LS+Assignment+1

A researcher of Indian theatre, Hanne M. de Bruin brings to light in this article a heated debate on the appropriate naming of a type of theatre in southern India. More than simply a matter of semantics, de Bruin reveals a subtle power struggle between two perceived factions in the debate which is grounded largely in the differences between class hierarchies. This puts a fascinating sociological spin on the article that helps to provide a closer look into what remains of India’s caste system. According to de Bruin, the theatre was originally referred to as //kuttu// or //terukkuttu//, which has apparently taken on negative connotations. This has prompted an organization of actors of this particular form of theatre called the Cankam to assign to it a name of their choosing: //kattaikkuttu//; which supposedly describes the theatre form more accurately without being degenerating. The linchpin of the debate seems to be that what de Bruin refers to as the urban intelligentsia, being mainly an outspoken group of upper-middle class people, prefer the term //terukkuttu// but are unwilling to budge on the subject of renaming the theatre on the grounds of holding fast with tradition. de Bruin readily admits to the possibility of bias in her article due to her position within the theatre community as a researcher who interacts primarily with the actors and people most directly involved with the theatre. While she wishes to present a balanced view of the debate, she also expresses desire to create a platform for the people whose opinions most often go underrepresented. This does color her article with a certain bias towards the //kattaikkuttu// camp, though not explicit. However, de Bruin does seem to at least support an open and balanced debate on the matter, if not an outright name change in one direction. de Bruin’s research demonstrates an intimate understanding of the realm within which she operates, allowing a clear transmission of ideas to her readers, even those who may not be quite as familiar with the subject matter. Somewhat frustrating is that explanations for the terms //terukkuttu// and //kattaikkuttu// do not appear until partway through the article, leading to some confusion for the uninitiated. Other ideas are explained thoroughly, such as how the intelligentsia’s social standing and influence allows them a superior position in the debate and the sociological ramifications therein. While discussion of theatre itself is an intriguing subject, knowledge of the politics and background of theatre are equally important when coming to understand the subject as a whole. de Bruin’s article shining light on the underrepresented side of such a debate is an irreplaceable part of the study of theatre as much as an in-depth view of a performance itself would be.
 * Naming a Theatre in Tamil Nadu.** By Hanne M. de Bruin. __ATJ__. Spring 2000. 17.1. 25 pp.