Features: Magazine | Literary Review | Life | Metro Plus | Open Page | Education Plus | Book Review | Business | SciTech | NXg | Friday Review | Cinema Plus | Young World | Property Plus | Quest |

The paradoxes of English theatre in India

PHOTO: R. RAGU

EXPERT SPEAK It is time for Indian theatre in English to develop a systematic scrutiny and discourse of its own

“English theatre exists in a vacuum. It has little to give back to the community.”

“As an Indian language, English theatre expresses Indian experiences as much as any other regional theatre.”

“English theatre is elitist, an urban, metropolitan phenomenon.”

“No, it draws audiences in places like Ludhiana and Jaipur.”

“Many ‘Englishes’ are used in English theatre in India.”

“The audience must be deaf to overlook the lack of linguistic variations identifying the class, caste or gender background of characters.”

Such contradictory statements enlivened ‘English Theatre in India: Challenge and Opportunity’, a part of The Hindu MetroPlus Theatre Fest 2008. Arshia Sattar, translator and curator of theatre festivals, who conducted the seminar, set the framework for discussions with the paradox of English theatre in India fighting for legitimacy despite critical and commercial success. Bypassed by studies on post-independence and post-colonial Indian theatre, dismissed as a marginalised elitist metro activity, English theatre had still managed to develop playwrights, actors, producers, audiences and sponsorship. It was time for Indian theatre in English to develop a systematic scrutiny and discourse of its own.

The first session — Practice and Identity — had Sabina Mehta Jaitly sharing her experiences as a graduate of the National School of Drama, actor and director of over 50 productions in English, Hindi and Urdu. Initially she assumed that she would act and direct in all the languages she knew. “It took me a while to recognise the divide between Hindi and English theatre in Delhi.” There were abysmally thin audiences for western plays staged in English, as well as Englished plays from Indian languages. She found her solution not in translation but in adaptation, to set in a process of dismantling the linguistic-cultural divide. Film-television-stage actor Shernaz Patel (Rage, Mumbai) agreed that the adaptation ‘I am not Bajirao’ became a turning point for her group. Compelled to proceed along the bedroom farce route demanded by sponsors and audiences, this play marked a dramatic change with its phenomenal success. But Patel notes the darker sides of entertaining, “not-to-be-stretched” comedies preferred by sponsors and audiences, lack of affordable spaces for rehearsal and performance… The talent pool has diminished. Why? “After 25 years in the field I am paid Rs.500 per show.”

It was natural for India’s best known playwright in English Mahesh Dattani, to share his concerns with the language he has evolved to best express the cultural identity and ethos he reflects in his work. “After ‘Final Solutions’ I became less self conscious. I let language emerge from my characters. They speak not one but several ‘Englishes’, interspersed with phrases from Indian languages as we do in life.” He wanted his language to set imagination free, to unite the writer, character and audience.

In session two —Between the Lines — theatre critic Keval Arora stressed its lack of identity as the strength and weakness of Indian theatre in English. This theatre picked up every performative style but offered nothing to its cultural space. It drew sponsorship, press attention as also higher ticket rates quite disproportionate to its reach, because of the value English commands in the market and in social perception. However, the overwhelming interest in bedroom farce and slick comedy limited its growth. “Give up romancing with ideas of big hall and large audience. Viable theatre practice has to be looked for in small local spaces,” he suggested. Arora also noted the yet-to-be-resolved problems of “Indianising” spoken English by adopting different regional accents. But while Bihari-flavoured Hindi merely identifies the speaker, English spoken with a local accent sounds a pejorative note, it is seen as dysfunctional and often comical.

Playwright Poile Sengupta regretted the lack of funding which made it difficult to reach professional standards in production and focussed on the need to make the theatre experience a part of school education. Long-term actor and President of the Madras Players P.C. Ramakrishna emphasised the need for creative translations from the treasure troves of fiction and drama in Indian languages. He also urged publishing houses with translation programmes not to neglect dramatic literature. Along with original writing in English, such translations would nourish the growing demands of English theatre in India.

The seminar accommodated audience participation after each session. Both speech and discussion underscored the positive aspects of challenge and opportunity. Despite increase in production costs, the impossibility of making a living out of theatre, and the reduced space for experimentation, Indian theatre in English had more playwrights, theatre workshops, foreign collaborations and exchanges, exposure to other genres, multi-genre productions, theatre festivals, audiences and sponsors than ever before.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail