Posted by Vinod II (24.47.241.215) on July 30, 2005 at 11:25:49:

 In Reply to: Worshipping a stack of USD $ instead of Nataraja? (or if the non-commercialized gurus are extinct...)

Posted by S.Kumari on July 29, 2005 at 23:45:02:

 I admit, dance today is a money-making business. And in the US, one can make quite a bit of money off of it. There are some who have qualifications and some who do not. Some charge more, some charge less. That's the way of the world... art unfortunately often has a price in the field of Bharata Natyam.
I've always wondered whether Gurus who were performing artists themselves truly let their disciples shine in the limelight fully. Say in a dance drama staged by an academy run by a top-notch dancer, you still find the dancer taking center-stage while disciples play other main and peripheral roles. Even at an older age, many of these revered performers continue to lead the troupe.
The paradox of this situation is that people flock to these Gurus based on the merit of their past performances. Yet, there are Gurus who simply teach and do not perform actively. Some may see this as a benefit (the disciple can truly come up instead of being in the shadow of their performing Guru)-- yet others may see the lack of performing practical experience as a drawback when choosing a Guru.
Any thoughts?