and frequently these are set to music. Often the occasion for these performances
is an annual festival observed in a local deity’s honor, and in these instances
the performance has ritual significance. Two recent studies focus on the cult of
Draupadı ̄, which is well represented in the villages of northeastern Tamilnadu
and recitation/enactment of the Maha ̄bha ̄ratastory during the annual festival
performed by Draupadı ̄’s devotees (Frasca 1988; Hiltebeitel 1988). A third
focuses on a genre known as “bow song” (vil pa ̄t.t.u), which is traditionally
performed during festivals celebrated at the temples of local deities in the far
southern region of Tamilnadu. (Blackburn 1988).
Alf Hiltebeitel describes a process, instantiated in the Tamil Draupadı ̄ cult,
“whereby the Maha ̄bha ̄ratais transposed into local, and for the most part village,
South Indian traditions” (Hiltebeitel 1988: 131).^8 At the Draupadı ̄ festivals cel-
ebrated in northeastern Tamilnadu, this transposed Maha ̄bha ̄ratais performed
in three modes. The first of these, called piracan.kam, the most “textual” of the
three, consists of a recitation of episodes from the epic in Tamil by a professional
Maha ̄bha ̄ratareciter, known as a piracan.kior pa ̄ratiya ̄r. Richard Frasca has
describedpiracan.kamas a musical narrative amalgamation of song (pa ̄t.t.u),
musical chant, and exegetical prose” (quoted in Hiltebeitel 1988: 137). More
often than not the textual basis for piracan.kam is the Tamil version of the
Maha ̄bha ̄ratacomposed in the fourteenth century by Villipputtu ̄r A ̄l
̄
va ̄r, though
reciters may also drawn upon other Tamil versions of the Maha ̄bha ̄rata. The
second mode is dramatic enactment, with song and dance, of episodes from
theMaha ̄bha ̄ratain a style known as “street drama” (terukku ̄ttu). According to
Hiltebeitel, the Villi Pa ̄ratam“provides the skein that both genres [piracan.kam
and terukku ̄ ttu] follow, but while the dramatists may know of Villi, ‘it is doubtful
that they ever consult, and unlikely that many of them could consult his
Pa ̄ratam’ ” (Hiltebeitel 1988: 138). Thus, unlike piracan.kam, the dramatic enact-
ment of episodes from the Maha ̄bha ̄rataat Draupadı ̄ festivals is only loosely tied
to the classical textual tradition. The third level of performance takes the form
of temple ritual, and Hiltebeitel has noted that whereas the piracan.kam “has
as its main task to present the Pa ̄ratamas a ‘whole,’ ” the street drama “has as
its main task to enact those aspects of the Pa ̄ratamthat have the greatest signifi-
cance in relation to the festival’s period of highest ritual intensity” (Hiltebeitel
1988: 140). During such periods it is not uncommon for some festival partici-
pants to enter a state of possession and speak with the voices of protagonists in
theMaha ̄bha ̄ratanarrative.
The bow song tradition is found in the far southern region of Tamilnadu. Like
the two performance genres associated with the festivals celebrated at Draupadı ̄
temples in the northeastern portion of the state, annual village temple festivals
provide the occasion for bow song performances. And like the village enactments
of the Maha ̄bha ̄rata, bow song performances are closely intertwined with temple
ritual; and further, at critical junctures in the narrative audience members
may become possessed. But there are also salient differences between the two tra-
ditions, and these pertain to both the performers and to the narrative they
perform. Like piracan.kam, bow song performances combine both spoken and
tamil hindu literature 153