Swapnasandhani’s NOTEER PUJA
Swapnasandhani has for the last nineteen years been trying to mould out a place for itself in the Bengali theatre world not only as a well tuned performing group but also to prove a purpose. Not that all its projects get the same success but, none the less, they believe in staging dramas with social relevance. From choosing dramas to staging them they spell out very discreetly their socio-political standing and in doing so they do not show any inattention to the art form that is theatre. Their latest production happens to be based on a Tagore’s drama, NOTEER PUJA which Tagore wrote way back in 1926, the theme of which he had dealt with in a poem Pujarini which he wrote in 1896.
But Swapnasandhani felt that it would not be enough to depict the caste conflict in the name of religion that Tagore had depicted in the play. What they did was to include a socio-political issue that has been tormenting the thinking Indian for the last decade though not much publicized. The issue they have amalgamated with Tagore’s is that of the civil rights activist from Manipur, Irom Chanu Sharmila who has been on hunger strike since November 2000 to demand repealing of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) from the State. The similarities of purpose of Sreemati and of Sharmila placed two and a half thousand years apart might seem very far off to a casual viewer but the socio-political parallels have deep roots in the similar social background.
Ujjwal Chattopadhyay who has done the script has very smartly introduced the Tagore poem while adapting the Tagore play for the production. The bringing in of King Ajatsatru to Sreemati has very well built up a crescendo that goes very well with the intentions of the production. Ratnabali’s cunningness, Malati’s innocence and Lokeswari’s agony have very well been brought out. But the character of the Brahmin extremist Madhavacharya seems absolutely out of place as the religious leaders never take the centre stage in fuming hatred and instead they employ the political big wigs to do the filthy things. In the original Tagore it was Devdutt, a royal consort, who was made to do the black deeds but Tagore never brought this character on to the stage. Then it was absolutely needless to depict rape and murder of Utpalparna as the mention of the incident would have brought about the same reactions in the viewers. But the one instance that goes against the tide of the production is the stripping off of the garb of the danseuse to reveal the ascetic’s attire of the Buddhist sect in the climactic scene. This has been done beyond the view of the viewers and so the impact that is supposed to be created gets lost.
Magadh, the setting of the plot has been brought about on the stage with all its grandiosity and this is one point that the production can boast of. Kaushik Sen, the director, has once again proved his competence in improvising situations that extends beyond the written words of the scripts. His use of jewellery and the excellently executed different masks for the different characters would be remembered for a long time by the viewers. The sets designed by Sanchayan Ghosh using the reclining Buddha figure and the famished Gandhar figure without the head well illustrate the creative thinking that has enriched the production. But the bamboo and linen work for the upstage failed to get the visual support and instead played obstacle for the characters to enter the acting zone from the back. Ashok Pramanik’s lights helped in creating the right ambience. Reshmi Sen’s costume and Soma Gupta’s jewellery are two very strong points as is Chandra Mukherjee’s music support. The choreography by Sudarshan Chakravarty had much to be desired particularly in Sreemati’s rendition in the climactic moment of the play.
Titas Bhowmik’s Ratnabali was excellently done with the correctness in expressions and modulations of voice. Siddhartha Banerjee’s Ajatasatru though a short portrayal was well done. Kanchan Mullick’s Madhabacharya was overdone and almost infringed into the jatra acting form. Ditipriya Sarkar’s Lokeswari, Chandra Mukherjee’s Utpalparna, Debarati Sikdar’s Malati, and Shrabasti Banerjee’s Shukla were organised well and each contributed their shares in the success of the production. Sreemati demanded a lot from Arpita Chatterjee which she could not deliver primarily because Sreemati has a set of shades in her character which ranged primarily from that of a dancer to that of a liberator. Moreover, the present drama gives this character a hue of a positive activist in the role of Sharmila. So it is not an easy job to handle. Arpita had certainly tried to render her best but the spirit of the character at the end did not find articulation in her performance.
At the end, Swapnasandhani is once again applauded for giving us yet another thought-provoking production.
