A senior scholar objecting to the word “prostitute” used in
the context of devadasis in a book review by another scholar in Nartanam shot off a letter to the
editor. In it, he does not mince words
about the moral fiber of the dancers today and the levels they can stoop to, for garnering awards and other benefits from the powers that be. He thus justifies that the
term “prostitute” would be as applicable to dancers today (He was talking in
the Indian context.) as it was to the devadasis, then.
However, citing the degradation of the ethical grain of
dancers today, does not negate the fact that the socio-economic and other
factors did lead to the exploitation of many of the devadasis, if not all, which
compelled them into prostitution, which might not have been by choice. And when a devadasi was in a live-in relationship
with a man of her choice (to whom she might have been more faithful than a
wife); it was because she was already married to God as per the oppressive
ritual order of devadasis; and hence was not allowed to marry a mortal. Asserting the
fact that many of the devadasis were pushed into prostitution, especially when
arts patronage under the temple and royalty saw a downward slide, does not cast
a slur on them or their exemplary art. It is a mere comment on the sorry state
of the society at that point of time, and even as recently as in the mid 20th
century.
An army friend related instances when he chanced meeting a
couple of Indian dance divas on different occasions; and he did not bother to
be subtle in expressing his reservations about the overtly evocative behaviour of
the dancers, off stage. Of course, one cannot brand every dancer by the same
yardstick and any such generalization would be blasphemy. Moreover, no one is
entitled to take up the role of a morals/values commentator/judge. Well, all that
is beside the point and I come back to academics.
All I want to put forth is that wielding the right to freedom
of expression comes with a lot of responsibility. This is especially so in case
of a community which deals with the most refined derivative of human mind and
spirit- artists/scholars. The grace
of written/spoken word and manner is imperative for artists and academicians.
Classical art is replete with suggestion, poise and
exploring the transcendental. The personal state of mind/emotion of a dancer or
actor is irrelevant when he/she is performing. So is the case in academics of classical arts
or any other subject. While putting forth an academic argument there is no
scope for being personal or getting emotional. It would then be no different from a vicious skirmish. And moreover, a scholar could be guilty of a researcher’s bias when he is emotionally high-strung about his argument.
At this, I cannot help but recollect a dear friend’s writing
style which is laced with a poetic tone even when he forcefully makes his point
to the extent of being nasty!
No, I am not advocating a licence to be poetically vicious!
