It is particularly problematic to talk of classical Indian dance.\u00a0 The problem stems partly from the definition of the word “classical”, and partly from the nature of the Indian dance forms.<\/p>\n
We will use three simple benchmarks to determine whether something is “classical”.\u00a0 The first benchmark is age.\u00a0 The second is its ability to cross ethnic boundaries, and third is class associations.<\/p>\n
Age is the first benchmark to come to anyone’s mind.\u00a0 It is generally acknowledged that for something to be considered classical, it must have great age.\u00a0 This seems simple at first, but it begs the obvious question of how one determines age.\u00a0 Clearly every performance exists in the here-and-now, so the performance itself cannot be used.\u00a0 Although the performance may not be used to determine age, we might consider using the genre.\u00a0 This would be acceptable to many people; however if this is used, it is surprising how recently some genre have developed.\u00a0 For instance Bharat Natyam<\/i> as it is thought of today, only goes back to the early 20th century!\u00a0 Since the genre also produces ages which are not acceptable in traditional Indian world views, most Indians would use the tradition to define age. (The relationship between performance, genre, and tradition will be discussed later.)<\/p>\n
The ability to span different ethnic groups is another common benchmark.\u00a0 This is best illustrated by a simple model put forth by the anthropologist, Robert Redfield in the early to middle part of the 20th century.\u00a0 According to Redfield’s model, there are “great” and “little” traditions.\u00a0 We may simplify theses concepts by saying that “little” traditions are the folk traditions while the “great” traditions are the classical traditions.\u00a0 The “great” tradition of European classical music was able to span the different ethnic groups that extend from Russia, throughout Europe, and even into the new world, yet the “little” folk traditions remained isolated to smaller geographical areas.\u00a0 It is in this same manner that Carnatic classical music spans the diverse cultures of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Carnatica, or Andhra Pradesh.<\/p>\n
Cultural connotations are also a benchmark for determining whether something is classical.\u00a0 “Classical” arts tend to be used by the upper classes to define their cultural identity.<\/p>\n
So we have three benchmarks to define “classical”; age, transethnicity, and class associations.\u00a0 These benchmarks work very well in describing Indian classical music (both Hindustani and Carnatic), but the various schools of dance tend to fall short in one or more areas.<\/p>\n
Over the centuries different areas have given their own colour to the ancient classical tradition.\u00a0 Today the acknowledged classical styles are: Bharatnatyamof Tamil Nadu, Kathakali of Kerala, Kuchipudi of Andhra Pradesh, Manipuri\u00a0<\/i>of Northeast India, Orissi\u00a0<\/i>from Orissa, and Kathak\u00a0<\/i>from north India and Pakistan.\u00a0 Each of these styles has a strong regional connection and none can claim to be representative of the entire Indian subcontinent.<\/p>\n