Subscribe for Newsletters and Discounts
Be the first to receive our thoughtfully written
religious articles and product discounts.
Your interests (Optional)
This will help us make recommendations and send discounts and sale information at times.
By registering, you may receive account related information, our email newsletters and product updates, no more than twice a month. Please read our Privacy Policy for details.
.
By subscribing, you will receive our email newsletters and product updates, no more than twice a month. All emails will be sent by Exotic India using the email address info@exoticindia.com.

Please read our Privacy Policy for details.
|6
Sign In  |  Sign up
Your Cart (0)
Best Deals
Share our website with your friends.
Email this page to a friend
Books > Performing Arts > Natyasastra > Dramatic Concepts: Greek and Indian (A Study of Poetics and Natyasastra)
Subscribe to our newsletter and discounts
Dramatic Concepts: Greek and Indian (A Study of Poetics and  Natyasastra)
Pages from the book
Dramatic Concepts: Greek and Indian (A Study of Poetics and Natyasastra)
Look Inside the Book
Description

About the Author:

Bharat Gupt, as Associate Professor in English at the College of Vocational Studies, University of Delhi, is a classicist, theatre theorist, musicologist, cultural analyst, and newspaper columnist. Trained in modern European and traditional Indian educational systems, he has worked in theatre, music, culture and media studies. He learnt to play sitar and surbahar by Pandit Uma Shankar Mishra and studied musicology and classics under Acharya Brihaspati and Swami Kripalavananda. He was a student of Marshal McLuhan for while taking his degree of Toronto. For his interest in media, he was given the McLuhan fellowship and the Senior Onasis fellowship to research in Greece on revival of ancient Greek pltheatre. He has lectured extensively at Universities in India, North America, Europe, and Greece. He has been a Visiting Professor to Greece under the bilateral Cultural Exchange Program, Visiting Professor at the National School of Drama, Delhi, the Bhartendu Academy for Dramatic Arts, Lucknow, a resource scholar at the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts and several other major centers and academies of the arts. His other published books include: Natyasastra, Chapter 28: Ancient Scales of Indian Music (1996). Dr. Gupt has contributed a large number of newspapers and internet magazines, and has numerous books forthcoming.

About the Book:

This study offers a fresh approach in comparing ancient Greek and Indian dramatic theories. Instead of treating the Poetics and the Natyasastra as Western and Eastern viewpoint, it places them within the broad framework of ancient Indo-European culture and the art of sacred drama (hieropraxis). It demonstrates that hieropraxis was basically different from post-Renaissance European drama which was entirely secular in content and Realistic in presentation. The Poetics and the Natyasastra on the contrary, belonged to theatres which pleased both gods and men, and which used semiotised gesture, dance, music, and dialogue to create a highly ornate theatrical reality. The book aims at comparing not only the concepts as propounded by Aristotle and Bharata Muni, but also attempts to reconstruct the Greek and Indian performances to highlight their similarities and differences. In view of the increasing constrains imposed on artistic endeavours by commercial pre-occupations in today's world, this stimulating revaluation of the two major classical stage-crafts will go a long way in the discerning and shaping of newer modes of performance. Concepts like anukarana, dharmi, abhinaya, itivrtta, mimesis, muthos, melopoiia, katharsis and rasa, etc., as revisited and expounded here, can be seen as means of creating dramatic shows which go beyond message and entertainment to provide sublimer experience.

Preface

THE primary aim of this book is to confront the rival theories of dramatics, Greek and Indian, with a view to draw conceptual parallels and differences. It is argued here that the Greek system of poetics, of which drama was one part, began semiotically but in its later European application tapered into the lexical. On the other hand, the Indian system has remained semiotic through and through. Both systems, however, had a beginning in a semiotic structure which was based and sustained by what I have called hieropraxis.

There have been many partial and some complete studies on this subject. Most of them have resulted in broad generalizations. Their approach invariably has been to take a concept from Aristotle and juxtapose it with a parallel from Bharata Muni. This way only a logocentric comparison is achieved. I have adopted a different method. I have placed the two dramatic theories within the broad framework of ancient Indo-European culture and the art of hieropraxis or sacred drama for which they were formulated. In other words, much of the similarity between the theories owes to the fact that they both emerge from a common Indo- European world-view. Ancient Greeks and Indians not only upheld some common metaphysical and epistemological concepts, but they also regarded theatre as a sacred action meant to please gods as well as men. Moreover, for them theatre was not, as is often erroneously argued, meant for the ruling elite, or merely the worldly audience, it was for the whole cosmos which was its raison d'etre.

I have also argued that sacred drama required the perfection of certain production techniques which were synesthetic. Music, dance and semiotized gesture were all unified to produce a performance text and the Poetics and the Natyasastra are, above all, manuals that present theories for the production of such performance texts. Thus, in this study, the emphasis is on techniques of production or elements of theatrical representation. It is not upon dramatic genres such as tragedy, comedy or dasarupakas. These genres as lexical structures, have been the basis of comparison between Greek and Indian dramatic theories all too long.

Besides pointing out the common Indo-European factor and the hieropraxic nature of the two ancient traditions, I have also emphasized that with the rise of post-Renaissance drama in Europe, the Greek tradition tapered from the semiotic to the word-centered performance text. This change was a departure from the hieropraxic towards the secular. Only the Byzantine period in Europe had achieved some sort of a synthesis between the sacred and the secular. From the Renaissance onwards, the sacred was too often redefined and at times even isolated from daily life under Humanistic and Individualistic ideologies. This resulted in the break-up of the aural-visual unity of the hieropraxic kind which was primarily an expression of human and cosmic unity.

The Russian semiotician Yuri Lotman has noted the difference between Classical and European sensibility and formulated his theory of two kinds of aesthetics, that of "identity" and that of "opposition." For Lotman, all folklore, Middle Ages in Europe, Classicism and the Asian cultures practise the first, and Romanticism, Realism and Avant-garde follow the second. The aesthetics of identity, holds Lotman, rests upon the identity or nearness of the code of the sender with that of the receiver. Its absence generates the aesthetics of opposition. While accepting all this, I would further add that the opposition to the code of the sender or the absence of nearness to it always results in a desemiotization of gesture and opsis in theatre. The gap created between the sender and the receiver needs to be filled by laborious means. In European theatre, extensive verbal discourse was used to fill in the gap. Later on, naturalist scenery and costume were used for the same purpose. And still later, a breakdown of verbal discourse was used as a device for reflecting the Absurdist universe. This method of filling in the gap created a total dependence upon logocentric means in theatre and reduced the synesthetic unity of the classical techniques. It may also be pointed out that, in the aesthetics of identity, the sender’s code works instantly upon the spectators and creates in them a deep emotional aroual is replaced by intellectual reflection. The plays of Ibsen, Shaw and Brecht are the high point of this intellectual stimulation meant to lead one to certain ideologies. Quite in contrast to this, a major aim of hieropraxis was to provide a deep emotional relief or bliss, in which the psyche of the spectator was transformed from the ordinary state to a special state, just as on the stage the worldly reality was transformed into a unique reality produced through multi-discourse techniques.

Before beginning to 'confront' the two systems with each other, I offer a revaluation of the Natyasastra from a modern critical perspective. Its basic tenets are redefined in a modern intelligible language not for the sake of establishing a false analogue between It and the Poetics but for using it as a lexical Site for interpreting its semiotic import. For the same reason I have put in a whole chapter on the date of the NS which in my reading brings it closer to the Poetics historically as well as conceptually.

The book is divided into three parts. The first part opens with an Introduction where I propose a definition of hieropraxis, and reasons for its decline in Europe. Then, I emphasize the need to look upon ancient drama from a non-European viewpoint. Next, I take up the problem of dating the NS, followed by a chapter which briefly explores the socio-cultural parallels between Greek and Indian dramatic themes. The first part is concluded with a chapter setting out the historical evolution of both the theatrical traditions from dance.

Introduction

DRAMA of the ancient world, no matter of what region, should be seen as a category by itself. In some respects, it may have been a forerunner of modern drama, but still the two are not to be equated. Ancient drama had a distinctive make-up, the characteristics of which can be found in its practices in Greece, India and Egypt. I t was primarily a communal and a sacred action which no later theatre could ever be. It was also not merely ritualistic and religious in spirit, as is often believed. On the contrary, it preserved very well the difference between theatre activity and religiuns rites. But, being sacred action performed on a festive occasion, ancient theatre came to acquire special characteristics and performance techniques which were quite different from modern theatre and are therefore, difficult to comprehend today. Let us consider those salient features of ancient drama which may have marked the great theatrical achievements of Greece and India and which Europe at a later date was unable to appreciate.

Ancient Drama as Hieropraxis

Ancient dramatic performances were localted within the wider activity of festivals (hieromenia or parva), a time when a community set aside the constraints of normal existence to communicate intensely with itself, with its ancestors and its gods. In this location, even though it did not seek the same end as religion, drama was meant to please the gods as well as men. This gave it a purpose significantly different from that of European drama which was meant to please the audience only. Besides being sacred, this drama was also an action (praxis), committed to enact a muthos or an itivrtta. I t was not supposed to depict merely a state of mind as in Hamlet. Rather, it had to be a drama or deed (action), which traversed from one state of being (avastha) to another, from fortune of one kind to that of the opposite kind. To highlight these two essential features of ancient drama, I have called it hieropraxis or sacred action. Later drama sidelined both the sacredness and the nature of action as conceived in ancient drama.

Some of the characteristics of hieropraxic drama may be stated briefly. I. Here, there was no primacy of the aural, particularly of the speech content, over the visual content. 2. The visual was never intended to be realistically representational but evolved instead as a sign language. 3. All gesture and body movement was highly embellished and codified and was mimetic of the cultural semi ones and habitual gestures of the people it represented. These semiones were codified modes of actions and gestures which had well-known meanings in their cultural context. 4. A major part of the visual content of hieropraxis was dance. It was often included as an act of worship, besides being a dramatic representation. 5. The aural content was wide in range, modulating from speech to intricate song. 6. Simple speech was used in a limited way but stylised speech, declamation and song-dialogue were amply used. 7. The visual and the aural were combined into a unified whole to produce a theatrical reality which was not meant to relfect directly upon the world beyond theatre, but was designed to be absorbing in itself. It was also meant to produce an elevated state of feeling in the audience. The theatrical practices of both ancient Greece and India were fine examples of hieropraxis, having all the characteristics noted above. The primary aim of this study is to show how the multi-channelled theatre was prescribed in the poetics and the Natyastra, and how the two traditions practiced it, each in its own way. But it is equally essential at the outsetof this study to point out how and why the production techniques of hieropraxis were forgotten both in the west (Greece and Europe) and in India.

CONTENTS

 

  Preface vii
Part I : ANCIENT DRAMA AS HIEROPRAXIS
 
1. INTRODUCTION
Ancient Drama as Hieropraxis
Unification of Speech, Gesture and
Dance in Hieropraxis
Growth of European Drama
Poetics and Natyasastra as Systems of
performance
3
2. THE DATE OF THE NATYASASTRA
Antiquity of Dasarupakas
Gandharvas and Gandharva
Pre-epic Themes of Early Drama
The Prose Passages in the NS
The NS as a Compilation
19
3. INDO-EUROPEAN BELIEFS IN GREEK AND
INDIAN DRAMA
Miasma-katharsis orSauca-asauca
Ancestor Worship and Burial Customs
Oracles and Curses
41
4. DRAMA AS FESTIVE RITUAL
Drama and Ritual
The Nucleus of Dance in Greek Theatre
Origin of Indian Drama
Indian Festive Setting
63
Part II : CONCEPTS AND TECHNIQUES
 
5. BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARISTOTLE AND
BHARATA MUNI: A REASSESSMENT
85
6. THEORY OF IMITATION
Mimesis
The Concept of Anukarana
93
7. MEDIUM OF IMITATION
Rhythm, Language and Harmony
Angika Abhinaya
Verbal Abhinaya
Sattvika Abhinaya
Aharya Abhinaya
Unification or Samanikarana
103
8. COMPARISON OF GREEK AND INDIAN
THEATRICAL SPACE
Hieropraxic Division of Space
Greek Performance Space
Indian Performance Space
Open Theatres
125
9. THE VISUAL CONTENT
Greek Gesture and Dance
Greek Choreolgy
Greek Dance Genres
Visual Content in Indian Drama
145
10. THE AURAL CONTENT
Lexis, Rhythm and Tone
Greek Musical System
The VagabhinayaConcept
Elements of Pathya
Dhruva Songs and Gandharva
169
11. DRAMATIC GENRES AND PLAY
STRUCTURES
The Serous and the Trivial
Dasarupakas
The Four Vrttis
Play Structures
Ethos and Nayakas
203
Part III : TRANSFORMATION AND
EMOTIONAL AROUSAL
 
12. TRANSFORMATION AND EMOTIONAL
AROUSAL
Transformation of Reality
Lokadharmiand Natyadharmi
Greek Theory of Emotional Arousal
Indian System of Emotional Arousal
Katharsis and Hedone
The Rasa Concept
Views of Lollata, Sankuka, Bhattanayaka and
Abhinavagupta
Samyuktivada
Katharsis and Rasa
Epilogue
 
  Bibliography 275
  Index 287

 

Sample Pages


Dramatic Concepts: Greek and Indian (A Study of Poetics and Natyasastra)

Item Code:
IDD162
Cover:
Hardcover
Edition:
2016
ISBN:
9788124600252
Language:
English
Size:
8.8" X 5.8"
Pages:
295
Other Details:
weight of book 546 gms
Price:
$31.50   Shipping Free
Look Inside the Book
Add to Wishlist
Send as e-card
Send as free online greeting card
Dramatic Concepts: Greek and Indian (A Study of Poetics and  Natyasastra)

Verify the characters on the left

From:
Edit     
You will be informed as and when your card is viewed. Please note that your card will be active in the system for 30 days.

Viewed 17361 times since 22nd Dec, 2018

About the Author:

Bharat Gupt, as Associate Professor in English at the College of Vocational Studies, University of Delhi, is a classicist, theatre theorist, musicologist, cultural analyst, and newspaper columnist. Trained in modern European and traditional Indian educational systems, he has worked in theatre, music, culture and media studies. He learnt to play sitar and surbahar by Pandit Uma Shankar Mishra and studied musicology and classics under Acharya Brihaspati and Swami Kripalavananda. He was a student of Marshal McLuhan for while taking his degree of Toronto. For his interest in media, he was given the McLuhan fellowship and the Senior Onasis fellowship to research in Greece on revival of ancient Greek pltheatre. He has lectured extensively at Universities in India, North America, Europe, and Greece. He has been a Visiting Professor to Greece under the bilateral Cultural Exchange Program, Visiting Professor at the National School of Drama, Delhi, the Bhartendu Academy for Dramatic Arts, Lucknow, a resource scholar at the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts and several other major centers and academies of the arts. His other published books include: Natyasastra, Chapter 28: Ancient Scales of Indian Music (1996). Dr. Gupt has contributed a large number of newspapers and internet magazines, and has numerous books forthcoming.

About the Book:

This study offers a fresh approach in comparing ancient Greek and Indian dramatic theories. Instead of treating the Poetics and the Natyasastra as Western and Eastern viewpoint, it places them within the broad framework of ancient Indo-European culture and the art of sacred drama (hieropraxis). It demonstrates that hieropraxis was basically different from post-Renaissance European drama which was entirely secular in content and Realistic in presentation. The Poetics and the Natyasastra on the contrary, belonged to theatres which pleased both gods and men, and which used semiotised gesture, dance, music, and dialogue to create a highly ornate theatrical reality. The book aims at comparing not only the concepts as propounded by Aristotle and Bharata Muni, but also attempts to reconstruct the Greek and Indian performances to highlight their similarities and differences. In view of the increasing constrains imposed on artistic endeavours by commercial pre-occupations in today's world, this stimulating revaluation of the two major classical stage-crafts will go a long way in the discerning and shaping of newer modes of performance. Concepts like anukarana, dharmi, abhinaya, itivrtta, mimesis, muthos, melopoiia, katharsis and rasa, etc., as revisited and expounded here, can be seen as means of creating dramatic shows which go beyond message and entertainment to provide sublimer experience.

Preface

THE primary aim of this book is to confront the rival theories of dramatics, Greek and Indian, with a view to draw conceptual parallels and differences. It is argued here that the Greek system of poetics, of which drama was one part, began semiotically but in its later European application tapered into the lexical. On the other hand, the Indian system has remained semiotic through and through. Both systems, however, had a beginning in a semiotic structure which was based and sustained by what I have called hieropraxis.

There have been many partial and some complete studies on this subject. Most of them have resulted in broad generalizations. Their approach invariably has been to take a concept from Aristotle and juxtapose it with a parallel from Bharata Muni. This way only a logocentric comparison is achieved. I have adopted a different method. I have placed the two dramatic theories within the broad framework of ancient Indo-European culture and the art of hieropraxis or sacred drama for which they were formulated. In other words, much of the similarity between the theories owes to the fact that they both emerge from a common Indo- European world-view. Ancient Greeks and Indians not only upheld some common metaphysical and epistemological concepts, but they also regarded theatre as a sacred action meant to please gods as well as men. Moreover, for them theatre was not, as is often erroneously argued, meant for the ruling elite, or merely the worldly audience, it was for the whole cosmos which was its raison d'etre.

I have also argued that sacred drama required the perfection of certain production techniques which were synesthetic. Music, dance and semiotized gesture were all unified to produce a performance text and the Poetics and the Natyasastra are, above all, manuals that present theories for the production of such performance texts. Thus, in this study, the emphasis is on techniques of production or elements of theatrical representation. It is not upon dramatic genres such as tragedy, comedy or dasarupakas. These genres as lexical structures, have been the basis of comparison between Greek and Indian dramatic theories all too long.

Besides pointing out the common Indo-European factor and the hieropraxic nature of the two ancient traditions, I have also emphasized that with the rise of post-Renaissance drama in Europe, the Greek tradition tapered from the semiotic to the word-centered performance text. This change was a departure from the hieropraxic towards the secular. Only the Byzantine period in Europe had achieved some sort of a synthesis between the sacred and the secular. From the Renaissance onwards, the sacred was too often redefined and at times even isolated from daily life under Humanistic and Individualistic ideologies. This resulted in the break-up of the aural-visual unity of the hieropraxic kind which was primarily an expression of human and cosmic unity.

The Russian semiotician Yuri Lotman has noted the difference between Classical and European sensibility and formulated his theory of two kinds of aesthetics, that of "identity" and that of "opposition." For Lotman, all folklore, Middle Ages in Europe, Classicism and the Asian cultures practise the first, and Romanticism, Realism and Avant-garde follow the second. The aesthetics of identity, holds Lotman, rests upon the identity or nearness of the code of the sender with that of the receiver. Its absence generates the aesthetics of opposition. While accepting all this, I would further add that the opposition to the code of the sender or the absence of nearness to it always results in a desemiotization of gesture and opsis in theatre. The gap created between the sender and the receiver needs to be filled by laborious means. In European theatre, extensive verbal discourse was used to fill in the gap. Later on, naturalist scenery and costume were used for the same purpose. And still later, a breakdown of verbal discourse was used as a device for reflecting the Absurdist universe. This method of filling in the gap created a total dependence upon logocentric means in theatre and reduced the synesthetic unity of the classical techniques. It may also be pointed out that, in the aesthetics of identity, the sender’s code works instantly upon the spectators and creates in them a deep emotional aroual is replaced by intellectual reflection. The plays of Ibsen, Shaw and Brecht are the high point of this intellectual stimulation meant to lead one to certain ideologies. Quite in contrast to this, a major aim of hieropraxis was to provide a deep emotional relief or bliss, in which the psyche of the spectator was transformed from the ordinary state to a special state, just as on the stage the worldly reality was transformed into a unique reality produced through multi-discourse techniques.

Before beginning to 'confront' the two systems with each other, I offer a revaluation of the Natyasastra from a modern critical perspective. Its basic tenets are redefined in a modern intelligible language not for the sake of establishing a false analogue between It and the Poetics but for using it as a lexical Site for interpreting its semiotic import. For the same reason I have put in a whole chapter on the date of the NS which in my reading brings it closer to the Poetics historically as well as conceptually.

The book is divided into three parts. The first part opens with an Introduction where I propose a definition of hieropraxis, and reasons for its decline in Europe. Then, I emphasize the need to look upon ancient drama from a non-European viewpoint. Next, I take up the problem of dating the NS, followed by a chapter which briefly explores the socio-cultural parallels between Greek and Indian dramatic themes. The first part is concluded with a chapter setting out the historical evolution of both the theatrical traditions from dance.

Introduction

DRAMA of the ancient world, no matter of what region, should be seen as a category by itself. In some respects, it may have been a forerunner of modern drama, but still the two are not to be equated. Ancient drama had a distinctive make-up, the characteristics of which can be found in its practices in Greece, India and Egypt. I t was primarily a communal and a sacred action which no later theatre could ever be. It was also not merely ritualistic and religious in spirit, as is often believed. On the contrary, it preserved very well the difference between theatre activity and religiuns rites. But, being sacred action performed on a festive occasion, ancient theatre came to acquire special characteristics and performance techniques which were quite different from modern theatre and are therefore, difficult to comprehend today. Let us consider those salient features of ancient drama which may have marked the great theatrical achievements of Greece and India and which Europe at a later date was unable to appreciate.

Ancient Drama as Hieropraxis

Ancient dramatic performances were localted within the wider activity of festivals (hieromenia or parva), a time when a community set aside the constraints of normal existence to communicate intensely with itself, with its ancestors and its gods. In this location, even though it did not seek the same end as religion, drama was meant to please the gods as well as men. This gave it a purpose significantly different from that of European drama which was meant to please the audience only. Besides being sacred, this drama was also an action (praxis), committed to enact a muthos or an itivrtta. I t was not supposed to depict merely a state of mind as in Hamlet. Rather, it had to be a drama or deed (action), which traversed from one state of being (avastha) to another, from fortune of one kind to that of the opposite kind. To highlight these two essential features of ancient drama, I have called it hieropraxis or sacred action. Later drama sidelined both the sacredness and the nature of action as conceived in ancient drama.

Some of the characteristics of hieropraxic drama may be stated briefly. I. Here, there was no primacy of the aural, particularly of the speech content, over the visual content. 2. The visual was never intended to be realistically representational but evolved instead as a sign language. 3. All gesture and body movement was highly embellished and codified and was mimetic of the cultural semi ones and habitual gestures of the people it represented. These semiones were codified modes of actions and gestures which had well-known meanings in their cultural context. 4. A major part of the visual content of hieropraxis was dance. It was often included as an act of worship, besides being a dramatic representation. 5. The aural content was wide in range, modulating from speech to intricate song. 6. Simple speech was used in a limited way but stylised speech, declamation and song-dialogue were amply used. 7. The visual and the aural were combined into a unified whole to produce a theatrical reality which was not meant to relfect directly upon the world beyond theatre, but was designed to be absorbing in itself. It was also meant to produce an elevated state of feeling in the audience. The theatrical practices of both ancient Greece and India were fine examples of hieropraxis, having all the characteristics noted above. The primary aim of this study is to show how the multi-channelled theatre was prescribed in the poetics and the Natyastra, and how the two traditions practiced it, each in its own way. But it is equally essential at the outsetof this study to point out how and why the production techniques of hieropraxis were forgotten both in the west (Greece and Europe) and in India.

CONTENTS

 

  Preface vii
Part I : ANCIENT DRAMA AS HIEROPRAXIS
 
1. INTRODUCTION
Ancient Drama as Hieropraxis
Unification of Speech, Gesture and
Dance in Hieropraxis
Growth of European Drama
Poetics and Natyasastra as Systems of
performance
3
2. THE DATE OF THE NATYASASTRA
Antiquity of Dasarupakas
Gandharvas and Gandharva
Pre-epic Themes of Early Drama
The Prose Passages in the NS
The NS as a Compilation
19
3. INDO-EUROPEAN BELIEFS IN GREEK AND
INDIAN DRAMA
Miasma-katharsis orSauca-asauca
Ancestor Worship and Burial Customs
Oracles and Curses
41
4. DRAMA AS FESTIVE RITUAL
Drama and Ritual
The Nucleus of Dance in Greek Theatre
Origin of Indian Drama
Indian Festive Setting
63
Part II : CONCEPTS AND TECHNIQUES
 
5. BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARISTOTLE AND
BHARATA MUNI: A REASSESSMENT
85
6. THEORY OF IMITATION
Mimesis
The Concept of Anukarana
93
7. MEDIUM OF IMITATION
Rhythm, Language and Harmony
Angika Abhinaya
Verbal Abhinaya
Sattvika Abhinaya
Aharya Abhinaya
Unification or Samanikarana
103
8. COMPARISON OF GREEK AND INDIAN
THEATRICAL SPACE
Hieropraxic Division of Space
Greek Performance Space
Indian Performance Space
Open Theatres
125
9. THE VISUAL CONTENT
Greek Gesture and Dance
Greek Choreolgy
Greek Dance Genres
Visual Content in Indian Drama
145
10. THE AURAL CONTENT
Lexis, Rhythm and Tone
Greek Musical System
The VagabhinayaConcept
Elements of Pathya
Dhruva Songs and Gandharva
169
11. DRAMATIC GENRES AND PLAY
STRUCTURES
The Serous and the Trivial
Dasarupakas
The Four Vrttis
Play Structures
Ethos and Nayakas
203
Part III : TRANSFORMATION AND
EMOTIONAL AROUSAL
 
12. TRANSFORMATION AND EMOTIONAL
AROUSAL
Transformation of Reality
Lokadharmiand Natyadharmi
Greek Theory of Emotional Arousal
Indian System of Emotional Arousal
Katharsis and Hedone
The Rasa Concept
Views of Lollata, Sankuka, Bhattanayaka and
Abhinavagupta
Samyuktivada
Katharsis and Rasa
Epilogue
 
  Bibliography 275
  Index 287

 

Sample Pages


Post a Comment
 
Post Review
Post a Query
For privacy concerns, please view our Privacy Policy
Based on your browsing history
Loading... Please wait

Items Related to Dramatic Concepts: Greek and Indian (A Study of Poetics and ... (Performing Arts | Books)

Mahabharata The Indian Classic (Hindi with English subtitles Devotional Drama Series) (DVD Video)
Touchstonemedia
(Color 125 Minutes)
Item Code: ICA009
$23.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
Saint Tyagaraja’s Nauka Charitam: A Dance Drama (DVD)
Doordarshan Archives (2005)
Item Code: ICX064
$35.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
Sampoorn Ramayan Full Ramayan Devotional Drama Series (Hindi with English Subtitles) (DVD Video)
Touchstonemedia
(Color 130 Minutes)
Item Code: ICA005
$23.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
History of Indian Theatre (Loka Ranga Panorama of Indian Folk Theatre)
by M. L. Varadpande
Hardcover (Edition: 1992)
Abhinav Publications
Item Code: IDH425
$75.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
History of Indian Theatre: Classical Theatre (Volume III)
by M. L. Varadpande
Hardcover (Edition: 2005)
Abhinav Publications
Item Code: IDH426
$125.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
Sangeet Natak - Special Issue on Kutiyattam
Item Code: NAP523
$35.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
Journal of Sangeet Natak Akademi
by A. Chatterjee
Paperback (Edition: 2010)
Sangeet Natak Akademi
Item Code: NAJ369
$20.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
Portrayal of Vipralambha-Srngara in Some Dramas
by C. Murugan
Paperback (Edition: 2011)
University of Madras
Item Code: NAJ497
$25.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
Modern Indian Drama - An Anthology
by G P Deshpande
Hardcover (Edition: 2017)
Sahitya Akademi
Item Code: NAO830
$35.00
Add to Cart
Buy Now
Testimonials
Kailash Raj’s art, as always, is marvelous. We are so grateful to you for allowing your team to do these special canvases for us. Rarely do we see this caliber of art in modern times. Kailash Ji has taken the Swaminaryan monks’ suggestions to heart and executed each one with accuracy and a spiritual touch.
Sadasivanathaswami, Hawaii
Good selections. and ease of ordering. Thank you
Kris, USA
Thank you for having books on such rare topics as Samudrika Vidya, keep up the good work of finding these treasures and making them available.
Tulsi, USA
Received awesome customer service from Raje. Thank You very much.
Victor, USA
Just wanted to let you know the books arrived on Friday February 22nd. I could not believe how quickly my order arrived, 4 days from India. Wow! Seeing the post mark, touching and smelling the books made me long for your country. Reminded me it is time to visit again. Thank you again.
Patricia, Canada
Thank you for beautiful, devotional pieces.
Ms. Shantida, USA
Received doll safely and gift pack was a pleasant surprise. Keep up the good job.
Vidya, India
Thank you very much. Such a beautiful selection! I am very pleased with my chosen piece. I love just looking at the picture. Praise Mother Kali! I'm excited to see it in person
Michael, USA
Hello! I just wanted to say that I received my statues of Krishna and Shiva Nataraja today, which I have been eagerly awaiting, and they are FANTASTIC! Thank you so much, I am so happy with them and the service you have provided. I am sure I will place more orders in the future!
Nick, USA
Excellent products and efficient delivery.
R. Maharaj, Trinidad and Tobago
Language:
Currency:
All rights reserved. Copyright 2019 © Exotic India