THE EVOLUTION OF NEGATIVE CHARACTER ROLES IN INDIAN CLASSICAL DANCE

International Journal of Computer Science (IJCS) Published by SK Research Group of Companies (SKRGC)

Abstract

This study examines how antagonistic characters have evolved within Indian classical dance traditions, where they function as essential elements of narrative, symbolism, and aesthetic expression. Rather than being limited to depictions of evil, these roles represent conflict, emotional tension, and moral opposition, helping to structure the dramatic arc of performance. Drawing on the theoretical foundations of the N??ya??stra and Abhinaya Darpana, the paper explores how abhinaya, mudras, body language, costume, makeup, music, and rhythm are used to create recognizable antagonistic identities. The study compares the representation of such characters in Bharatanatyam, Kathakali, Kuchipudi, Kathak, Odissi, Mohiniyattam, and Yakshagana, showing that each form preserves a shared classical vocabulary while developing distinct regional aesthetics. It also considers how these characters reflect social values, mythological memory, and cultural attitudes toward power, desire, pride, and disorder. Over time, antagonistic roles have moved from strictly codified traditional portrayals to more nuanced and interpretive performances, while retaining their classical dramatic function. The paper argues that the evolution of negative character roles reveals both continuity and adaptation in Indian classical dance. Their study contributes to a deeper understanding of how Indian dance communicates emotion, ethics, and cultural meaning through embodied performance.

References

1. Banerji, S. C. (1990). A handbook of Indian classical dance terminology. Sharada Publishing House.
2. Bose, M. (2007). The Bharata Natyam reader. Oxford University Press.
3. Chakravorty, P. (2011). Bells of change: Kathak dance, women, and modernity in India. Seagull Books.
4. Coomaraswamy, A. K. (2004). The mirror of gesture: Being the Abhinaya Darpana of Nandikeshvara. Munshiram Manoharlal.
5. Gaston, A., & Gaston, A. (1996). Bharatanatyam: The Tamil dance of life. Motilal Banarsidass.
6. Kothari, S. (1989). Kathak: Indian classical dance art. Oxford University Press.
7. Meduri, A. (2004). Bharatanatyam as a global dance: Some issues in research, identity, and agency. Dance Research Journal, 36(2), 134–137.
8. Nair, S. (2014). Rasa: Performing the sacred and the mythic in Indian classical dance. Penguin.
9. O’Shea, J. (2007). At home in the world: Bharata Natyam on the global stage. Wesleyan University Press.
10. Varadpande, M. L. (1982). History of Indian theatre, Vol. 1. Abhinav Publications.
11. Varadpande, M. L. (1987). History of Indian theatre, Vol. 2. Abhinav Publications.
12. Varadpande, M. L. (1992). History of Indian theatre, Vol. 3. Abhinav Publications.
13. Vatsyayan, K. (1977). Classical Indian dance in literature and the arts. Sangeet Natak Akademi.
14. Vatsyayan, K. (1987). Traditional Indian theatre: Multiple streams. National Book Trust.
15. Zarrilli, P. B. (2000). Kathakali dance-drama: Where gods and demons come to play. Routledge.
16. Zarrilli, P. B., McLean, J., & Pratt, D. (1992). A sourcebook of Indian classical dance. Motilal Banarsidass.
17. “The facets of dance revisited in the N??ya??stra and the Abhinaya Darpana.” (2022). ShodhKosh.
18. “Kathakali dance and masks.” (2025). Khan Academy / MAP Academy.
19. “Gestures in Kathakali: A study on protagonist and antagonist performances in stories.” (2017).
20. “The laws of movement: The Natyashastra as archive for Indian classical dance.” (2021). Contemporary Theatre Review.

Keywords

Antagonistic characters, Indian classical dance, evolution, abhinaya, N??ya??stra, Abhinaya Darpana, symbolism, aesthetics, and performance.