![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper illustrates the major challenges faced by globally recognised classical art forms through the examination of Kutiyattam, a centuries old renowned theatre form of India, Kutiyattam was declared by the UNESCO in 2001 as an intangible heritage of humankind. During the mid-twentieth century, Kutiyattam performers came out of their traditional performing space in Hindu temples, encouraged by the proactive support of the State. In the wake of the UNESCO recognition for the theatre form, State support measures underwent further strengthening. However, in spite of this, India’s Kutiyattam institutions are confronted with a serious economic crisis that threatens their very existence. Based on detailed field studies and stakeholder consultations, the paper analyses the policy roots of the crisis and explores the options for transforming the Kutiyattam institutions into sustainable enterprises. We argue that the lessons offered by this study have implications for similarly situated art forms in India and elsewhere.
Acknowledgements
The inputs provided by two anonymous referees on an earlier draft are thankfully acknowledged.
Notes
1. For a discursive analysis on the UNESCO Convention’s concepts of culture, cultural diversity and practices, see Pyykkönen (Citation2012) and for a critique of UNESCO’s heritage conferment scheme refer to Bertacchini and Saccone (Citation2012). For an assessment of the strengths and limitations of the UNESCO Heritage recognition scheme see Frey and Steiner (Citation2011). In a philosophical vein, Meskell (Citation2014, 237) explains how the economic gains and prestige associated with UNESCO recognition dwarf the substance of the art form concerned.
2. Source: Website ‘Koodiyattam – New World Encyclopaedia’, http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Koodiyattam, accessed on 17 September 2015.
3. The role of the Kerala Government in supporting Kutiyattam was further attested by P. Rama Iyer, former Secretary of the Margi Theatre, in his personal communication dated 4 July 2011.
4. Source: http://kutiyattam.org/kutiyattam-kendra.html, accessed on 5 September 2015.
5. See note 4.
6. The ratio of lead artistes to accompanying artistes were calculated based on information provided by the management personnel of the theatres and on information provided by the websites of the theatres concerned (as in the case of the Ammanur Chachu Chakyar Gurukulam (http://www.Ammannurgurukulam.com/ – accessed on 18 November 2015).
7. As Netzer observes, overhead costs become unbearable for theatres that are burdened with a large stock of heritage capital (Netzer Citation1988).
8. Despite having greater income security and stable emoluments in the wake of UNESCO recognition, the Kutiyattam artistes of Kerala found the ‘institution centric model of governance’ of their art form to be stifling on account of its strict regulatory and bureaucratic practices (Lowthorp (Citation2015, 169, 170). As Lowthorp further explains, ‘The view that money is necessary to survive but artists should not pursue it was complicated by the introduction of salaries …’ (Citation2015, 170, 171). Indeed the remuneration provided to teachers and veteran performers averaged Indian Rupee (INR) equivalent of US $250 per month during the period 2014–2015, calculated using the average exchange rate of INR to US $ for the mentioned period. Further, our field studies revealed that the fees that privately sponsored shows constituted only slightly over 10% of the total cash inflows for the two theatres. For young students the monthly stipend disbursed by the Kutiyattam Kendra was a paltry $32 per student.
9. We are thankful to an anonymous referee for this point.
10. During our pre field survey activities, we interviewed a group of 19 randomly selected young and old local community members in Trivandrum and Moozhikulam who were avid cinema goers. None of these community members had witnessed a Kutiyattam performance though they were aware of the existence of a Kutiyattam theatre/institution in their locality. This led us to narrow our focus to the local spectators of Kutiyattam in the field survey phase.
11. WTP studies could provide an indication of the crowd sourcing potential available to new enterprises in developing countries. In the instant case, we found that that the median WTP for Kutiyattam was less than that for a movie ticket. However it needs to be noted that by nature WTP surveys tend to be based on small sample sizes. Another limitation of WTP surveys is that some respondents tend to overstate their willingness to pay.
12. Both ‘Margi’ and ‘Nepathya’ were similar in terms of the classical element in their repertoires. The demographics and the age statistics of the local spectators frequenting each of the performance venues of the two institutions were also similar. Margi is located in the Fort Area of Trivandrum, which has been the traditional cultural hub of the city in the twentieth century. Spectators who turn up for Kutiyattam performances in Margi come from the different parts of Trivandrum city. Nepathya, though located in a semi-rural area (named Moozhikulam), is situated close to the growing urban agglomeration centred on the Cochin International Airport. In addition to drawing spectators from its immediate vicinity, the Kutiyattam institution Nepathya regularly draws spectators from the nearby urban city of Ernakulam and the surrounding towns of Angamali and Alwaye. It is not noteworthy that both institutions never charged for their performances, nor had a tradition of doing so. Hence, in our Willingness to Pay survey we asked the sampled spectators on how much they were willing to pay as a voluntary contribution for a performance (in a hypothetical drop box placed outside the performance venue). The benchmark value that we fielded to the spectators was the average movie ticket price that each of them was used to paying for a movie. The benchmark value of a movie ticket was $0.50.
13. It was observed that the older generation of spectators (above 45 years) outnumbered the younger generation (45 years and below). The former constituted 65% of the spectators.
14. Policy documents perused include those of the Sangeet Natak Academy (http://www.sangeetnatak.gov.in/sna/training-page.htm – accessed on 4 August 2015) as well as those of the Kutiyattam Centre (http://kutiyattam.org/kutiyattam-kendra.html – accessed on 5 September 2015).
15. Confirmation bias refers to the situation wherein decision makers/researchers actively seek out and assign more weight to evidence that confirms their hypothesis, while tending to ignore or under weigh evidence that could disconfirm their hypothesis (Nickerson Citation1998). We have sought to avoid this bias by conveying our field survey results to the artistes and giving them an opportunity to confirm or repudiate our findings.
16. In calculating the prices/values in US$, we used the average exchange rate of 1 USD = INR 65.01 reported for the period 2014–2015. The median ticket price reported by nearby cinemas was only $0.50. This was adopted as the benchmark value for ascertaining the Kutiyattam spectators’ WTP. It was interesting to see that the maximum WTP that spectators were willing to pay for a Kutiyattam performance was only 10% above the benchmark movie ticket price of $0.50. The WTP for a performance amounted to 0.3% of the sample spectators’ median monthly salary.
17. Genre means an artistic category characterised by a particular style, form, or content. In our interviews with Kutiyattam artistes and connoisseurs, we asked them whether there were differences in performing styles amongst different Kutiyattam institutions, While some of the interviewees did express that there were differences in style amongst the Ammanur Chachu Chakyar Smaraka Gurukulam, Mani Madhava Chakyar Smaraka Gurukulam and Painkulam Rama Chakyar Smaraka kalapeedam two renowned Kutiyattam artistes, namely G. Venu and Kapila Venu, did not agree that there were inter-institutional difference in genre.
18. Both G. Venu and P.K. Narayanan Nambiar have published books on Kutiyattam. While Venu’s ‘Ramayana Samkshepam’ (2013) and ‘Kathakali-Kutiyattam and other Performing Arts’ (2005) are in English and are copyrighted (with copyrights reserved in his own name), P.K. Narayanan Nambiar’s ‘Srikrishna Charitham’ and ‘Krama Deepika Attaparakaram’ are in the local language (Malayalam) and do not have registered copyrights. However, under the common law provisions underlying India’s Copyright Act 1957, Nambiar’s works do have implicit protection from copyright infringement, despite not being formally copyrighted. The publishers of the mentioned titles are the respective institutions with which the artistes are affiliated, namely Natana Kairali (in the case of Venu) and the Padmasree Mani Madhava Chakyar Smaraka Gurukulam (in the case of Nambiar). It needs to be noted that Natana Kairali is not included in the list of the six SNA supported Kutiyattam institutions as the institution is not exclusively devoted to Kutiyattam.
19. The term ‘artistic vibrance’ is drawn from Nick Rabkin’s notion of great and aesthetically rich art works that are communally produced but are not able to position themselves in the market place for want of sophisticated elegance that is present in an individually produced art work (Rabkin Citation2007, 27).
20. The relevance of a ‘company’ in nourishing the intellectual property protection base of an organisation is well attested by Shapiro (Citation1983) and Cuccia, Marrelli, and Santagata (Citation2007). The managers of the two Kutiyattam institutions did not name the private foundations they had approached for financial assistance. However, it is observed that two notable private foundations in India (namely, the ‘Indian Foundation of Arts’ and the ‘Tata Trust’) support art organisations that are either ‘trusts’ or ‘societies’ or are ‘companies’ that are registered under Section 8(1) (a),(b) and (c) of India’s Companies Act, 2013. Companies that are registered under Section 8(1) of the Act are not allowed to distribute their profits and income as dividends. These entities are required to utilise their earnings and profits only for the further development of the arts.
21. We have adopted a reflexive approach to research conducted as part of this study. Reflexivity is the process of examining one’s role as a researcher and her/his relationship to the research question at hand. In this case, the first author’s familiarity with Kutiyattam and some of its artistes over four decades and the elaborate pre-survey phase that preceded the field surveys we conducted, led his addition into the research process.
22. Indeed, the role of (local) communities in developing knowledge and insights on local culture and local sustainability practices is well attested in other contexts (Jeannotte and Duxbury Citation2015, 84–99). The more fundamental reason for local communities to play a larger role in supporting classical art forms is the focus it could bring to the dimensions of ‘place’ and ‘cultural diversity’ (Bonet and Négrier Citation2011, 584). To secure the association of Kutiyattam to its landscape, it is important that the current Kutiyattam policies are sensitive to the cultural expression and history of the traditional landscape from which different Kutiyattam institutions have evolved (see Bianchini and Ghilardi Citation2007 for a detailed discussion of these aspects in a different context).
23. Indeed, as Hesmondhalgh and Pratt observe, a shift to alternative funding sources may bring in its wake tensions that need to be minimised in the larger interest of sustaining these organisations (Hesmondhalgh and Pratt Citation2005).
24. See note 22.