Chandralekha
TISHANI DOSHI
WHEN
people ask about Chandralekha, I sometimes tell them
how John Cage recorded her infectious laughter and played it on loop through
ten speakers at the National Institute of Design in Ahmedabad. Or that Henri
Cartier-Bresson, after seeing her choreography ÔYantraÕ, in Avignon, said, ÔSuch wonderful slowness;
slowness is the only luxury we have left in the world today.ÕOr
that Harry Shunk and J‡nos Kender, photographers of French Nouveau realisme
and part of Andy WarholÕs coterie, immortalized her beautiful hasta mudras in
gelatin silver prints. Or about the friendship between her and Pina Bausch,
touring together with their dance companies, visiting each otherÕs studios
– Die Tanztheater Wuppertal and Mandala Theatre
in Chennai. Or that Philip Glass, before couch surfing was a thing, crashed at
her house in Mylapore,when
he was travelling through India in the Õ60s. Or that she once found herself in
Hawaii, staying with the poet W.S. Merwin, and what she remembered was the size
of the vegetables grown huge in all that volcanic soil, but what he remembered
was her silver-white hair and how she stood in the garden marvelling
at the moon. And if none of this sparks any response, I tell them how she went
to the first Woodstock, took LSD, and felt the grass growing beneath her feet.
There is a similarly
impressive list of Indian greats beginning with her mentor Harindranath
Chattopadhyay, Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Balasaraswati,
Bhupen Khakhar, Dashrath Patel, Rukmini Devi Arundale, Vallathol, Ratan Thiyam. None of this is about name-dropping but about
placing her within a national and global framework of artists and thinkers with
whom she had collaborations and friendships, how all this made up the patchwork
of her life, her seamless reach across disciplines, from dance to poster-making
to poetry to design to feminism to film.
I want to circumvent the
hard work of having to contextualize her because I think she should be better
known. When I say Chandralekha, I want
people to arrive at wonder immediately, because this is the aesthetic realm to
which I designate her life and work. Or to use a word she favoured
– chamathkaar – which in Tantra occurs in
a flash, a sense of magic, transport or revelation that can happen to someone
who is not even an initiate. The thing that happened to me when I first met
her. An electric river of energy racing up my spine.
Twenty years ago I was asked by this magazine to review
a book of poems by the Madras-based dancer Chandralekha.
It was my first journalistic assignment, and it would change the direction of
my life. The book was a long prose poem called Rainbow on the Road: Montages
of Madras, published by Earthworm Books, which I could not find anywhere. Tejbir Singh, who commissioned the piece, said, ÔJust go to
her house and get a copy. Everyone knows she lives at Number 1 ElliotÕs Beach
Road.Õ
I didnÕt know that she
lived there. In fact, I didnÕt know much about her. I didnÕt think it proper
for a reviewer to scrounge a copy from an author. Still, I went. Her house was
ten minutes from my parentÕs home in South Madras. Rough-hewn granite pillars
were spaced apart to form a boundary wall. The front gate was made of bamboo,
and the compound inside was full of neem and blazing red hibiscus. She wasnÕt
home, but a man called Sadanand Menon gave me a copy
of the book. I told him I was planning to return to India after eight years of
studying and working in the US and London. Later, I received an email from Sadanand, saying that my review had been ChandraÕs favourite, that she particularly liked the connections I
made between the staccato rhythms of her lines to build image upon image, much
like the movements of dance.
Things might have been left
there, but when I returned to Madras, I began taking Kalaripayattu
lessons at ChandraÕs centre, Spaces, with Shaji John, a Kalari master, who
had worked with Chandra since her first production, ÔAngikaÕ.It
was Shaji who urged me to meet her, saying that they
were looking for a new dancer. After class, I arrived at her door, sweaty,
depleted. She did not have an electric buzzer. Instead, a small brass bell was
tied with a rope to the front door grill. It was a relief when no one answered.
I scampered away. At the end of the next class Shaji
himself walked me over, and once I crossed the threshold into ChandraÕs room of
swings, the difference between the life IÕd lived and the life I was
moving into, swelled beneath me
like a premonition.
If I could relive those years, I would follow my
instinct to record everything – our rehearsals; our talks by the front
door – Chandra in her special chair by the door grill with the light
falling through; our talks on the parapet looking at the Bay of Bengal; the
evening salon-style conversations in her front room, which instead of sofas and
chairs had three wooden oonjals hanging from the
ceiling; and later, as she became progressively unwell, the things we said to
each other as she lay in bed. I wanted to hold all of it and archive it because
I was aware there was so much I was not grasping. If I put all our conversations on
cassettes, I thought, IÕd have something to return to. She was stubborn though,
and wouldnÕt allow it, insisting it all flow through.
I tried to keep a daily
notebook but it was hard enough keeping up with my body, which at 26, was going
through something quasi-religious, a kind of bodily Reformation. We worked
arduously, seven days a week. If I suggested a day off to rest, I got a look.
If I said I wanted to go on a trip with friends, I got a look. Be here now, was
the unspoken dictum.
Part of the reason IÕm a
writer is because writing allows me to construct a scaffolding around memory.
So much of my time with Chandra exists in quicksands
now, and the only moments I can hold and trust are the ones that I wrote about
or were recorded. There was a train ride from Madras to Baroda in February
2002, my first performance in Champaner. Chandra, Shaji and I took a train that would take a heroic 66 hours
to snake its way across the country.
I fictionalized that
journey in a short story called ÔThe Navjeevan
ExpressÕ, using details of how Chandra marked each sunrise and sunset, how at
each station she knew what kind of special food youÕd find, how she said they
should build prisons and hospitals by the train tracks so the inmates could
imagine the lives of people passing by. She talked about her travels –
how it was important to walk alone, how disappointed she was in Greece because
she could not find any bodies that resembled the Fisher Boy of Thebes. In
India, she said, you could take your eye from the temple wall to the street and
youÕd find the same postures, the same shoulders and legs and waists –
the squat, tribhanga, sideways recline. For her,
there was strength in this continuity.
Chandra was 73 when I met her, and already in
ill-health. The choreography IÕd perform for fifteen years, ÔShariraÕ, would be her tenth and final work. People who
have participated in ChandraÕs trajectory since Angika
in 1984 say that Sharira is both continuation and
sublimation of her ideas. While Angika explored a
more physical, expansive idea of the body, with a large ensemble of martial
artists, yoga practitioners, and Bharatanatyam dancers, synthesizing these
different Indian physical traditions in a non-narrative performance of great
vitality, Sharira, which means the unending body, was
a more meditative and intimate production, scaled down to two dancers. The best
description IÕve heard of it is that itÕs like a moving collage. Over her ten
choreographies, ChandraÕs central question remained the same: ÔWhere does the
body begin, and end?Õ
For a woman so obsessed with the body, she was hard
work when it came to looking after her own body. She was a difficult patient,
resistant to the idea of a wheelchair, hiding tablets in her mouth and spitting
them into the hibiscus bushes when no one was looking. At a consultation with
her doctor, one of ChennaiÕs top heart surgeons, she berated him for the ugly
poster of the human heart hanging above his desk, objecting to its literal
interpretation of the heart as a giant pumping machine. ÔThis is not what my
heart looks like,Õ she insisted. Some months later, at her doctorÕs request, we
performed Sharira at a conference for heart surgeons,
so they could understand that it was possible for audience and performer to
share a heart – sahridaya.
Such was ChandraÕs charm.
It extended not just to artists and thinkers, but to everyone who came into her
orbit. One morning she called and said, ÔShall we go to Auroville?Õ
She had performed there several times, but it had been a while since she had
visited. It was the only trip we made together, just her and I. We stayed with
a friend, who had converted some horse stables into rooms. I remember it being
glorious. On the way back, we stopped on the side of the road because she
needed to make Ôlily pondsÕ. I remember taking her hand because she was a
little shaky in the legs, the way she lifted her skirt, that infectious
laughter.
Chandralekha Prabhudas Patel was born on
6 December 1928, in Wada, Maharashtra. When she was 17, she gave up studying
law in Bombay to learn Bharatanatyam with Guru Ellappa
Pillai in Madras, which would remain her home for the rest of her life. By the
time I met her in 2001, she had gone through so many avatars and iterations,
yet strangely, she seemed so uniquely herself, as though sheÕd emerged into the
world just so. Early in her career she had disengaged herself from caste and
familial ties by cutting off her surname, floating around as a free, one-word
unit that answered to the name Chandralekha, which
was inevitably shortened by friends to Chandra.
At some point, her hair
turned white and she refused to dye it, shocking conservative dance audiences
by continuing to perform. The silvery mane would become her trademark. At her Arangetram in 1951, at the Museum Theatre in Madras, she
suffered what she would later call
Ôa split in the body.Õ On stage she was performing the joyous sensuality of
water, the people of Mathura bathing in the river Yamuna to greet Krishna on
his return, but in the streets of the real world there was drought, the papers
were full of pictures of cracked earth and empty pots. How to reconcile dance
with life? In 1960 she stopped performing in public, continuing to practice
dance, but shifting her energies into things that presumably helped salvage the
split – print-making, haikus, the feminist
movement.
There was something of the
provocateur in Chandra. She understood the power of an apocryphal story, and
she delighted in making people squirm with statements like Ôchildren are little
terrorists.Õ Her imagination was capacious – equally enamoured
with Chola bronzes, principles of mathematics, concepts of time, but not so
lofty as to shun the mundane: ÔTishani, how did you
get such soft feet?Õ (Answer: ÔPedicures, ChandraÕ). She was a radical person,
who was in many ways, deeply traditional. Someone who had the greatest
reverence for ideas, but who could shift registers like lightning
and mock with the best of them. She had much to say about Ôgreat menÕ and their
little shadows. I believe her decision to live away from the power centre of
Delhi was a studied choice, to live her life aslant from the bog of dance
politics. She mistrusted institutions of all kinds, including marriage,
believing that they eventually ran to seed. She never had children, never created
a dance school, was uninterested in the idea of legacy.
At a recent talk, Sadanand
Menon, her long-time companion and light designer, remarked that it had been a
pattern of hers to create iconic geometries on stage and then dissolve them
like the ten-armed Dashabhuja in ÔSriÕ, which has
since been ripped off by any number of dance companies. The difference with
Chandra though, is that rather than treating that image as a moment of
crescendo or conclusion, she pushes further by dismantling it, as though a hive
of bees had suddenly been unleashed, a collective of womenÕs energy spiralling across the stage.
ChandraÕs subversions, and
there were many of them, were certainly not just for the hell of it.
She was interested in ideas of recovery rather than representation, abstraction
rather than story. Dance, for her, was not spectacle or entertainment, but
having the audience meet you half way. I remember her saying that she didnÕt
want people to lean back in their chairs and watch. Their spines needed to be as
actively engaged as the dancersÕ spines. So, the audience leaned forward, and
we reached out.
What does it mean to arrive towards the end of
someoneÕs life at the precise moment when your own life is opening? A space is
made where certain exchanges happen. Would you believe me if I said that for
the first few years of performing Sharira, I had no
idea what I was creating on stage? We rehearsed in silence, keeping our own
internal talam. Our theatre had no mirrors. It was
only after a friend made a video of our performance and showed it to me that I
saw what she was doing – how those arms and legs, ShajiÕs
and mine, were making formations and shapes and shadows. How they were of the
body but in some way, beyond it.
The word ecstasy comes from
the Greek, ekstasis, to stand outside oneself, and in
a strange way, watching myself perform, was exactly that. While performing, I
occasionally experienced moments of transcendence. Not always. In Bhopal, for
instance, there was an extremely fidgety audience, heavy on the
bangle-clashing, and an errant cockroach flew from the dark onto my shining
thigh (which might
have been transcendental for the cockroach but not for me). In general,
performance offered doorways where I sometimes felt lifted out, magnified.
Watching the video of our show was different. It was seeing what she saw. Her
vision of the world. And her vision made people say things like, ÔI felt my
soul shooting out of my bodyÕ, or ÔI felt myself falling in love.Õ
There was something spiritual and of the air about
Chandra and her work, yet utterly earthy and sensuous as well. She was engaged
daily in the idea of beauty with utility and sacrality. She told me once how
delighted she was that sheÕd met a man who had only ever bathed in rivers. This
gave her such thrills. SheÕs the kind of woman who would stay up all night to
watch a flower bud unfurl, who made kolams outside
her door every morning, and gathered hibiscus to place at the feet of her Natarajas. She collected all manner of household
implements, textiles, woven baskets, but her nerves grated against the sounds
of domesticity – woe betide the maid who banged the vessels too loudly
while washing up. Her great dream was to build a theatre connected to the sea
and sky, incorporating those elements into her work. Being in the world for her
involved looking and listening with deep contemplation, irreverence and
pleasure.
Chandra died on 30 December
2006, a holy day of Vaikuntha Ekadashi, when the
gates of heaven are supposedly open for all. It was the same day that Saddam
Hussein was executed, and I knew that Chandra would find play in this –
her and Saddam hanging out in heaven.
Over the years, IÕve
realized that my retroactive ambition for Chandra is, in fact, an attempt at
pinning her to a single narrative, which is exactly the kind of thing she was
always escaping from. It means that every time I go back to her work, to write
an essay, to think about that time, I must find a new point of entry, and in
this way, our relationship is continually revitalized. The essence of her lies
beyond her ten choreographies, written texts, and posters. It has to do with
the way she lived her life. She could be difficult, cantankerous, even stun you
with sudden cruelty, but there was something about her devotion to ritual, to
the daily assurance that the world was full of magic, that constantly recentred her. And she
was brave, unafraid of rupture. Some days, after rehearsals, perhaps having
looked at the work too long, sheÕd say, ÔI think itÕs time to shut up shop.Õ It
was not threat, or sadness, but an ability not to be overly in love with her
own work.
If I think about what I
have taken from her, it is this desire not to place any schisms between life
and work. To keep the walkway between these two territories open. To find your
own way of being modern. To politicize the energy within, so that even if you
are comfortable in your life, you can see whatÕs brutal around you. To resist
the mechanical by harnessing agents of renewal. In other words: rage dazzle
rage dazzle.
Reading the stories of Ambai
recently, I was struck by something her translator, Lakshmi Holstršm,
described in her introduction – ÔA personal history with which you are at
ease,Õ she wrote, Ôis what you take with you wherever you goÉTo be able to feel
firm ground wherever you tread, rather than to be rooted in one place –
that seems to be AmbaiÕs goal.Õ She goes on to say
that the word Ambai uses for this groundedness
in Tamil is irutthattum, from irutthu
– to hold firm, stabilize, ground. Chandra was my source of irruthattum.In the stories of my life, what layers
underneath – even the times before her – is this sense of waiting
and awakening. The real marvel of Chandra was that she was a source of irutthattum for so many.
* Tishani Doshi worked as a dancer with the Chandralekha Group in Chennai for fifteen years. She has published seven books of fiction and poetry, the most recent of which is, A God at the Door, shortlisted for the Forward Prize 2021.