Memories from the past
|
Ninasam Tirugata’s Akashabheri raised many contemporary questions
|
PROBING The play was marked by tremendous energy and intense conviction
Kobad Ghandy, the Maoist ideologue who was arrested on October 13, 2009, stepped into the premises of the court and said: “Long live Bhagat Singh!”. He later reportedly said how the Maoists identify themselves with the revolutionary socia
list leader Bhagat Singh and is their inspiration. “Bhagat Singh and we stand for similar causes, complete emancipation of the Indian masses and rejection of all forms of foreign imperialist forces.”
Eighty years ago, even the Mahatma had to unabashedly admit that Bhagat Singh was a stimulating force. He apparently once said admiringly of Bhagat Singh and his friends: “I am not referring to the frothy eloquence that passes muster for patriotism. I have in mind that secret, silent persevering band of young men and women who want to see their country free at any cost.” When he was sent to the gallows by the British on March 23, 1931, the Mahatma wrote a tribute in “Young India”. Despite its attempts, the Congress had failed to save Bhagat Singh. He said: “Bhagat Singh was not a devotee of non-violence, but he did not subscribe to the religion of violence. He took to violence due to helplessness and to defend his homeland. But we should not imitate their act. Our poor people will become victims of our atrocities.” Between Gandhiji’s position on violence and its contemporary resonances in Kobad Ghandy, “Gagan Damama Baajau”, Piyush Mishra’s Hindi play translated (Siddalinga Pattanashetty) as “Akashabheri”, staged by Ninasam Tirugata in Bangalore recently, traces a complex trajectory. The stunningly designed play -- which draws one’s attention to contemporary politics in its very narrative scheme (music and direction by Sanjay Upadhyaya) -- has the life story of the revolutionary Bhagat Singh for its plot. Within a seeming linear movement, it foregrounds the various forces that prevailed during the freedom struggle and their oppositional nature — everything didn’t flow into a single force that was called Gandhi. The chorus therefore becomes the most dynamic and powerful character of the play — absorbing, rejecting, questioning and making choices.
Do the cold clinical clutches of history often subsume a living memory? The play juxtaposes history and memory into its structure as it builds a story within a story? “Akashabheri” opens in the sixties, a good thirty years after Bhagat Singh’s death: Batukeshwar Dutta, Bhagat Singh’s fellow traveller in the HSRA, is talking to the young Markand Trivedi who asks him questions that are neither easy nor simple. The plot traces Bhagat Singh’s revolutionary spirit, his association with HRA and HSRA, the Russian revolution that roused him, his bond with Chandrashekar Azad, but it is the subplot that elevates it from being a linear narrative. The conversation between the two is constantly recasting the past and acquires contemporary overtones. It suggests that it is history that has remained static; it is memory that has given it a movement – and hence the concerns of Bhagat Singh in the past, continues to remain the relevant questions of today; though, they have grown in complexity.
Explaining why they had to resort to using the bomb, Bhagat Singh says, “we had to make a loud noise to awaken the people. Our intention was not violence.” This is not only a critique of the society, but also of the State – indicating the state as an agent of the colonial powers. A logical extension of Bhagat Singh’s anxieties finds resonances in Kobad Ghandy, as they accuse the state machinery of having succumbed to the capitalists.
A highly relevant play for our times, “Akashabheri” shows immediacy in portraying Bhagat Singh as an individual of tremendous clarity and commitment. His views on the Congress was clear, he was aware of the nature of problems he had with Gandhi, he knew the merits/demerits of the path he had chosen, and he was absolutely sure that a revolution of this kind would be futile without building the consciousness of its people. In addressing these issues, the play points fingers at the failure of all people’s movements of the present – their failure in grooming the consciousness of the people. Unfortunately, they also deal with a corrupt state that only seeks to militarise. Hence, as K. Balgopal writes in his essay, “Reflections on violence and non-violence in political movements in India” or as Arundhati Roy has been saying in the recent times, taking moral high positions on violence is becoming a difficult task.
“If there is something called next birth I too want to peacefully put my head on my beloved’s shoulders… I want to cocoon life in a shield of gentle rose petals… but in this life my calling is elsewhere…” these lines by Bhagat Singh (played outstandingly by Yateesh) haunt you long after the play is over. A superb cast (stunning performance by Gopalkrishna Deshpande, Prashant Siddi), full-bodied energy (though such an energy could take a dangerous tilt), and soulful music made the play a very moving experience. Some filminess did creep in at points, but the intense conviction of the play makes everything else trivial. As the actors try hard to resist their adamant tears playing out their roles, it doesn’t make the watching any easy. It can’t be overlooked merely as their calling.
(Venissina Vyaapari review will appear next week in these columns)
DEEPA GANESH
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Friday Review
Bangalore
Chennai and Tamil Nadu
Delhi
Hyderabad
Thiruvananthapuram
