|
|
 |
 |
| |
|
Mahesh Elkunchwar’s name is now synonymous with the great tradition of playwriting in Marathi. His name is often invoked in the same breath as that of playwrights like Vijay Tendulkar and Satish Alekar. His play WADA CHIREBANDI had a very successful run and has come to be regarded as one of the canonical texts of Marathi literature. Mumbai Theatre Guide features excerpts from an interview that was conducted by Dr. Shubhada Shelke who interviewed the playwright in order to trace the writer’s process, his reaction and the misgivings he had when the play was directed by Vijaya Mehta in 1985. The complete interview is available in the July 1987 issue of “Facts and News”, a theatre newsletter that was developed under the aegis of the ‘Theatre Development Centre’ (TDC) at the N.C.P.A., Mumbai. The interview undoubtedly forms a part of any valuable documentation that has been done on the theatre and appears below in two parts.
|
Part I:
Do you find this play [WADA CHIREBANDI]* different from your other plays? How did you turn to this theme? How did you experience this?
I also think that this play is different from my other plays. But I do not think that it completely deviates from my earlier plays. Some signs from this play have appeared in my earlier writing. In RAKTAPUSHPA and PARTY I have tried out the exercise of relationships and tensions between people that are there in WADA CHIREBANDI. In my earlier one-acts I have tried to reconcile the tensions in the lives of people…Then there is a gap of seven years during which I have not written anything, because I realized that what I was writing was not good enough…Then I wrote WADA CHIREBABDI. Some personal changes also took place in this period. Till then I was an introvert observing myself. I grew up…
How did you arrive at WADA CHIREBANDI (in your search)**?
The answer is simple. The subject is an invisible part of me. I am from a village from ‘wada’ (old, ancestral, country house) culture. I was born in a ‘wada’. My father was a zameendar (landlord). Luckily my father did not face the same decline because my father was wise…All of us brothers got out. Only one stayed back to look after. But I was sensing nearby ‘wadas’ crumbling. The strangulation and suffocation of Brahmin families living in the villages in the post-independence period is a special subject. But I do not think so, because their sorrow and their suffocation is as true as that of other castes…I was once discussing with Satyadev Dubey. Both of us are from the feudal atmosphere…He told me a story showing how lethargic we are and how we do not easily accept change. His friend brought a tractor which he did not use, neither did he sell it. I have used this image in the play…and the play took shape…This tractor image started a thought process and the characters started taking shape.
The family, the conflict between two generations are all constituents of the traditional family-social play, but this play does not fall into this category.
No, I did not want to write a pure family-play. I had no interest in that. Not that writing a family-play is artistically low. My RAKTAPUSHPA is, in a way, a family play.
The treatment that you gave?
I will tell you. It is not objectionable to take a family mould and write a play. But then you have to do something new…But keep in mind that while doing this, I wanted to bring in all social, cultural, political references…For example the cook Gaja goes away. Three generations of his family have been cooks in the Deshpande house. But he goes away to work in a restaurant on the bus-stand because a bus service has now started. He gets more money there. I know that I have been clever in putting these references. I don’t know whether people realize this. When the two brothers quarrel, one says ‘Do you know, out of the seven houses of Brahmins three have remained. People have opened liquor shops, run trucks, built brothels. We cannot do this.’ You will see signs of a changing social milieu in the play. Thirdly, I have taken incidents on the level of fantasy…the scene in which Vahini wears the ornaments…when Dadi keeps on asking what the time is and crawls up to the tractor, that is a very surreal moment…Dadi is Time. She is Time and also the silent spectator who sees Time flit by…This is why this play lives on three/four levels.
You said that in your one-acts and in PRATIBIMB you have used surrealism for symbolism. Why did you feel like employing realism in this play?
I think I was writing about the consistency of the human mind in this play. Be it very sorrowful, but it keeps flowing like a river and we keep finding some meaning in it…And Dadi automatically becomes a symbol. I remember that while writing I had not thought that Dadi would become a symbol. I have seen these people from very close and for me they are very real and alive. These old people are there in these houses, they are respected but that is all. This respect is formal…I wanted to use this reality. When Dadi asks for the second time what the time is, I realized that she was becoming a symbol. I welcomed this…
Your stage directions are full of pauses. Is there any specific intention behind this?
I feel that on our stage people are afraid to use silence. In fact they do not use silence at all. I had a disagreement with Vijayabai- I was shouting and she was speaking softly! We were discussing what to do in a nine-second gap between scenes. I wanted total silence. She disagreed and said there is nothing like silence in theatre- except at the end. So we must fill these spaces up with recitations, songs. I started shouting over the phone from Nagpur saying that nothing of this sort would do. We compromised on the chirping of crickets, etc as all scenes were happening at night. Do we not have faith in the audience? Or do we not have faith in ourselves? Why do we fear that the audience will be fidgety…I do not understand this fear. When I intend a pause in a dialogue every pause has its duration and every actor should know this. In my first play I used to refer to counts. But then I realized that the director never follows this and I gave it up. Yet I mark the pauses so that the readers should know. Pause can give a complexity to dialogues and actors should use them more than words to reach out to the audience. My pauses are not adhered to and that makes me unhappy…
To what extent do you agree with the changes made in the stagescript?
The changes Vijayabai made? Let me tell you about the script in detail. There are three scripts. The first I brought along though I knew it was rough, that it had flaws, but I did not know for sure. I read it out to Dubey, Dr. Lagoo, Kumudmen (Mehta), Arvindbhai (Mehta). Their reaction was favourable but I realized that I had erred somewhere. Arvindbhai pointed out correctly. In the first script the teacher appears. Arvindbhai said that an outsider had no business in the Deshpande family, only a reference is enough. I thought it out and decided to cut out the teacher…Vijayabai read it and liked it and decided to do it. She wanted me to tighten up the script a bit…Vijayabai came to Nagpur and we worked on it for five days. She said that she did not like the opening. Originally it opened with the arrival of Sudhir and Anjali. It was opening in the morning. [Vijayabai said] if it opens at night it would be visually very good. She wanted me to write a prologue. I liked the idea and thought it an important suggestion from the point of view of atmosphere…This was the second outside contribution, this time from the director…The other changes are so insignificant that I don’t even remember them…[However] Vijayabai’s Anjali is Koknastha (a Brahmin sub-caste not known for its generosity as opposed to the generousness and at times even extravagence of the Deshastha) to the core…Vijayabai has taken the play to the level of ‘division’, Koknastha, etc and this disturbs me…
Part II:
Does the character of Prabha come up to your expectations in the production?
I think Prabha delivers the goods. She does not sound that shrill. What Aruna Joglekar does is very sharp. It is all right. This will always happen. What the playwright visualizes does not appear on stage the same because there are many other limitations, that of the actors, of the director.
Due to what change did you find the production wanting?
I think that there are small changes which you Bombayites will not understand. When they are discussing the division Anjali and Sudhir are sitting next to each other. In the early rehearsals even Vahini was sitting next to her husband. Women will not sit near their husbands in any Varhadi household, and never in the presence of others…I used to tell Vijayabai that in the presence of the mother-in-law and grandmother-in-law Anjali would not sit so near (her husband). But she said it was the composition which was important. Vijayabai sits on the box. A five-day widow would never do this. These small things would trouble me…
Can you elaborate on the dialect you used and the changes made by Vijayabai?
I don’t think it is purposeful.
Did you approve?
No. I had provided a cassette of my reading to Vijayabai.
Then how did you allow?
There are limitations. I have a professional relationship with Vijayabai of 18 years standing. We have good relations. I realized her limitations and difficulties. Had I insisted, I would have had to work on their [actors’] Varhadi diction for one-two months. I had to work for eight days with Vijayabai alone! She just could not imbibe it. She could not say ‘Deshpande-I-chya’. Actors have to practice this. We call ourselves experimental but we refuse to put in efforts…Vijayabai was contented only with the flavour. I would have preferred authenticity…
My thrust was not on the issue of language. What I meant was Vijayabai has replaced your pauses and curt remarks with long, complex sentences. This is urban. Does this change of values affect the play?
The playwright does not have much control. Vijayabai is a senior director and one can’t do much except register protests. Otherwise the play will not be produced. I have spoken to her about the long sentences. She says it is a part of improvisation. When Girija goes from here to there, it is necessary. Not that all changes are Vijayabai’s. Some the actors have worked out…
To what extent do you agree to the interference of the director?
This is an age-old question. If the playwright is big and the director is small then the playwright scores over the director. If the director is big and the playwright is small then it is the other way round. This is a simple calculation in theatre…
How do you feel about the changed end?
I do not want to say anything about it. I think you will imagine why it happens that way. But I don’t think this end is bad. Even this end is good.
What is your opinion as a playwright regarding the Hindi (TV) version?
Basically I did not know that it is going to be of 90 minutes. I thought it would be 2 ¾ hours. When I saw it I realized my ignorance is to be blamed and so there is no point in blaming others. Many references and details have been dropped to fit into 90 minutes and the play loses some dimensions. Sulbha Koranne’s 90 year-old Dadi was okay on stage. On screen she looked like Vijayabai’s sister-in-law not mother-in-law! Had they got an old woman as in Pather Panchali, or even someone like Mangalabai (Parvate) in Rathchakra, the TV film would have been much more successful.
*The box brackets have been added by us to distinguish them from the round ones of the original draft.
**The round brackets occur in the original interview.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
