The second is again the school of tradition which is more sympathetic to innovations in the sense that the members of this school on doubt see the new creations and after seeing them condemn them as new fangled and as such not classical conforming to tradition. But are the same time, they incorporate some of the changes in heir own compositions thus giving them the hall-mark of classicism.

Their compositions are therefore half-hearted variations of the old with a certain new flavour which they force down the minds of their ardent admirers as authentic traditional creations. The third school belongs to the generation of broad-minded traditionists who within the frame work of classicism make earnest attempts to introduce new ideas openly.

And so they become the torch-bearers of progress in contemporary dance. They believe in a pulsating art and contemporary dance and work for the removal of any stagnation, diehardism and bigotry that is so rampant in the first school of strictly traditional artists. Bharata Natyam originated more than a thousand years ago. The fundamentals of this supreme art such as the 'mudra-s', the varieties of expressions, and the various movements and poses have remained the same. But is it possible for any thinking person to believe that we are practicing and performing the same dance from a millennium ago? If so, it is stark absurdity. Maestros and Artists come into existence, live, create and finally join their Maker. And in their short span of creative life, is it possible for us to presume that they have stuck to the principles laid down by their ancestors and practiced age old dance compositions?