The Playwright in the WorldSudhanva Deshpande BADAL SIRCAR: TOWARDS A THEATRE OF CONSCIENCE By Anjum Katyal . Translated by A.N.D. Haksar after Malla Sage, Delhi, 2015, pp. xxiii 266, Rs. 995.00 VOLUME XL NUMBER 5 May 2016 Along with Mohan Rakesh, Vijay
Tendulkar and Girish Karnad, Badal
Sircar was a preeminent playwright
who shaped our modern theatre. Ebong
Indrajeet (Evam Indrajeet, ‘And Indrajeet’,
1963) and Pagla Ghoda (‘Mad Horse’, 1967)
are undisputed classics of the modern Indian
stage, translated into several languages
and performed across the country. They
blazed a trail, and opened new vistas. Badal
Sircar was a playwright of great power and
technical sophistication. Playwrights and
directors we consider masters today—
Shombhu Mitra, Girish Karnad, Satyadev
Dubey, B.V. Karanth, among others—acknowledged
their artistic debt to Badal Sircar.
Girish Karnad, for instance, says that he learnt
about the fluidity of form from Pagla Ghoda,
and Satyadev Dubey says that every play he
did after directing Evam Indrajeet had the
shadow of this masterpiece on it.
And yet, when he was at the peak of his
creativity, hailed as a modern master, Badal
Sircar quit and went away. He didn’t quit
writing, and he didn’t go away from theatre.
He quit being a ‘playwright’, and abandoned
the urban proscenium stage of psychological
realism and the box set, a theatre that
showcased the actor and pandered to his ego.
As Anjum Katyal documents, a large part
of Sircar’s early phase was agonizing about
what the playwright was to write. She quotes
the literary scholar Sibaji Bandyopadhyay:
‘[It was] obvious to Badal Sircar [that], in
order to continue one has to produce original
plays. What counted as an original play
in Bengali was the question which at one
point in his career preoccupied Badal Sircar;
as a matter of fact, the question almost consumed
him’ (p. 43). One could expand this
further. The question which preoccupied
Sircar throughout most of his career was how
the theatre maker relates to the world.
Sircar created what he called the ‘Third
Theatre’. This was a theatre that lived and
breathed among the common people, that
spoke of their lives, that cried their tears and
dreamed their dreams. This was theatre for
social change. Later, he preferred the term
‘free theatre’ to ‘Third Theatre’. Not only
was this term less confrontationist, it was also
more accurate.
In the early seventies, the world, especially Bengal, was in turmoil, and this is the
turmoil Sircar captured with such precision
in his third classic, Michhil (Juloos, ‘Procession’,
1972). He had already formed his theatre
group Satabdi, in 1967. Sircar and
Satabdi performed their plays anywhere—
in ... Table of Contents >> |