Indian Drama

INDIAN DRAMA The Indian drama was almost certainly a native growth. and, in spite of some points of resemblance, there is no real evidence for assuming any influence of Greek examples at any stage of its progress. On the other hand, it had passed into its decline before the dramatic literature of modern Europe arose.

The Hindu writers ascribe the invention of dramatic entertain ments to an inspired sage Bharata, or to the communications made to him by the god Brahma himself concerning an art gathered from the Vedas. Three kinds of entertainments, of which the ndtya (defined as a dance combined with gesticulation and speech) comes nearest to the drama, were said to have been exhibited be fore the gods by the spirits and nymphs of Indra's heaven, and to these the god diva added two new styles of dancing.

The ultimate source of the Indian drama, thus traditionally believed to have been religious, has indeed been traced by some scholars to certain hymns in the Rigveda, which took the form of dialogue. There is, however, no direct evidence of such a source, and the existence in Vedic times of popular mimes has been in ferred from certain references in Vedic texts. Some features of modern plays and the so-called yatras of Bengal, representing mythical scenes (especially the Krishna legend), may possibly point to the drama's originating from an ancient pantomimic art. The 12th century Gita-govinda, in which three characters engage in lyrical monologues, is the earliest literary specimen of this primitive type of play. On the other hand there is no doubt that the influence of epic recitations was of continuous importance. Keith rejects the evidence for a secular origin and concludes (Sanskrit Drama, p. 45) that the Sanskrit drama was probably evolved by "the combination of epic recitations with the dramatic movement of the Krishna legend, in which a young god strives against and overcomes enemies." Nothing certain is known of the history of the actual drama before about A.D. 200, when it had already reached its zenith. We know it only in its glory, in its decline and in its decay.

To the 11th Century A.D.

This is the classical period of the Hindu drama, and includes the works of its two greatest masters.

The earliest dramatist of whose work we possess specimens is Asva-ghosha, the Buddhist teacher (end century A.D.). Frag ments of his drama, the Sariputra-prakarana, which correspond closely with the classical type, have been found at Turf an in Central Asia, with parts of two other Buddhist dramas.

Kalidasa, the brightest of the "nine gems" of genius in whom the Indian drama gloried, lived at the court of Ujjain. He is the author of .akuntala--the work which, in the translation by Sir William Jones (1789), first revealed to the Western world of letters the existence of an Indian drama, since reproduced in in numerable versions in many tongues. This heroic comedy, in seven acts, takes its plot from the first book of the Mahabhdrata. It is a dramatic love-idyll of surpassing beauty, and one of the masterpieces of the poetic literature of the world. Another drama by Kalidasa, Vikrama and Urvasi (The Hero and the Nymph), though unequal as a whole to 5akuntald, contains one act of in comparable loveliness; and its enduring effect upon Indian dra matic literature is shown by the imitations of it in later plays. (It was translated into English in 1827 by H. H. Wilson.) His third, and probably earlier play, Mdlavika and Agnimitra, is in ferior to the other two.

Kalidasa had a famous predecessor, Bhasa. Thirteen plays, supposed to have been his long lost works, were published in but their genuineness, about which there has been much con troversy, is most doubtful.

Probably not far removed in date from Kalidasa is the pathetic Mrichchhakatikei (The Toy Cart), attributed to King udraka, but perhaps written by a court poet. It is a comedy of middle class life, treating of the courtship and marriage of a ruined Brahman and a rich courtesan.

To Harshadeva, king of northern India, are ascribed three extant plays of considerable merit, including the famous Ratnavali (The Pearl Necklace), a court-comedy with a half-Terentian plot.

The palm of pre-eminence is disputed with Kalidasa by Bhava bhuti, who flourished in the earlier part of the 8th century. While he is considered more artificial in language than his rival, and in general more bound by rules, he can hardly be deemed his inferior in dramatic genius. Of his three extant plays, Mandvira-Charita and Uttara-Rdma-Charita are heroic dramas concerned with the adventures of Rama (the seventh incarnation of Vishnu) ; the third, the powerful melodrama of Malati and Mtidhava, has love for its theme, and has been called the Romeo and Juliet of the Hindus. It is considered by their critical authorities the best example of the prakarana, or drama of domestic life. Bhava bhuti's plays are devoid of the element of humour.

The popular Veni-samhara, by Bhatta-Narayana, must be dated before the year A.D. Soo. Its main incident is derived from the Mahabharata. The play is marred by too much detail and adher ence to rule. More interesting is Visakhadatta's (Rakshasa and the Seal), a lively drama of political intrigue, in which Chandragupta appears as the founder of a dynasty. The plot turns on the gaining-over of the prime minister of the ancien regime.

The plays of Rajasekhara, who lived about the end of the 9th century, deal, like those of Harshadeva, with harem and court life. One of them, Karpura Manjari (Camphor Cluster), is stated to be the only example of the sattaka or minor heroic comedy, writ ten entirely in Prakrit. Among the remaining chief works of the period are the favourite, but hyperbolical, Anargharaghava by Murari, and the long and rambling Hanumannataka, or Mahana taka, both of which deal with the adventures of Rama.

The Period of Decline.

This may be reckoned from about the II th to the 14th century, the beginning roughly coinciding with that of a continuous series of Mohammedan invasions of India. Krishnamisra's remarkable allegorical play, Prabodha Chandrodaya (c. Iloo) is a glorification of the cult of Vishnu. This style of drama had many followers, mostly very inferior. Of the remaining plays of this period, as compared with the first, the general characteristics seem to be an undue preponderance of narrative and description, and an affected and over-elaborated style.

Isolated plays remain from centuries later than the 14th. These, which chiefly turn on the legends of Krishna (the last incarnation of Vishnu), exhibit the Indian drama in its decay. The latest of them, which was composed about A.D. 1820, is im perfect in its dialogue, which (after the fashion of Italian impro vised comedy) it is left to the actors to supplement. Besides these there are farces or farcical entertainments, often indelicate, of uncertain dates.

The number of plays which have descended to us from so vast an expanse of time is still comparatively small. Nevertheless, Schuyler's bibliography (1906) enumerates over Soo Sanskrit plays. To these have to be added the plays in Tamil, about ioo in number, and some in other vernaculars.

There is among the Hindus no dearth of dramatic theory. The sage Bharata, the reputed inventor of dramatic entertainments, was likewise revered as the father of dramatic criticism. The commentators constantly cite his supposed sutras, or aphorisms. (From sutra, thread, was named the sutra-dhara, thread-holder, carpenter, a term applied to the architect and general manager of sacrificial solemnities, or of theatrical performances.) By the loth century dramatic criticism had reached an advanced point ; and the Dasa-Rupa distinctly defines the ten main forms of drama. Other critical works followed, exhibiting a rage for subdivi sion unsurpassed by the efforts of Western theorists, ancient or modern.

Species of Drama.

The Indian drama is a Brahmanical pro duction, aiming not at delineation but at the awakening of senti ment, and making its appeal to the cultured minority. This ele vated disregard of popularity accounts for much that is charac teristic of the higher class of Indian plays. It explains both their relative paucity and their great length, renders intelligible the chief peculiarity in their diction, and furnishes the key to their most striking ethical and literary qualities. Connected in their origin with religious worship, they were only performed on solemn occasions, more especially at seasons sacred to some divinity. They were always originally written for one particular representation. Again, the greater part of every one of the plays of northern India is written in Sanskrit, which ceased to be a popular language by 30o B.C., but continued the classical and learned form of speech. Sanskrit is spoken by the principal personages of the plays, while the female and inferior characters use varieties of the Prakrits. Hence, part at least of each play cannot have been fully understood by the general audience. It is, then, easy to see why the Hindu critics should make demands upon the art, into which only highly trained and refined intellects were capable of entering. The gen eral public could not be expected to appreciate the sentiments (rasas) expressed.

The Hindu critics know of no precise distinction between tragedy and comedy, still less of any determined by the nature of the close of a play. They dislike an unhappy ending, and a posi tive rule prohibits a fatal conclusion in their dramas. The general term for all dramatic compositions is rupaka (from rupa, visible form), those of an inferior class being distinguished as uparupakas. Of the various subdivisions of the rupaka, in a more limited sense, the ndtaka, or play proper, represents the most perfect kind. Its subject should always be celebrated and important—heroism or love—and the hero should be a demigod or divinity or a king. The prakaranas agree in essentials with the ndtakas but are less elevated, their stories being taken from life in a respectable class of society (e.g., Mrichchhakatika; Malati and Madhava). Among the species of the uparupaka may be mentioned the trotaka, in which the personages are partly human, partly divine, and of which a famous example remains--Vikranua and Urvasi. The bhana was a monologue of low life, and the prahasana a farce. These trifles represent the lower extreme of the dramatic scale, to which the principles that follow only partially apply.

Construction.

Unity of action is enjoined by theory, though not invariably observed. Episodical or prolix interruptions are forbidden ; but the story of the play is sometimes carried on by narratives spoken by actors or "interpreters," something after the fashion of the Chorus in Henry V ., or of Gower in Pericles. "Unity of time" is liberally understood by the later authorities as limiting the duration of the action to a single year ; and even this is exceeded. The single acts are to confine the events occurring in them to "one course of the sun." "Unity of place" is unknown, by reason of the absence of scenery ; for the plays were performed in the palace courts or in the open air. Hence change of scene is usually indicated in the texts.

Not only must a play end happily, but death and all deeply tragical incidents are excluded, while such operations as biting, scratching, kissing, eating and sleeping should never take place on the stage. Yet such rules are occasionally broken. The charm ing love-scene in the .Sakuntala (at least in the earlier recension) breaks off just as the hero is about to act the part of the bee to the honey of the heroine's lips (act iii. ; cf. Nagananda, act iii.) . But later writers are less squeamish, or less refined.

Indian plays usually open after a benediction with a prologue, in which the manager, with one or more actors, discusses the play which is to follow. This is divided into acts (ankas) and scenes; of the former seven is a common number; "the great ndtdka" reaches 14. Thus the length of the higher class of Indian plays is considerable—about that of an Aeschylean trilogy. Comic plays are restricted to two acts. It is a characteristic merit that the business is rarely concluded before the last act. The piece closes with a prayer. Within this framework room is found for situa tions as ingeniously devised and highly wrought as those in any modern Western play. Recognition—especially between parents and children—frequently gives rise to scenes of a pathos which Euripides has not surpassed (Sakuntald; Uttara-Rama-Charita). The device of a "play within the play" is employed with great success by Bhavabhuti. On the other hand, miraculous metamor phosis (Vikrama and Urvasi, act iv.) and, in a later play (Ratnd vali), vulgar magic are introduced. With scenes of strong effec tiveness contrast others of the most delicate poetic grace—such as the charming episode of the two damsels of the god of love helping one another to pluck the red and green bud from the mango tree ; or of gentle domestic pathos. For the denouement the expedient of the dens ex machina is often employed.

Characters.

Every species of drama having its appropriate kind of hero or heroine, theory here again amuses itself with an infinitude of subdivisions. Among the heroines, of whom not less than 384 types have been distinguished, are to be noticed the courtesans, whose social position somewhat resembles that of the Greek hetaerae. In general, the Indian drama indicates relations between the sexes freer than those which Mohammedan example introduced into India. Male characters are frequently drawn with skill. Prince Samsthanaka (Mrichchhakatikd) is a type of royal selfishness worthy to rank beside figures of the modern drama; elsewhere (Mudrd-Rakshasha) the characters and principles of action of intriguing ministers are judiciously discriminated. Among the lesser personages two are especially worth noticing : the vita, or parasite, and the vidushaka, the buffoon and humble associate of the prince. He is always a Brahman, or the pupil of a Brah man—perhaps a survival from a purely popular phase of the drama. His jokes are generally harmless and pointless.

With its mingling of prose and lyrical verse, and its highly ornate and figurative diction, the Indian drama essentially de pended upon its literary qualities, and upon the familiar sanctity of its themes for its effects. Its scenic apparatus was scanty. Propriety of costume, on the other hand, seems always to have been observed.

Companies of actors seem to have been common in India at an early date. The player's social status shows a gradual rise, and in later times individual actors enjoyed a widespread reputation. The managers or directors were usually highly-cultured Brah mans. Female parts were in general, though not invariably, repre sented by females.

Summary.

The Indian drama would, if only for purposes of comparison, be invaluable to the student of this branch of litera ture. But from the point of view of purely literary excellence it holds its own against all except the very foremost dramas of the world. It cannot be described as national in the broadest and highest sense of the word ; but, as the drama of a literary class, it exhibits many of the noblest as well as of the most characteristic features of Hinduism. Its ethics are lofty, but they are those of a scholastic system of religious philosophy, self-conscious of its com pleteness. To the power of Fate is occasionally ascribed a suprem acy, to which gods as well as mortals must bow (Vikrama and Urvasi) ; but, if man's present life is merely a phase in the cycle of his destinies, the highest of moral efforts at the same time points to the summit of possibilities, and self-sacrifice is the supreme condition both of individual perfection and of the progress of the world. Such conceptions as these seem at once to enfold and to overshadow the moral life of the Indian drama. The affections and passions forming part of self it delineates with fidelity; on the other hand, the freedom of the picture is restricted by conditions which to us may seem intolerable, but which it was impossible for the Indian poet to ignore. The sheer self-absorption of ambition or love appears inconceivable for these poets; and their social philo sophy is based on the system of caste. On the other hand, they are masters of many of the truest forms of pathos, above all of that which blends with resignation. In humour of a delicate kind they are by no means deficient ; to its lower forms they are generally strangers. Of wit—as distinct from the play on words—Indian dramatic literature furnishes few examples intelligible to Western minds.

The distinctive excellence of the Indian drama is to be sought in the poetic robe which envelops it. In its nobler productions, at least, it is never untrue to its half religious, half rural origin; it weaves the wreaths of idyllic fancies in an unbroken chain of ever fresh beauties from an inexhaustible garden. Nor is it unequal to depicting the grander aspects of nature. A close familiarity with its native literature can here alone follow its figurative diction, listen with understanding to the hum of the bee as it hangs over the lotus, and contemplate with akuntala's pious sympathy the creeper as it winds round the mango tree. But the poetic beauty of the Indian drama reveals itself in the mysterious charm of its outline, even to the untrained ; nor should the study of it be omitted by any lover of literature.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.-Wilson,

Select Specimens of the Theatre of the Bibliography.-Wilson, Select Specimens of the Theatre of the Hindus (1871) ; Sylvain Levi, Le Theatre Indien (189o) ; A. A. Macdonell, History of Sanskrit Literature (19oo) ; Sten Konow, Das Indische Drama (1920) ; Winternitz, Geschichte der Ind. Lit. (Leipzig, 1922) ; Keith, The Sanskrit Drama (1924) . There is a large literature on the authorship of the plays attributed to Bhasa, see Macdonell, India's Past (1926).