Kutiyattam – Subhadradhananjayam (India, Kerala)

Thinking Through Michel Foucault (1926-1984)’s Philosophy on the Art Essence

Art as a Technology of the Self:

Kutiyattam, a Sanskrit theatre form preserved over two millennia, is not merely a performance tradition; it is a ritualistic discipline of self-formation. From Foucault’s perspective, it functions as a “technology of the self,” through which the actor becomes an ascetic vessel of embodied memory and sacred utterance. The actor undergoes a life-long training process akin to the Stoic self-care regimes Foucault explores — meticulously disciplining the body, emotions, and breath to create a stage where the actor is not a subject expressing self, but a medium for the transmission of moral, cosmological, and political codes.

Displacement of the Cartesian Subject:

Foucault’s critique of the Cartesian cogito is relevant here: in Kutiyattam, the subjectivity of the performer is decentered. The performance is not about personal expression but about inscribing ancient texts — such as Bhāsa’s Subhadradhananjayam — into the collective consciousness of the community. The performer becomes an ethical surface upon which collective mythologies are re-enacted, not as narrative entertainments, but as ontological reenactments of dharma and cosmic order.

Aesthetics of Existence and Performativity:

Kutiyattam embodies the aesthetics of existence: each hand gesture (mudra), glance (drishti), and vocalization (raga) is a stylized expression of inner cultivation. Foucault’s emphasis on bios — the stylized life — is enacted in the life of the Kutiyattam actor, who must craft their soul and body as an aesthetic object in order to participate in the metaphysical drama. What appears on stage is not a “character,” but the condensation of ethical and spiritual memory passed through generations.

Episteme and Ritual Time:

In contrast to the modern episteme that prioritizes individual authorship and temporality, Kutiyattam operates within a cyclic and ritualistic episteme. Time folds inward. As Foucault suggests in his genealogical method, such performances do not represent progress but intensify a circularity of power-knowledge relations, here between Brahmin priesthoods, temple institutions, and theatrical praxis.