A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CHANDRALEKHA AND MARINA ABRAMOVIĆ: CHALLENGING NORMS THROUGH THE FEMALE BODY IN PERFORMANCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v4.i1.2023.6126Keywords:
Female Body, Performance, Dance, Patriarchy, GenderAbstract [English]
This paper compares two seminal performance artists, Indian choreographer and dancer Chandralekha and Serbian performance artist Marina Abramović. They both changed how the female body is used in modern art. Even though they came from very different cultural and political backgrounds, both artists used the body as the focus of their creative expression to question mainstream ideas about aesthetics, gender, and politics. Chandralekha used the classical Indian dance style Bharatanatyam as a base and added aspects of yoga, martial arts, and Tantric philosophy to her work to reclaim women's sexuality, strength, and political presence. Marina Abramović, who works in the global avant-garde art world, used endurance, vulnerability, and audience participation to show how power works in violence, objectification, and spectatorship. The study says that both artists used their bodies not as something to portray but as active sites of resistance and change, based on ideas of performativity, embodiment, and resistance. The study looks at works like Chandralekha's Sri and Abramović's Rhythm 0 and The Artist Is Present to see how embodied performance can shake up cultural scripts and provide women and political activists new ways to express themselves. The study ends by saying that Chandralekha and Abramović, although though they come from different backgrounds and have different practices, both use the body as a revolutionary tool to challenge and change the definitions of gender, tradition, and presence.
References
Bharucha, Rustom. Chandralekha: Woman, Dance, Resistance. New Delhi: Indus, 1995.
Brunton, Jaime. “Biopolitical Masochism in Marina Abramović’s The Artist Is Present.” Camera Obscura,(2017), digitalcommons.unl.edu DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/02705346-3776868
Butler Judith, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, United State,1990
Chatterjea, Ananya. “Chandralekha: Negotiating the Female Body and Movement in Cultural/Political Signification.” In, Ann Dils and Ann Cooper Alabright (ed), moving history /dancing culture A dance History Reader, Wesleyan University Press, United State of America,2000.
Demaria, Cristina. “The Performative Body of Marina Abramović: Rerelating (in) Time and Space.” European Journal of Women’s Studies,2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506804044464
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage, 1977.
Mitra, Royona, Living a Body Myth, Performing a Body Reality: Reclaiming the Corporeality and Sexuality of the Indian Female Dancer.
Mitra, Royona. “The Parting Pelvis: Temporality, Sexuality, and Indian Womanhood in Chandralekha’s Sharira (2001).” Dance Research Journal, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0149767714000254
Phelan, Peggy. Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. New York: Routledge, 1993.
Renzi, Kristen. “Safety in Objects: Discourses of Violence and Value – The ‘Rokeby Venus’ and Rhythm 0.” SubStance, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/sub.2013.0007
Revers, Judith. “Rhythm 0: Vulnerability and Resistance. The performative artistic process as agent of change.” Archives of sexual Behaviour, 2019.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Dr. Sreeparvathi .D, Rincy T P

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
With the licence CC-BY, authors retain the copyright, allowing anyone to download, reuse, re-print, modify, distribute, and/or copy their contribution. The work must be properly attributed to its author.
It is not necessary to ask for further permission from the author or journal board.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.