Meaning-Making in the Diaspora: Cultural Expression and Transformation
By Parul Shah
This paper aims to acknowledge that diasporic art forms frequently generate new meanings shaped by bicultural identities, as manifested through embodied practices and the shifting cultural contexts in which they are created and performed.
My inquiry centers on the diasporic Indian dance community in the United States, where dancers frequently grapple with feelings of delegitimization either because they are making work outside of India or because their work assumes new identities and meanings beyond its place of origin.
While many Indian dancers contend with issues such as patriarchal hierarchies, colonialism, casteism, and nationhood, diasporic Indian dancers and specifically, Indian dancers in America encounter additional challenges, including Orientalist tropes, bicultural identity, and questions of belonging. Their influences are shaped both by the specific sociocultural context in which their work is created and by the broader cultural milieu of Indian dance.
The core of my argument emphasizes the necessity of fostering critical dialogue around what it means to produce artistic work outside its place of origin, and to recognize the importance of validating the narratives that emerge from such contexts. As evidenced in the history of Indian dance, cultural change over time is a natural and ongoing phenomenon. To gain deeper insight into this process, this paper examines significant shifts within Indian classical dance alongside my own experiences and reflections as a diasporic Indian dance choreographer, performer, and educator. Through the early stages of an autoethnographic inquiry, I begin by analyzing key transformations in Indian classical dance.
While I do not offer a definitive conclusion to my inquiry, my intention here is to approach change and shifts in meaning as an inherent and natural cultural phenomenon, and to critically consider its implications for the future of Indian dance on the global stage.
Reclaiming the Narrative
The choices we make in life serve as the foundational building blocks of our personal and artistic narratives. Our biases and beliefs are deeply embedded in these choices, shaping our creative practices and pedagogical approaches.
As a Kathak practitioner, my feminist perspective informs the ways I curate and perform repertoire. I have intentionally shifted the gaze within Kathak to challenge the traditionally dominant male gaze and reclaim it through a feminist lens. While some may view this approach as a dilution of tradition, others may understand it as a necessary evolution—one that ensures the repertoire remains both authentic and relevant to individual identity. For me, dance has become a language through which to disrupt, question, and reimagine inherited forms.
In “The Cultural Nature of Human Development," Barbara Rogoff argues that human development is a cultural process. Individuals develop through participation within a community and with time, cultural practices and ideologies can transform due to circumstances, influences of other cultures, and environmental and social conditions. ( 2003). Culture is essentially not stagnant but is continuously in a dynamic process. As participating members of communities, humans develop and often contribute to the changing nature of culture. Rogoff’s assertions are witnessed in the cultural reproduction of Indian classical dance in India and the diaspora. Rogoff's conceptual framework of human development as a cultural process are the underpinnings of this inquiry.
Rukmini Devi and the Reinvention of Dasi Attam
Since the origins of Indian classical dance, instruction has traditionally been passed down through the guru-shishya tradition. In this pedagogical model, students lived with their guru (teacher) and took responsibility for attending to the guru’s daily needs, including preparing meals, running errands, and maintaining the household. In return, the guru imparted their knowledge and training, often through a highly immersive, oral, and embodied transmission of the art form.
This barter-based system was grounded in dedication and deep respect for the guru. While the guru-shishya tradition offered an immersive and rigorous mode of training where the student’s primary purpose was the mastery of the art form, it was also marked by unequal power dynamics and a lack of formal accountability. In the aftermath of British colonial rule, the guru-shishya pedagogy began to decline giving way to more institutionalized forms of dance education. (Chatterjea, 1996) The late Bharatanatyam dancer Rukmini Devi was instrumental in bringing this significant change to Indian dance education.
In the wake of colonial rule, Indian dance was left in a fragmented and devalued state. It was within this context that Rukmini Devi emerged as a pivotal figure in reshaping and institutionalizing South Indian dance. She transformed the traditional form of Dasi Attam into what is now recognized as Bharatanatyam, aligning it with Western and Eastern aesthetic ideals. While Devi dedicated her life to the preservation and elevation of Indian arts and culture, her reinterpretation was significantly influenced by Western ideologies and values.
Critics argue that although Devi played a central role in the revival of Bharatanatyam, her efforts also contributed to the erasure of the Devadasi identity, female hereditary dancers who had long been embodied and transmitted the tradition. In aligning Bharatanatyam with English Victorian morality, Devi eliminated repertoire that celebrated sensuality and replaced it with themes of spiritual piety. This rebranding helped distance the form from the colonial stigma that had associated dance with prostitution, a result of the British ethnocentric gaze. This historical process of"sanskritization" sought to purify and elevate the art form within acceptable social norms.
In 1936, Devi established Kalakshetra, a dance academy that continues to thrive today. As a high-caste woman and the first Bharatanatyam performer outside the Devadasi lineage, her public engagement with the form was bold and, at the time, controversial within upper-caste circles. Devi’s efforts helped codify Bharatanatyam as a “classical” dance form and legitimize it within national and international contexts. The institutionalization of Indian dance expanded further with the founding of Rabindra Bharati University in 1961, the first university in Asia to offer formal academic study in music and dance, modeled after British educational frameworks ( Chatterjea, 1996).
Dance scholar Ananya Chatterjea (1996) argues that this institutional shift fundamentally altered the experience of dance training. While it diminished the depth of immersion characteristic of the guru-shishya tradition, it also provided students with greater autonomy and reduced the risk of exploitative power dynamics.
Another instrumental change Rukmini Devi brought to Bharatanatyam was the introduction of the proscenium stage. With her debut performance in 1935, she placed Bharatanatyam outside of the temple setting and onto the proscenium stage. This was the first time Indian classical dance was witnessed on the stage. Rukmini Devi often traveled to the West and drew from Ballet aesthetics. She was deeply influenced by the ballerina Anna Pavlova, one of the most celebrated ballerinas of her time, who was also a dear friend of Devi’s. Devi changed the presentation of Bharatanatyam to suit a frontal format. To make Bharatanatyam “acceptable”, she classicized and codified the form. Over time, other styles of Indian dance began to shift the forms to reclaim their position in society.
Today, Bharatanatyam is predominantly witnessed on the proscenium stage. Devi’s work fundamentally transformed both the pedagogical structure and public perception of Indian classical dance. As Rogoff (2003) suggests, cultural change can emerge through cross-cultural influences and social necessity.. Both of these factors played a role in the reinvention of Dasi Attam. Rukmini Devi’s contribution to Indian dance thus occupies a complex and contested place within its history, at once a revitalization and a reconfiguration shaped by sociocultural, political, and transnational influences.
While some credit Rukmini Devi with rescuing Dasi Attam from the brink of extinction, others contend that her interventions effectively colonized the form, marginalizing and erasing the contributions of female hereditary dancers from historical memory. By removing the social stigma associated with the Devadasi tradition, Devi made Bharatanatyam more acceptable to upper- and middle-class families, thereby broadening its social accessibility. In doing so, she fundamentally altered both the pedagogy and presentation of Indian classical dance, leaning into Western ideologies and aesthetic principles in its reconstruction.
Kumudini Lakhia and the Evolution of Form
The late, renowned Kathak choreographer and educator Padma Vibhushan, Kumudini Lakhia, took Devi’s work a step further. Lakhia, like Rukmini Devi, often traveled to Europe to perform with Ram Gopal and was influenced by Western aesthetics in her choreographic approaches. In the 70s, Lakhia introduced a “contemporary” approach to Kathak, focusing more on group choreography and stepping away from Hindu mythological narratives. Today, she is widely hailed as a pioneer in the field of Indian dance, but was initially met with harsh criticism for creating choreography that deviated from the cultural milieu of Indian dance in the 1970s.
Chitresh Das and Diasporic Innovation
The late Pandit Chitresh Das, one of the first Kathak dancers to establish himself in the United States in the early 1970s, adapted the form to align with the appetite of American students and audiences. Das concentrated on the technical aspects of Kathak in his teaching and performance repertoire because he believed the storytelling aspects, rooted in Hindu mythology, were outside the cultural context of his American students. He responded by focusing on technical aspects, such as emphasizing speed and athleticism. He believed this was the most translatable to his American students and audience ( Dalidowicz, 2015). He developed his own footwork exercise called “ accent exercise,” where his students learned to emphasize certain numbers within the footwork pattern. Dance scholar Monica Dalidowicz (2015) maintains that Das adapted his teaching to the needs of the student and worked within the limitations of the environment. Das struggled with the lack of live musicians to accompany his classes in the U.S. Out of this need, he taught his students to play the harmonium or tabla. After achieving a certain level of mastery, they would play the instrument while executing the footwork. This movement was and is unique to his style of Kathak, and I only witness this with his students today. According to Dalidowicz, this not only eliminated the need for musicians but provided a deeper embodied understanding of the footwork composition.
In line with Rogoff’s argument, Pandit Chitresh Das adapted and reimagined Kathak to meet the cultural and social demands of his diasporic environment. While rooted in tradition, Das retained key elements of the guru-shishya model particularly the emphasis on reverence for the guru. He introduced codified, ritualistic practices that extended beyond the scope of my own training in India. In the late 1990s, he developed what he termed "Kathak Yoga," a hybrid form that drew from ancient Indian practices while also responding to the local cultural landscape of San Francisco. Influenced by the city's Hippie movement and the growing commodification of yoga and spirituality, Das strategically positioned Kathak within a context where these ideas were both accessible and marketable.
According to Daldiowicz, Das stated that he changed his method of teaching every ten years to meet the culture of a new generation (2015). From my own understanding of Das’s work and community, he cultivated a following, marked by highly specific protocols around guru reverence and discipline. Das reinvented Kathak with a keen awareness of the cultural appetites of American students and audiences, selectively emphasizing certain aspects of the tradition while simplifying or departing from others. Much like Rukmini Devi, he curated the form to align with the values and expectations of his context.
Notably, Das anchored his pedagogy in the guru-shishya tradition within the American cultural landscape, where individuality and personal freedom are deeply valued. Despite this seeming contradiction, many students were drawn to his rigorous and highly structured approach. Both Das and Devi responded to the demands of their historical and cultural moments, making intentional choices to preserve, reinterpret, and legitimize their respective dance forms. Neither shied away from change, or from integrating Western ideologies in pursuit of their artistic and pedagogical goals.
Some may argue that figures such as Rukmini Devi, Kumudini Lakhia, and Pandit Chitresh Das diluted Indian classical dance through their engagement with and incorporation of Western influences. Conversely, it can be contended that Devi took steps she believed were essential to preserve a tradition on the brink of disappearance, while Das worked to establish and legitimize Indian classical dance within a cultural landscape largely unfamiliar with its aesthetics and values. The boundary between change and dilution remains ambiguous, raising a fundamental question: who holds the authority to define that boundary? Can the individual artist’s experience and creative truth take precedence over the custodians oftradition?
As I reflect on these complexities, I find it essential to distinguish between stripping down a cultural form for the sake of making it more accessible to dominant audiences and the process of reimagining that form as an expression of personal identity and cultural specificity. This distinction becomes vital in diasporic contexts, where negotiation between tradition and innovation is not only inevitable but necessary.
Straddling Between Identities
A research study reported in the Oxford Handbook of Human Development and Culture examines how Arab-American high school students vacillate between identities, sometimes identifying more with being American and in other circumstances, connecting more to their Arab culture and identity. Because many bicultural youths belong to various groups, their identities are hybrid. Many immigrant youths in the U.S. often find themselves in a conflict of culture between American individuality and values coming from families of the majority world primarily of interdependence and the collective good. (Flanagan et al., 2015) The coexistence of the two worlds can be challenging but can also create new spaces and perspectives. Studies with students of Chinese and American cultures indicate that they obtain higher levels of creativity than students who are only exposed to one culture. Leung and Chiu (2010) suggest that even brief encounters with multiculturalism can enhance creative thinking, a claim supported by Mourges et al. (2015).
The multiplicity of perspectives often serves as a catalyst for innovation. As someone shaped by two cultural contexts, I frequently experience a sense of dissonance between the worlds I inhabit. Yet, it is precisely this intersection that informs my choreographic work. My practice reflects the commingling of these cultural influences, generating a distinctive movement vocabulary and artistic perspective. In doing so, it becomes a means of negotiating and bridging my multifaceted identity.
Conclusion
The ongoing negotiation of the legitimacy of form, placement, and identity is a central concern throughout this inquiry. As I continue to navigate the tension between tradition and transformation, embracing our diasporic identities allows for a more authentic mode of expression. Bicultural identity isn’t a conflict to resolve, but a strength to embrace unapologetically. Rogoff (2003) contends that human development is a cultural process, shaped by participation within a community. As both an educator and choreographer, my engagement with community deepens my awareness of positionality—as someone who moves between two cultures in search of equilibrium. This engagement also creates space for others to recognize and affirm my diasporic identity within a culturally relevant and respectful framework.
When I watch a performance, I am most compelled by dancers who speak their truth, those who move beyond merely replicating their teachers’ work to create something deeply personal. I am particularly inspired by the Cuban ballet company Malpaso, whose approach to ballet is infused with the cultural textures of Cuba. Their movement vocabulary, while rooted in ballet technique, is uniquely and distinctly their own, adding the essence of Cuban life to their work. This sense of ownership imbues their work with depth, authenticity, and cultural relevance, capturing a powerful expression of this moment in history. They are not simplifying or diluting the ballet form, but enriching and personalizing it, expanding the possibilities of what ballet and dance more broadly can be in a globalized world.
Cultures evolve, sometimes to endure, sometimes in pursuit of what is perceived as progress, and at other times as a means of making sense of a shifting world. The history of Indian dance is marked by continuous transformation, with forms being adapted and reinvented to respond to the needs of their time, the communities they serve, and the aspirations of individual artists. These evolutions are shaped by conscious choices: what we preserve, what we relinquish, what we choose to emphasize, and what we relegate to the margin, all guided by our biases, intentions, and the narratives we seek to tell.
References
Chatterjea, Ananya. “ Training in Indian Classical Dance: A Case Study.” Asian Theatre Journal, (1996): 68-91 DOI: 10.2307/1124303. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1124303
Dalidowicz, Monica. “ Crafting Fidelity: a pedagogical creativity in kathak dance.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 21, Issue 4 ( December 2015): 838-854 DOI 10.111/1467-9655.122290
https://tc.idm.ocl.org/login?url=https:/…
Flanagan, C., Lin, C., Luis-Mills, H., Sambo, A., Hu, M. ( 2015). Adolescent Civic Development Across Cultures. In Jensen, Lene Arnett ( Eds.), The Oxford handbook of human development and culture: an interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 471-484). Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Leung, A. K., & Chiu, C. (2010) Multicultural experience, idea receptiveness, and creativity. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41 (5-6), 723-741.
Mourgues, C., Barbot,B, Tan,M, Grigorenko, E. ( 2015). The Interaction Between Culture and the Development of Creativity. In Jensen, Lene Arnett ( Eds.), The Oxford handbook of human development and culture: an interdisciplinary perspective ( pp. 255-270). Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Rogoff, B. (2003). The Cultural Nature of Human Development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.