As a performative ritual, Theyyam is a cult confined to the socio-cultural matrix of northern Kerala. A kaleidoscope of colour and ritual, Theyyam not only demonstrates the vibrancy of visuals but also illuminates the mastery of verbal expressions. The linguistic topology of Theyyam—spanning from indigenous knowledge to divine utterances and poetic improvisations—weaves together a dense and intricate web of meanings that transcend the periphery of everyday interactions. The semantic formulations of Theyyam are primarily oral with each performance anchored in intergenerational customs and legacies.

Often mixing multiple registers—formal Malayalam, vernacular dialects and even Sanskritized idioms—the lexical discourse of Theyyam hymns and chants is rooted in lyrical and narrative forms. More importantly, unlike the written word, which constitutes meaning in a fixed mould, the oral tradition of Theyyam makes the ballads more flexible and open to interpretation. By focusing on this flexibility, the article aims to unravel the subtleties of language in Theyyam where each expression, rhythm and tone offers a dual invocation to the divine and the real.

Orality in Theyyam: Language as Temporal Embodiment

One of the hallmark features of Theyyam lies in its oral nature, but orality here moves beyond preservation and embraces the transient nature of the performance. This orality also records the legacy of the past while simultaneously establishing itself in the present time. Through subtle variations in tone, pace and vocal quality, the kolam (or performer) transforms what seems like an ordinary iteration into a generative act of linguistic renewal. Here, the variations in speech reflect not just the changing landscape of rituals but also shed light on the evolving social hierarchies. Through the spoken word of Theyyam, the subaltern performers briefly rise above their social identities, channelling the deity through linguistic variations.

Yet, this ethereal manifestation is impermanent as it fades away upon the conclusion of the performance, restoring the individual to their everyday realities. Language, in this scenario, operates as a paradoxical entity, balancing both liberation and temporality. As Ahearn (2012) notes, “Language is not a neutral medium for communication but rather a set of socially embedded practices” (3). As language mediates between the sacred and profane, words themselves acquire a corporeal quality in the body of the artist. The performer does not merely “speak” the words of the deity—he “becomes” the words. The act of oration, particularly during the state of divine infusion, is both a somatic and phonetic event. The sonic vibrations, the breath control, physical gestures—all blend seamlessly at the time of utterance.

In particular, the idea of embodiment assumes vivid clarity in the invocation of “Thampuraneee” (O’ Dear Lord), where the elongated syllables cascade over several breaths, turning the act of enunciation into a near physical struggle. Since the performer exhibits visible tension in vocalisation, the body becomes the performance and through subsequent invocations, its vulnerability gets wrapped under divine invincibility. What unfolds linguistically in these episodes of sacred oracle is the erasure of the difference between humane and divine, where words are no longer reflections of divinity, but are for a brief moment, divinity itself.

Caste and the Subversion of Linguistic Authority

When the subaltern performer “appropriates” Sanskrit, he boldly confronts Brahminical hegemony to challenge the elitism embedded in spirituality. In the performance, the artist outstrips the “authenticity” of Sanskrit as he actively inhabits them, reconstructing it through his distinct timbre of voice, dialect and pronunciation. This strain is audible in places where the eloquence of Sanskrit chants is altered by the raw tones of vernacular Malayalam—the language of the masses. This fluctuation in language also points to the performer’s perilous social standing—even if he ascribes to divinity for a short while, the vestiges of discrimination will still reverberate in his voice.

In the performance of the Theyyam of Vishnumurthy, the evocation to “deivam” (God) in “Njan Daivam, Njanaa Kulam” (I am the God, I am the lineage) is articulated with a heavy texture of colloquialism, pointing at a possible deviation from the obligatory “purity” of Sanskrit elocution. This inflexion in pronunciation is a deliberate linguistic assertion, establishing that the artist can relegate upper-caste standards to commanding spiritual power. In a way, the divine bypasses “linguistic correctness” for the sincerity and conviction of the utterance itself.

Moreover, this playful use of language is also closely tied to a unique sense of ritual time. Temporality in Theyyam is cyclical and not linear, and it is exemplified through its liturgy. Most of the verses in the performance are created with circular speech patterns, where mantras are recurrent, producing an endless loop of repeated utterances. In the performance of Vishnumurthy, the diety’s actions orbit in this non-linear vortex; the Lord arrives with mercy, bestows blessings, exits with promise and comes back. The devotees’ vis-à-vis mindful listening is pulled into this recursive time, where the separation between past and present sublimates into the divine presence.

In essence, the very act of “speaking” overturns and overthrows the shackles of spirituality from the relics of Brahminism. Through articulations and embodiments, the performer codifies a liturgical experience that defies the limitations of the ordinary. Ingrained in the fabric of sounds and syllables, the “attam” (or performance) becomes an act of rebellion, questioning the status quo of caste-based social order. Overall, while there exists a substantial body of work on the discourse of Theyyam, the linguistic aspect of the performance introduces a new avenue for exploration—a framework where language serves as a vehicle for challenging the contours of social structures and cultural norms.

References

Ahearn, Laura M. (2012). Language: Some Basic Questions in Laura M. Ahearn edited Living Language: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology. Pp. 3-49. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.

***

Akhila Krishnan is an interdisciplinary scholar with an MA in Society and Culture from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Gandhinagar. Her academic journey spans the intersections of literature, culture, and social dynamics, with a keen focus on exploring the role of narratives in shaping societal values.