekly20(44) (November) :1869-1876. Tamil Lexicon.1982. 6 vols. and supplement. Madras: University of Madras.

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

de Bruin

122

Tamilil navina natakam. 1996. Chennai: International Institute of Tamil Studies. Tedlock, Dennis, and Bruce Mannheim (eds.). 1995. TheDialogicEmergenceof Culture.Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Usha, R. 1998. "ATheme Lost." Indian Express(Madras), October 1. Varsa. 1998. "Kilavialla, mankai." Tinamani (Madras), October 14. Weber, Max. 1970. Max Weber:TheInterpretationof SocialReality.Edited and introduced by J. E. T. Eldridge. London: MichaelJoseph. Zarrilli, Phillip B. 1992. "A Tradition of Change: The Role of Patrons and Patronage in the Kathakali Dance-Drama." In Joan L. Erdman, ed., Arts Patronage in India: Methods,Motives,and Markets.New Delhi: Manohar.

This content downloaded from 128.248.155.225 on Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:43:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions