there is a tendency for stagnation and repetition with no scope for new blood and new ideas. Therefore, a stage has now come when there is a general conflict between tradition bound purists and tradition bound innovators. The purists always argue that in classical dance, our ancestors have created the best and the finest masterpieces, with the result there is no scope for any modern enthusiast

to better them, whereas the innovators are of the determined opinion that even in a tradition bound art there is scope for variety, unbounded richness and unique nuances. In most western countries, where Indian dance is known as an ancient and tradition bound art, many people voice the opinion that Indian dance is a dead art because it follows verbatim, bygone ideas and views. But, the point such critics always miss is that no art can survive and progress unless it is vibrant, reflecting the artistic eminence of that age. If, as the European critic says, our Dance art is dead, we would never

have been able to visualize it let alone practice it. The fact that Bharata Natyam is glowingly alive and refreshingly radiant is definite proof that it has never been a decadent art but a progressive vista of the creative artists depicting the panorama of that particular age. Before the 1930s, Bharata Natyam was in a precarious condition because it was a tabooed art with a plethora of social stigmas. It was practiced in the homes of a few 'Devadasi-s' who performed this art only as mere entertainments in marriages, festivals and other community functions, resulting in an appalling apathy. The greatness of any art can never remain dormant and ostracized and so during the renaissance of this art it blossomed in all its glory as a great art with tradition as its foundation.