ROOPANTAR of Paramik Barrackpore: an adaptation of Max Frisch

 

ROOPANTAR of Paramik Barrackpore: an adaptation of Max Frisch (staged on 1 June 2016)

Paramik presented the play ROOPANTAR at the Academy of Fine Arts under the direction of Subhajit Bandopadhyay. The play has been written by Anirban Sen, one of the promising young Bengali playwrights. He has adapted this play from Swiss playwright and novelist Max Frisch’s drama The Fire Raisers also known as The Firebugs. Long back a group had staged this play in its translated form.

The original story of two arsonists in the garb of salesmen coming to a house of a businessman and planning to blow it up, and is helped by the owner of the house, who represents the common ‘everyman’, and who is totally ignorant about the plan, has been transformed into a different narrative by Anirban. In his version a revolting ‘terrorist’ party worker decides to visit every household and awaken the good sense of the common man. So, Frisch’s ‘everyman’, who prefers to stay naïve and avoid facing the looming dangers all around, and yearns for a comfortable bourgeoise life, becomes the general common man here, Frisch showed that this complacency, moral irresponsibility unknowingly acknowledges a totalitarian system. In Anirban’s story we find a very highly placed bureaucrat who as part of the government enjoys all the fruits of power, and nurtures the organised corruption and decadence of the society. He also incites his own daughter to take to dishonest and corrupt ways to promote herself in her field of work. But the daughter who due to the upbringing that she got from her mother resist this. Anirban tells us that lady’s father is a communist believing in strong moral values. After the previous change of government, he is shown to be coerced by a lumpen student leader. At the end of the play, we see that youth revolting against the bureaucrat and go out on his mission to change the system, but is killed in a police encounter. And the wife of the bureaucrat, too, take the path to bring change. At the end a few questions come up in the viewer’s mind. If the youth is not Frisch’s arsonist, then why was the terror ambience built up at the beginning? Was it to suggest a fake encounter? Or why was the youth shown to be a Muslim?                  

Frisch had written this drama in the early ‘50s, almost at the same time that Ionesco wrote Rhinoceros. These black comedies had the touch of absurdity and were like parables aimed at Fascism and Nazism. As the situations throughout the world stands, these forces are very much active. But Anirban just missed the bus as his play though had the political touch, had drifted to a melodrama that diverts the viewers’ point of view.

Subhajit has, I should say, very unnecessarily stressed on designing. With a very promising start the play then meanders into a mire of confusion. The chair, table, stool and three bamboos draped in plastic do not help in the stage craft. The entrances and the exits are kept non-specific. The use of a trolley in the conversation sequence of the mother with her daughter is unexplainably pointless. Excepting for Saheb Sanyal’s lights, the stage design nor the background score help the play.

As the cast-list was not available individual performances can not be discussed. It is presumed that Bratin Gangopadhyay did the bureaucrat and Swagata Sengupta the wife. Both appropriately did their designated roles. It can also be assumed that Subhajit did the youth’s part. He could well bring the casualness of the character. Others did as told to.               

In the next Blog we will be discussing ABU HOSSAIN of Nandiranga staged on 10 June 2026.

See you till then.

 

I had to come back….

 

I had to come back….

 

In my yesterday’s Blog I had said that I would be back after two days. But today’s (17 September) issue of Desh compelled me to get back to my Blog.

Today’s issue of Desh carries two of my reviews, one of Belgharia Rooptapas production of SHANKO, and the other of Newtown Bratyajon’s MARSHUMER EKDIN.

It also carries Shubhankar Bhattacharya’s very well-written theatre review of Bengaluru’s Smaranik’s production of Indrashis Lahiri’s play DRISHTIKANYA. What amazes me is that this same production of the same play by the same group under the same director had been reviewed by me way back in 2014. It, though not often, happens that the same play staged by two, or sometimes three, or may be more groups like in the case of Tagore’s RAKTAKARABI, have been reviewed. This aptly reflects the diversity of thoughts and interpretations amongst the groups. But a presentation of the same play by the same group has little to suggest other than acknowledging a new set of actors doing some of the parts. I may mention that this play had been produced by Indrashis himself for his Chena Mukh, a long time back. I had mentioned this in my review twelve years back.  

Another point of indignation that I find has garnered in me. Lately I find that they have their own system of pronunciation of Western names or English words, that does not go with my way of pronunciation. Like for instance, I pronounce Brecht in the English way as BREKHT, as Shombhu Babu used to pronounce. In fact I learnt this diction of the name from him. Some pronounce it in the voiceless velar fricative sound (ch) like in the German way. As a result, I had been writing the name in Bengali script as BREKHT since long. Suddenly in a recent issue I found the word had been edited to BRESHT! On enquiry I was told that they have adapted their phonetic system of spelling of foreign words. But for that to be implemented the correct diction needs to be known.

But the ultimate of it all has been for the word ‘visual’. In my review of SHANKO, I had written ‘visual’ in the correct diction as ‘vizhual’ in the Bengali script as ভিজ্যু়য়াল. But to my horror I found the word has been changed to ভিশুয়াল !

I believe this is sheer unbearable torture, of sorts.

May God help me!!!

 

JATRAGOPAL of Chakdah Natyajon: a fitting dramatization of an excellent script

 

JATRAGOPAL of Chakdah Natyajon: a fitting dramatization of an excellent script (staged on 28 May 2026)

 

Before beginning my discussion, I would like to apologise for having missed mentioning about this play at the end of my last Blog. Sorry folks, as they say!

The prolificity of Chakdah Natyajon can be easily measured, if I am permitted to use the yerm, by looking at my list of unpublished reviews of plays, fourteen in all, staged since February this year that I had mentioned in my first introductory Blog of the present session that was published on 8^th of this month. Of these 14, two happen to be of this group steered by Suman Pal. Their EKTA ISHKOOL has been discussed in the Blog of the 11^th. Their other production, Ujjwal Chattopadhyay’s JATRAGOPAL is directed by Sudipta Dutta and was presented at the Academy of Fine Arts. They presented this play remembering the legendary Jatra-emperor Shantigopal. In the title role was Sanjeeb Sarkar, accompanying him on the stage were Suman himself, Urbi Bhattacharya, Moubani Poddar and Dipak Nayek.

The play is built around Nitai Bhattacharya who is an ardent copyist of the Jatra-emperor. He enacts the roles played by the legend in rural areas and villages as the cheap edition of Shantigopal taking up the moniker of Jatragopal. Copying the legend’s creations of Lenin, Marx, Hitler as well as that of Shahjahan he gets his share of popularity. Though he gets a good number of calls and advance payments thereof, his income is but meagre. Nantu, a journalist of a small paper comes to get his interview in his rented room, the rent of which is lying in default. That room happened to be the room of Nantu’s former lover, Purnima who had since been married off as Nantu could not afford to start a family life with her. But she has come back to her father’s house after estranging her husband. Nantu finds this encouraging. Purnima now wants Nitai to vacate her room but she develops a liking for him and has a sensual attraction towards the veteran thespian. This jeopardises Nantu’s future plans. However, on his request Nitai does pieces of Lenin, Marx, Hitler in full attire and Nantu video records them for his professional needs. The young girl Shabnam who comes daily to supply food for Nitai is raped and killed by two hooligans. This devastates Nitai and he ponders whom should he choose to counter this situation – would it be Hitler’s fascism, or will it be Marx’s communism or may be Lenin’s socialism. Or, will he do his long-dreamt  ‘Aami Subhas Bolcchi’ and take the path of armed militancy?

Ujjwal has discussed in detail the dialectical relationship of the actor with the role he enacts, making it the central theme of the present play. He has touched upon this subject in some of his recent plays. Without taking pieces from the original Shantigopal pala-s, he has used the main characters to design his dialogues, and thereby firmly establishing the central philosophy. Witnessing each of the scenes developing on the stage, one could feel how challenging is the job of the playwright. There are scopes of some editing which I believe would tighten up the script further.   

Sudipta’s making has not many flaws, and he did keep a steady pace in the progression of the play. As because the texture of the drama changes in the second half it was a difficult job for him to maintain the rhythm. He did it well. His scheme of the use of the stage needs applause.

As I was witnessing Sanjeeb in the role of Nitai and doing the various historical personalities, I remembered that in 1977 Pele had come to Calcutta to play for Cosmos Football Club in an exhibition match against Mohan Bagan. But the giant played a very dismal football, and people said this was not the monarch playing but it must have been Shantigopal in the garb of Pele. Shantigopal did have that unique acumen to impersonate any character in his behaviour, gait, way of talking etc., so much so that it is not possible for any actor to equal his versatility. Even then Sanjeeb taking an unimaginable work-load played out in four characters - Nitai, Lenin, Marx and Hitler. And in each part, he kept the individuality of the characters. Of course, he did get the help of the script but representing the personalities in their individual characteristic traits talks volumes about the proficiency of this brilliant actor. Another perfect representative performance was by Suman as Nantu. A little stuttering in speaking enlivens the character, but at the same time Suman was careful not to overstep and make his performance jocular. Urbi was flawless as Purnima. She has proved her mettle in previous productions of this group, but this job had a different texture, and her cerebral application has given her success in a number of challenging situations in the play. Moubani in the role of Shabnam was free of any inhibition and did her role with a natural spontaneity. Dipak owner of the house was apt in his performance. All these four actors with slight change of dress acted as co-actors in the different pala-s that Nitai enacted. Likewise, Nitai with the help of dresses, wigs, moustache and beards change into the historical personalities at the wink of the eye.

Manoj Prasad’s lights and Surajit Nandi’s background music demand mention, as is Sudipta’s design of two big red salu cloths overhead on the two sides of the stage, one with sickle and hammer, and the other with swastika painted on them. Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate if the sickle and hammer cloth was on the left side, and the swastika on the right side? 

    P.S. Now that reviews of the plays staged till the month of May have been done with, I propose to space out the next reviews over a couple of days in-between each. So, I’ll come back a couple of days later with my next Blog with a review of ROOPANTAR of Paramik staged on 1 June 2026. 

See you till then.         

 

SHESH BASANTA (transl: The Last Spring) of Naihati Rangasena: a stunning production that speaks volumes.

 

SHESH BASANTA (transl: The Last Spring) of Naihati Rangasena: a stunning production that speaks volumes. [staged on 27 May 2026]

After a long time, I experienced a revealing work of a lesser group and that too, from a group stationed about 45 km from Kolkata. I was stunned to see how a production could be presented exclusively with the help of dramatic elements handled aesthetically and without the use of gimmicks and stunts. It was simply astonishing to find the playmaker Dhrupad Ghosh with sheer ingenuity in designing of the play set aside the numerous limitations that Tapan Theatre poses to put up a spectacle yet devoid of opulence.  

The story ‘Shastha Ritu’ of the kirtan singer Krishnabhamini is one of Samaresh Basu’s outstanding creations. Subrata Nag has done a commendable job in adapting it into a drama, renaming as SHESH BASANTA. For the sake of dramatization, he had to do some extensions of parts of the story which are complemented with pieces of kirtan. Then in the dream sequence and in the last scene on the banks of the Ganges, he has brought in touches of surrealism that give the narrative a hint of spiritualism. He had also introduced a new character like that of the Mokshada, the maid of Krishnabhamini. Through this character he has elaborated the character of Radha. Subrata has kept the form and the flavour of the writer’s literary essence in constructing the dialogues.        

The additions and alterations may have given a sense of completeness to the drama, but at the same time it has prolonged the play, too. But that does not make the viewers tiresome. And that is due to an excellent transformation of the script to its stage form by the maker applying a matured theatrical sensibility to keep up a steady rhythm and pace. There are many a scene and sequence that the viewers would treasure in their memory for a very long time. Especially the composition of the dream scene and in the use of lamps. The dexterous use of the two side steps of the stage and the space in front of the viewers deserve appreciation. It was a treat for the eyes to see the floating of the lamps in the water of the Ganges. And the emergence of the boy Krishna in the last sequence was a laudable application of a theatrical mind, no doubt. The light and the stage designing had no superfluousness in them so the ambience of the drama blended with the steady progression of the play. A very imaginative dress designing gave the viewers a visual pleasantry.

Dhrupad executed the role of Krishnabhamini. A cerebral application in doing the part was evident throughout. In the first part when Krishnabhamini is trying to ignore her age she finds that a ‘heterogenetic tangle develops’ in her voice as she attempts to sing a song, Dhrupad brings about an elderly cracked tone in the voice. As the cast & credit list was not available no names can be mentioned. The teenaged girl in the role of Radha had to take a lot of loads, and did her part as directed. The actor in the role of Gagan needs special appreciation. Every other actor, it was evident, did their parts with full sincerity.

Music is a vital part in this production. Quite a few old kirtans have been used together with few common ones. In the last scene the use of Bhanusingha Thakur’s ‘Marnre tuhu mama shyamasaman’ can be called a brilliant application. The person controlling the sound needs special applause as there were a number of overlapping sounds needed for the sake of the play. And he was successful in this job.

Before ending I should mention that despite some amateurish management problems of the group, they have done wonders that I believe groups, even established ones, should take lessons on how brilliantly a play can be mounted even stationed miles away from Calcutta.

P.S. The reader must have noticed that the storyline has not been discussed. I was so emerged in the making of the play; I found it irrelevant to talk about the story that Basu had written. It was however fitting to stage his story on his centenary year.                           

PRATHAM PARTHA of Sansriti: a poetic treatment of a Buddhadeb Basu’s poetic drama

 

PRATHAM PARTHA of Sansriti: a poetic treatment of a Buddhadeb Basu’s poetic drama (staged on 13 May 2026)

 

Every theatre buff would acknowledge that it is very rare for a production to give the viewers an unqualified pleasant experience so that they are compelled to repeat viewing the play immediately on the next staging. And that happened exactly to me after seeing Buddhadeb Basu’s poetic drama PRATHAM PARTHA by Sansriti at the Academy of Fine Arts. I once again saw the play in their next staging at Giris Mancha. Such an immaculate classical presentation of a classical text is a rare happening in the Bengali theatre world.   

What struck me foremost was the aspect of the drama on which the playmaker put the weightage on. Debesh Chattopadhyay’s emphasis was not on what transpired on the eve of the Kurukshetra battle when the royal mother Kunti confronts Karna and divulges the truth of his birth to him, but on the psychological analysis of the characters involved. An exhaustive reading of the script by Debesh including the between-the-lines connotations that the poet-playwright had fashioned to adorn the play, did the magic that compels the viewer to repeatedly come back to the play. The meeting of Karna with Kunti though is narrated in the epic, the tryst of Draupadi with Karna came to Buddhadeb’s imagination as a possible happening that could be deduced from a few earlier indications in the narration of Mahabharat itself. This part of the drama has been taken to a different level of dramaturgy by Debesh simply by applying human psychological interpretation, but at the same time keeping true to the text. Let us see an illustration of this from a sequence in the play. Draupadi tells the two elderly Brahmins that she was a bit hesitant to meet Karna – ‘My mind too, was but divided into two. On the way my feet had stopped a few times – there were a lot of hindrances, lots of doubts.’ Since her entry we find Draupadi walking with a limp, as if there was some thorn stuck to her feet. A little later as she prepares to go for the tryst, she plucks out the thorn from her feet. Debesh masterly uses Radha’s Krishnabhisar episode as a syntax to mount this episode of Panchali’s rendezvous, which gives a surprising yet a refreshing twist to the depiction of the incident. If one goes over the script of Buddhadeb one would come across indications of such a tryst in her conversation with the Brahmins. Draupadi says that she is in doubts whether she would recognise Karna. This is like hiding one’s paramour from others. Before she leaves for Karna, she is seen to make herself as presentable as possible by straightening out her dress and managing her dishevelled hair, etc. She, then in a very secretive amorous gait approaches Karna. She tells Karna, ‘All of a sudden I wanted to see you again.’ Then she blurts out in an earnest entreaty, ‘Isn’t it possible, Karna, isn’t it possible – here at this hour, under the sky, just for a moment in this silence, for a few moments …. We share our love with each other?’ There is a distinct tone of a sense of hurt pride or, so to say touchiness, in the words of Draupadi. Karna’s ineffable, or rather inexpressible attraction towards her is palpable. And from all these the playwright had indicated a very subtle extramarital attraction between the two. It is for the students of theatre to see how Debesh has manifested this psychological tension between two paramours on to the stage.

Without tampering with even a single phrase or word of the original text Debesh has his actors delivering their lines – and this too, is an aspect to note. He discarded the usual melodic tone of reciting the poetic lines, and instead made the actors to scan their lines in the general conversation mode. Without losing a bit of the poetic texture of Buddhadeb’s lines the characters assume a normal way of conversing.

Turna Das speaks her lines with flair yet keeping each word of her dialogue in its proper perspective. With faultless articulation and play of voice she portrays the role together with her easy flowing use of the stage and her physical expressiveness. And so, the central female character of the epic as a tormented lover with her anxiety and her yearnings come alive on the stage. She has once again shown how with pure acting talent can bring about a character live onto the stage regardless of the mere physical appearance of the actor.

Talking of physical appearance, it is needless to say that none of the actors can match the physical look as described in the epics. The character of Karna, for instance is defined by its firmness, determination, inflexibility and resilience of his personality as well as by his persona. But that is an impossible proposition for any actor. Though in this production Arna Mukherjee took up the challenge head on. And he did his job brilliantly. He exhibited outstanding skill in his delivery of lines as well as in his physical expressions where he had to display a restrained countenance. Especially noticeable was his expressive hands. In Krishna’s case the question of physical look is irrelevant. The character’s mainstay is political shrewdness and diplomacy. And that needs masterly delivery of the lines with variations in inflection and pitch, accompanied with facial expressions. Rajatava Dutt with his constrained and controlled performance was the perfect choice for the character, and he did a marvellous job by not treading into melodramatic theatrics. Physical aspect does not matter in the case of Kunti. What makes the character unique is together with the required royal grace and elegance, she carries pride and disgrace of a motherhood that pervades the entirety of her being. Senjuti Mukhopadhyay has imbibed the soul of the character so deeply into her that she deliberates her lines with the required tone, that is not an easy job to perform. In the sequence of Kunti revealing to Karna the mystery of his birth Senjuti’s exposition is akin to a musical refrain. The viewers would treasure this wonderful performance in their memory. One wonders how could she nurture her position of significance in the Bengali theatre world without any interruption for so long a period. Abhra Mukhopadhyay and Shyamashis Pahari as the two Brahmins should be lauded for their scope of performance were limited to a set of dialogues only, which they delivered impeccably.                

At the end a few words about Debesh’s work. As stated, he did not tamper with the original script, but in a couple of places his intervention I believe has enriched the script. This I say with all due respect to Basu.  After Kunti being turned down by Karna leaves, we see Karna deep in thought. We believe that he must have been engrossed in his conversation with Kunti. At this point of time Draupadi calls out to him from behind. This startles him and he retorts, ‘Mother?’ Another such a beautiful dramatic element could also be found elsewhere, too. The second interference is in the last scene where he totally discards the concluding remarks of the two Brahmins. After the exit of Krishna, the two Brahmins enter but without a single word stare at the audience and then leaves the stage slowly.

The total scenography has been designed obviously by Debesh himself. He magically transforms the stage into the banks of the Ganges in Hastinapur with two teak tress and undulated forest floor with a suggestion of the river done with blue web and ropes. A few dry teak leaves strewn on the forest floor are used as props in a few specific dramatic moments. Normal lights can do wonders has once again been proved by Debesh in this production. His meaningful use of the blue and red lights needs applause. Lights were handled by Tapas Bhattacharya and Alip Mullick. For the background score he used esraj, sarod and flute. This aptly created the melancholic mood of the play as well as few euphoric moments, too. The sounds of horses’ hoofs in a few of the moments need appreciations, too. Sound was operated by Anindya Nandi. Appreciations are also due for the make-up artistes Md Ali and Debjit Pal. There were no signs of stinginess in Anik Ghosh’s dress-designing. The black coat, like that of the lawyers for Krishna who had just returned from the mantranasabha or the Advisory Council meeting was a master stroke to identify Krishna.

An exquisitely enjoying experience, indeed.

 

The next Blog will be on SHESH BASANTA (transl: The Last Spring) of Naihati Rangasena staged on 27 May 2026.          

 

KUNDUBABU (trans. Mr Kundu) of Sayak: a magnum opus in their repertoire of productions

 

KUNDUBABU (trans. Mr Kundu) of Sayak: a magnum opus in their repertoire of productions (staged on 3 May 2026)

 

[Debashis Mazumdar has informed me that the Hindi presentation of STREER PATRA about which I had mentioned in my last Blog, was directed by Prof. Anuradha Kapoor. This piece of information was unknown to me till this treasure chest of information of Bangla theatre, informed me in WA. Checking out my discussion of the production that was staged in the Nandikar Festival on 20 December 2011 and published in the 2^nd March 2012 issue of Desh, I find I have not mentioned the name of the director, and rather hinted that Seema herself had designed the production. I stand corrected. Thanks to Debuda.]

In my experience as a theatre viewer for over five decades, I have come across quite a few productions which from the very beginning give the impression that may be some unforgettable occurrence is waiting when the curtain rises. Most of the times I get well rewarded. That happened exactly so when I was waiting in my seat for the curtain of the Academy of Fine Arts stage to part for Sayak’s latest production KUNDUBABU. As I waited the whole auditorium was reverberating with an overture the marching tune of which seemed very familiar yet could not be immediately identifiable. Shortly after the play started, the original source of the symphony like music was revealing to me. I questioned myself – have I heard such a befitting overture before?

This production of Sayak under the stewardship of Meghnad Bhattacharya has been a very significant and self-defying departure from their trademark productions. The repertoire of works of Sayak for so many years has a definite character of its own, that makes the group’s works accepted by the general audience as a whole. A section has always been there who sneered at the ‘non-intellectual’ fares Sayak caters. But this group of spectators are bound to sit up and ponder if they care to see the production. I believe this production is their magnum opus. This I say keeping in mind their record-breaking popular production of DAYEBADDHA. This is for the first time in their fifty-three years of theatre life they have staged a fully political play. Meghnad’s political commitments never got reflected in his previous works. This time it was different. His plays very strongly did advocate the motto of the group – to speak about life. But in this production, it was uttered not as a well-made play or by doling out melodrama. In this production one finds they unequivocally pronounced their statement standing firmly on a strong realistic platform.     

The drama written by Arijit Biswas is set fifteen years ago when the Left force lost its power. It talks about a septuagenarian district CPI(M) party whole-timer who at the debacle of the party, holds on to the ideals of the party which is treated allegorically in the play as the party office building that was donated to them by a sympathiser and where he stays. He together with a handful of common men resist the goons of the party in power who tries to get hold of the office building. The outcome is not relevant for the play, but the main focus of the drama is the resistance of the common man.

It was mere coincidence that the next day of the premiere of this play the TMC government fell with the BJP taking over the reins of the state with a mandate of the people. When Meghnad chose the drama and muted the staging of it, he did not imagine, perhaps, that this would take a different intonation when it came on to the stage. Theatre once again proved that it played though however small it may be, a significant role in building the history of the nation, and to analyse it, too.

The play shows how the turn coats take advantage of the political situation to lap up the cream that comes up during any such turmoil. They keep the revisionist bourgeoise character intact. Then there is the obsequious police force. On the other side, the play depicts the morality, truthfulness, and the relentless fight for survival of the common man. The drama has a very strong realistic texture that does not have even an iota of sensationalization. Even in the section of the ghost the playwright gave it a non-supernatural look. The dialogues even have less verbosity.

Meghnad with all his theatrical wisdom have masterly mounted the play with a complete faith in the theme of the drama. And so, we find he has emphasised not on the progression of the storyline, but on the very soul of the play. We thus find that in the putting up of each scene he is careful not to lose the rhythm and flow of the play as the story developes. His complete realistic treatment that goes in unison with the plot has involved the viewers to participate psychologically in the fight against the negative force. In his mounting of the last scene, he has given it a metaphorical tone, and that gives the production a theatrical ending of sorts.    

Once again, he has reiterated the truth which is the mainstay of all Sayak productions, that ‘acting or performance’ is the heart of theatre. In this work too, he has fortified this department so as to give the production its finesse. In his portrayal of Kundubabu he has taken the performance to an astonishing level of representative acting. He has always been a master of silent acting and here too, Kundubabu’s wounds within together with the will to resist have found a new language in his silent expressions as well through his physical movements and postures.   

Every other member of the group has done the jobs to perfection, including those in the sundries like Gautam Sardar as servant Hebo, or veteran Bharati Das as a protesting woman. Samiran Bhattacharya as the lumpen had a challenging job of not over doing the part. He did it perfectly well. Veteran actor Biswanath Roy too, was a complete success with his measured movements and an animated voice in portraying the ghost. Ashis Ghosh as the business man Bireswar with his immaculate deliveries and use of the stage was a perfect example of realistic acting. Another experienced actor Runa Mukherjee has kept up to her name in the role of Amrita, the wife of Bireswar. She with her limited scope could perfectly convey the character’s tensions. The turncoat poet Probodh was well done by Prantik Ghosh. Mentions should be made of Anamika Bhattacharya as the daughter of a slain party comrade and that of Indrajita Chakraborty as his wife, Subrata Bhawal as a Party member, or Samir Deb as the OC, and Kartik Maitra as the District Secretary. Others did their parts as directed.

Shoumik-Piyali’s stage was not up to the mark, though Somnath Chatterjee’s lights were satisfactory, especially in the ghost sequences. The almost legendary make-up artist Panchanan Manna’s art job which has always been an inseparable part of Sayak’s productions was missing this time, though Md Ali’s job had no complains.

Apart from the acting department of the production, music and background score played a very significant role. This section was handled by none other than the senior most music designer of Bengali theatre Murari Roychoudhury. This work would remain as a treasure in the memory bank of the audience. He adopted the tune of The Internationale to write the overture that created a dramatic audio-space in the auditorium. To build up his music-scape he used Mohini Choudhury’s ‘Muktir mandir’ and Salil Choudhury’s ‘Gram-nagar-maath-paathar’, as well as one of the songs of the Bangladesh liberation ‘Shahar gramer ajana thikana’. As his background music he used parts of the tune of ‘Hei samalo’.

Oh, what an experience it was! Thanks to Sayak, Meghnad Bhattacharya and of course to Murari Roychoudhury.   

 

My next Blog would be a discussion of Sansriti’s PRATHAM PARTHA staged on 13 May 2026.             

STREER PATRA (trans: Wife’s Letter) of Nirbak Abhinay Akademi: an eternal memoire of a woman’s journey to emancipation (presented on 22 March 2026, at Achira, Phuldanga)

 

STREER PATRA (trans: Wife’s Letter) of Nirbak Abhinay Akademi: an eternal memoire of a woman’s journey to emancipation (presented on 22 March 2026, at Achira, Phuldanga) 

 

With a very threatening nor’wester looming overhead, with lightning and thunder cracking all around I was present in a room of Achira in Phuldanga, near Shantiniketan, But I was transported to the Twenties of the 20^th century Calcutta. It was not because of the décor of the room, or the ambience around. It was because of Mrinal, the Mejo-bou of 27 Makhan Boral Lane.

I was listening to Mrinal's pledge to cross over the threshold of her cloistered world and break open the heavy chains of the patriarchal society and to live an emancipated life of her own. That vow had no emotional bearings, had no unpleasant comments about her husband nor her in-laws, but had a bulldozer of rationality shattering the ‘mason-built walls’, ‘the barbed wires of household regulations’ of the society. She narrates how against the wishes of her in-laws she had given shelter to her elder sister-in-law’s sister Bindu, who was being tortured by her cousin brothers and had been married off to a mentally deranged man. But that she could not save Bindu, for situations compelled Bindu to die. But she says the ‘banner of victory in the hands of Death’ taught her that ‘Bindu was superior than her unfortunate human birth…greater than Death – and here Bindu is not only a girl from a Bengali household, not only a cousin sister, not only a deceived wife of an unknown mad husband – there she is eternally infinite’.       

When this story written in 1914 was published in ‘Sabuj Patra’ Tagore had to face a barrge of condemnations from different quarters. Even a person like Bipin Chandra Pal wrote a piece ‘Mrinaler Katha’ which translates into like ‘The Account of Mrinal’. The misogynist rage was perhaps amplified reading Tagore ending the letter of Mrinal to her husband with ‘চরণতলাশ্রয়ছিন্ন – মৃণাল’ which can be loosely translated into ‘Severed from the shelter under your feet – Mrinal’. Tagore had told Rani Chanda that such a piece by Pal would not deter him from ‘taking the side of Women’.

About fifteen years back Seema Biswas had staged this piece in a play in Hindi in the Nandikar Festival. I liked the work. But as it was a proscenium work, it had to be an extrovert representation with an obvious loud expression. But the very intimate dialogue of Mrinal has a very inwardly communicative character. The reader would find it comfortable to read the piece in his own quite corner. And would perhaps hear as if the voice of Mrinal herself pronouncing an introspective realisation. In the small space of Achira, it was exactly that feeling which I underwent when I sat to experience Suranjana Dasgupta’s performance. The feeling was so intense that I was totally oblivious of the other persons present alongside with me in that room. A numbness took over me as I listened to the inner soul of Mrinal. I felt that, time had frozen and Suranjana had metamorphosed into mejo-bou Mrinal for that time being. Her performance was steeped with her nuanced expressions that brought out Mrinal with all her shades. Keeping to the tone of the letter she did not deliver her monologue but simply conversed with the person in front of her. It felt that she built each and every moment holding firmly the hands of Tagore.   

The other aspects of the production like the background sounds like the roar of the sea, or the bleating of the calves or the shehnai seemed redundant and were like intrusions in the intimate space of both the performer and the viewer.    

Before signing off I would like to state that despite reading the story umpteen number of times, Nirbak Abhinay Akademi through Suranjana introduced me to a new Mrinal of 27 Makhan Boral Lane.

 

We will be meeting Sayak’s KUNDUBABU (staged on 3 May 2026) in my next Blog.

EKTA ISHKOOL (trans. A School) of Chakdaha Natyajon: an experimentation in form & content that reminds one of Lehmann’s Post-dramatic theatre

EKTA ISHKOOL (trans. A School) of Chakdaha Natyajon: an experimentation in form & content that reminds one of Lehmann’s Post-dramatic theatre (staged on 18 March 2026)

 

[Before going into the discussion on the aforesaid play I would like to give a rejoinder to my last Blog. Mainak Sengupta, one of the most important dramatists of the present generation, has informed me the following in WhatsApp. I express my deep gratitude to Mainak for this important piece of information on the dramatization of Samaresh Basu’s short stories. This is what he informed me: ‘I adopted a play ' সুপ্রভাত ' based on Samaresh Basu's short story ' প্রাণ পিপাসা ‘. Some lesser-known groups like বেলঘরিয়া উজান and বজবজ ঋক had staged the play; the second group more than ten times. And Last year ' গ্রুপ থিয়েটার পত্রিকা শারদ সংখ্যা ' had published a ' ক্রোড়পত্র ' on Samaresh Basu, more or less seven plays were published in that magazine based on Basu's creations.]

 

Of the few young play-makers who have strived to bring in a fresh new concept in designing of a play Debashis (Roy – the surname he does not use) is the foremost of them all. In his stage-schemes he had discarded the classical realistic stage and took to a modernist, expressionistic approach in his designing. He has been such an influencer that a host of directors have been blindly imitating him without any reference to the contents of their individual productions. and the result in most of the cases is a big flop.   

Watching Chakdaha Natyajon’s production of Ekta Ishkool at Academy of Fine Arts the viewers find that he has deviated from his signature stage-designing. The very sight of the stage even before the play begins makes the viewers to sit up and eagerly wait for the third bell to ring. As the play proceeds one come across a storyline that talks of unconventional education. The acting design, too, is different from the predictable style. This production gave the viewers a very fresh and of course a rare experience of viewing theatre.

The story tells us of a journey seeking an untainted, bright future with the lessons that are abundant in the life and the Nature around us. A school student Mahendra who is not that intelligent, and rather somewhat obtuse is a habitual failure. He meets Gada who has never been to a regular school, but has excelled in his performance in the school of Life. He takes Gada as his real tutor. Mahendra learns that Gada takes his lessons of life from Nature under the tutelage of his grandmother. Mahendra decides to join Gada’s granny’s ‘school’. But his father Manishankar who is like the authoritative master of the village, acts the spoil-sport. He plans to evict Gada’s grandmother from her ancestral homestead. Gada learns that his father had to commit suicide because of this man. A number of things happen in Gada’s life, and that affect Mahendra, too. And this results in Mahendra maturing into a responsible man.  

It may seem that there is a shadow of Rabindranath Tagore’s education system in the theme. Debashis has placed the story in Jalbasi, a remote village surrounded by mountains and rivers in north Tripura. In elaboration of his plot the playwright has emphasized on expressionism rather than keeping to naturalism. Mahendra like Gada has been inwardly enlightened, so as to say he has been spiritually uplifted rather than materialistically gaining from attending the ‘school’. In constructing the character of the grandmother, Debashis has touched on to the postmodern concept which rejects the concept of truth being absolute and universal. Then the sudden turn in the storyline gives the viewers a jolt. But at the end the play gives the spectators an experience of Lehmann’s Post-dramatic theatre.

The manifestation of the script on to the stage is intimately woven around the specific acting style that the director had planned. The play with its total happening on the stage, like in post-dramatic theatre, extends beyond the script and the dialogues, and the viewers leave the auditorium with the play deeply embedded in their conscience.  

As mentioned in the beginning the stage designing is completely different from what the viewers expect from a Debashis presentation. Here, it has a canopy of blue sky with ginned cotton like white clouds covering the whole acting zone. This has certainly given the viewers ample scope in interpreting the text in their own ways. This is, so to say is one of the vital elements of post-dramatic theatre, too. Just with the help of the dialogues the spectators construct the locale where the things are happening.  Together with this the acting style he has applied is quite different from what we are used to see. And each and every actor has contributed their might and emotion in full-filling the director’s idea. Performance in this Chakdaha Natyajon’s production has reached a zenith, so to say. But that does not mean no more improvisation is possible, because in theatre each and every performance leads to a new horizon of creativity.     

The young Abhik De who has proved his mettle in the previous Chakdaha Natyajon’s productions has raised his benchmark. It was a difficult job in the first half to represent a dumb, stupid Mahendra. He has done this in a different approach where physical expressions are supplemented by the variations in vocal acting. In the second part he was remarkably restrained in the part where the character has an emotional outburst. This work of Abhik will be remembered for a long time to come. Equally outstanding was Akshaynarayan Jhan as the mentally deranged Bhala. Acting in such characters has a very cliched pattern, but Akshaynarayan has come out of it and presented a different hue in realistic acting. The viewers would keep in memory his delivering of his dialogues while weeping uncontrollably. Another memorable performance was by Amit Saha as Gada. He has depicted the simplicity of the character in an almost naturalistic representation. One more seasoned actor of the group Aditi Lahiri in the role of the grandmother has portrayed the tender softness of the elderly lady with a marvellous suavity. In contrast she gives a superb violent expression during the killing of Manishankar.

The others like Adrita Pal and Poulomi Ghosh as Charai and Billi, respectively, Debashis De as Manishankar, Subhadip Mandal as Columbus, Abhishek De as a policeman, Soumen Bhattacharya’s Kader with a rooster appearing perhaps for the first time on the Bengali stage, or Ujan Ganguly as Baga, and Sandipa Chatterjee as Mahendra’s mother did their roles in their perfect disposition so to say. What was most notable was that these actors in their non-performing moments on the stage were so involved in the happenings in the acting zone, that one could see during an emotional sequence being enacted tears rolling down the cheeks of the teenager Adrita standing behind in the non-performing area of the stage. And here lies the success of the playmaker who has apart from designing the stage has also schemed the lights and the background music of the production. Kudos to Debashis.

Before ending mention should be made of the names of Suman Pal, the coxswain of the group who handled the lights, and that of Dana Roy who designed the choreography and of Souvik Biswas who was the music hand. Dress designing also should get the due clap.   

 

My next Blog will be on STREER PATRA of Nirbak Abhinay Akademi staged on 22 March 2026. 

 

MARSHUMER EKDIN (trans. A Day in the Season) of Newtown Bratyajan: a tribute to Samaresh Basu

 

MARSHUMER EKDIN (trans. A Day in the Season) of Newtown Bratyajan: a tribute to Samaresh Basu

 

The centenary of Samaresh Basu passed off not with much fanfare but for a few literary programmes. The theatre world was not active either. I find two groups, both of the lesser type, have staged two plays based on his stories, on this occasion. They are Newtown Bratyajon with their MARSHUMER EKDIN, and Naihati’s Rangasena with their SHESH BASANTA. Credit should be given to them for having treaded a not too familiar path.

Newtown Bratyajon presented Sumitro Bandopadhyay’s adaptation of a short story by Samaresh Basu, MARSHUMER EKDIN under the direction of Debashis Roy at Madhusudan Mancha. I have seen their previous work and have an impression that with many a shortcoming this group strives to present their fare with sincerity.

Samaresh wrote this short story in 1951. Like his other works this story, too, is a portrayal of that section of the society who live their struggling life day-in and day-out. It is of course needless to say that this work too reflects his own experiences in his living-out his own life. after all these seventy-five years it is also futile to say that the picture he drew still remains true. Perhaps the backdrop has changed, the contexts have changed but the content and theme remain the same. The Bengali society, its culture, its intellectual horizon like the corner stone of his other writings, are present here too, with their glories.

A quite handsome young Nabin works in a theatre-jatra dress and requisition supplier’s shop. During the jatra season he stays back in the store-room of the shop with his other co-workers. As the income from his job in the shop is not much to maintain his family of three kids and his wife, he takes up a part-time job as a tabla-player, and also does a few stints as an actor for parties who come looking for a performer. He fails to provide his family with quality time as well as with sufficient cash, despite his utmost endeavours.  

The third wedded wife of the owner Bhanumoti, has a soft corner for Nabin, and is always concerned about the kids of Nabin, as she herself is childless. She buys new dresses for the kids and gives them to Nabin on the night of shasti of Duga puja. In the early morning the next day he returns to the shop to find everyone including the owner and his wife waiting for the police to come. One of his co-workers has hung himself in the store-room after being rejected by his lover.  

Sumitro has done a commendable job in adapting Samaresh keeping true to the unique flavour of the story-teller, though he had to edit, add and modify a few areas to bring the story with its nuances on to the stage. But this has not overshadowed the magical play of words of the litterateur. In presenting the characters in the mould of the story-teller he has kept the texture of the original in writing the dialogues, too. His addition of parts of old classical plays was a pleasant experience for the viewers. So was the short tabla piece by Nabin.    

Debashis has used a few of the recent practices in play-making, like the use of the LED lights, the use of smoke, or some choreographic representations in the soliloquy of Aurangzeb where the later talks of the ghosts of his brothers Dara and Suja. But unlike the recent trends he has not taken refuge to gimmicks in constructing his scenes. The play gets a smooth progression, thus. In the first scene the store with the adjacent shop is shown, but from the next scene onwards the perspective is changed. The suicide is shown in a suggestive way though a little more imagination was wanting. But the scene that had damaged the total production was that of the prostitute quarter mainly due to very poor performance. On the other hand, the short scene of the conjugal relation of Nabin and his wife was a treat for the viewers.       

Subhankar De’s lights and Swapan Bandopadhyay’s background score were laudable. Surajit Pal’s make-up job was equally creditable. Dress designing also needs to be appreciated.

Sunny Chattopadyay’s Nabin is the main-stay of the production. I have not seen any earlier work of this young actor, and for me his Nabin is a revelation. He is such an accomplished performer that one is marvelled at his range of performance. His easy movements, unhesitating dialogue deliveries with accurate intonations need to be applauded. When he is performing in the classic plays, he is more dramatic yet not crossing over to over doing the parts. His tabla playing certainly adds a creditable point for the production. The description of the appearance of the character Nabin as described by the author is so very similar to that of Sunny, that one may tend to think that Samaresh had built Nabin in the image of Sunny perhaps!  Chanchal Bhattacharya as Guinram, or Subir Ghosh as the shop owner, or Bijoya Karmakar as Nabin’s wife did their jobs well. Others were Susmita Bhattacharya, Malay Pal, Sourabh De, Riju Basu and Sahana Chattopadhyay.

 

The next play for our discussion will be EKTA ISHKOOL (trans. A School) of Chakdaha Natyajan.

SAANKO (trans: Footbridge) of Belgharia Rooptapas: A tribute to Ritwik Kumar Ghatak

 

SAANKO (trans: Footbridge) of Belgharia Rooptapas: A tribute to Ritwik Kumar Ghatak

 

While Ritwik Kumar Ghatak’s centenary year that had begun in November 2025 is passing by, the Bengali stage has but contributed very little in this celebration of the only member of the Trinity of Indian cinema who have had a deep-rooted connection with the theatre world, a reflection of which we find in his films – may it be in the elements that make up a scene like the framing, the lighting, the movements of the shots, or in the storyline itself. Like for instance in the 1961 masterpiece Komal Gandhar, my most favourite of the Ghatak films, one finds the crumbling world of the group theatre movement, as well as the human component of a struggling group. There are stagings of three plays in the film and the pieces of the stagings that the viewers get to see show signs of a very futuristic modern play-making. The film also has frames that gives the viewer an impression of a stage composition. The film ends, most unlike Ghatak films, on a promising note! Maybe because this playwright-playmaker did have faith in the struggle that has kept the Bengali stage kicking despite many a hindrance since perhaps the 1876 Control of the Dramatic Performance Act. He believed in the immortality of the Bengali stage in the backdrop of the rich cultural heritage of Bengal. Only a person initially baptised in theatre could have possibly create such moments on the screen.   

Doesn’t one find a sub-surface similarity of Ghatak films with those of Ingmar Bergman who also had had deep-rooted relations with the stage.

More on this perhaps some other time.  

A couple of groups have staged plays on the person himself, one (Chetana’s Meghe Dhaka Ritwik) very laudably excavate the artistic entity of Ritwik Kumar, while the other (Spandan Peoples Theatre’s Ritwik Ekti Nakshetrar Naam) goofed up the filmmaker’s very purpose of creating his genre of cinema! 

A lesser-known group, Belgharia Rooptapas on the other hand has done a very commendable job in staging Ritwik Kumar’s play Saanko, one of the plays that he had written during his days with the IPTA. The recent partition of the country had just doled out its miseries and the ‘50s saw a group of religious fanatics bathing the city of Calcutta in blood of fellow men. His plays were like heart wrenching catharsis of the unsurmountable agony he had to bear because of the partition that had made his homeland a distant foreign country.    

The play begins in Calcutta with a fratricide based on hatred of a different religion, and ends in a remote village in East Pakistan where a Hindu youth had come to visit the family of the Muslim youth killed in Calcutta. This educated, gentle youth in a very impulsive unguarded moment had become a consort in the killing of the Muslim youth. Since then, he had been suffering from repentance and has come to the parents of the Muslim youth to ask for forgiveness. The sister of the deceased who is a political activist and a United Front worker fighting against the Muslim League, imbibe in him a dream to build a secular world.

The dramatist Ritwik Kumar brings about in his way, as would be seen later in his films, a mellifluous melodrama in each of his characters. The character of the mother is typically built as the iconic mother image that is a recurring dramatic element in his later films. The killer who is impetuous, questions in repentance who is to be held responsible for this fate of his. The playwright having faith in Man and his virtues tries to build up a utopian world of camaraderie standing firm against the ruthless backdrop of strife and bloodshed.   

The playmaker Kaushik Ghosh had a tough challenge to translate the script on to the stage. A slight unguarded moment would have made the staging an ordinary melodramatic TV serial. The test was to portray the soul of the drama rather than telling the story. And if it is missed at any point of time, may be unwittingly, would have betrayed the sole purpose of the playwright in penning the play. Kaushik has been more than successful in doing his job. His mounting of each scene smacked of professional smartness. Ritwik Kumar had tuned every character to a high pitch, and so, Kaushik in his attempt to balance out, had to present them in exaggeration but in a very subdued way. And that is a tough job, indeed. The contradiction in the character of the Hindu youth, or the belief and faith in human beings of the bereaved mother, or for that matter, the unwavering political belief of the sister, or the mental conflict of the killer are portrayed firmly yet subtly. On the other hand, the blatancy of the instigator of the murderous act, a distinguished person of the neighbourhood, is presented in stark contrast.                

Each of the actors has ably done their job in the right earnest, so as to interpret the playmaker’s design. Each of them was careful not to overdo their parts so as to keep the melodramatic texture of the play. The veteran thespian Sumita Basu in the role of the mother once again proved her worth. The delivery of her lines with the perfect play of the tone depicted the firmness of the mother to tackle the unfortunate situation as well as keeping alive her natural maternal caring self. It is sad that not often do we come across her work these days, but it is absolutely certain that this particular work would be discussed for long. Another of the actors is not much seen, too, though this extremely powerful actor is a prized possession of the Bengali stage. He is Kajal Sambhu. His portrayal of the killer had the undertone of the tediousness of an impulsive criminal. Sumit Kumar Roy as the Hindu youth had to bear a heavy workload and he successfully executed the role. The sense of guilt in the character was well conveyed by his delivery of lines as well as his use of the stage. Ayan Mondal as the brother was good. Abhi Sengupta as the local bigshot was particularly cautious to avoid overdoing his role. Tanushree Saha as the sister was a bit stiff but did her part as directed by the maker. Sunny Barik was good as the Muslim youth. His rendering of a bhatiyali was commendable, so was Sumit Kumar’s song. In other sundry roles were Tarun Chakravarty, Anjan Roychoudhury and Gautam Chakravarty.                   

Bilu Dutt’s excellent stage gave the production its visual richness. His creation of the courtyard along the riverside had literally brought the house in a village in East Bengal on to the stage of Academy of Fine Arts. It was a gem of a work that would be mentioned for a long time to come. The unpronounced poetry that Ritwik Kumar had penned in his script took shape in Bilu’s job. Soumen Chakravarty’s lights was a perfect consort to Bilu’s stage, and together they became a character of the play. And last but not the least it was Abhijit Acharya’s background score that had wrapped the production in an unimpeachable Ritwik-ambience even before curtains rose. The use of Indian classical mixed with bhatiyali, and the tunes of Tagore’s Keno cheye achho go Maa and Tora je ja bolis bhai was simply mesmerizingly haunting for the viewers. Dress designs were done by Triparna Das and Aparna Das, while Bappaditya Pramanik did the make-over.

In the present times when radical Hindutva is baring its teeth and raising its fangs, this production of Rooptapas is very much desirable.

 

The next Blog would be MARSHUMER EKDIN (trans. A Day in the Season) of Newtown Bratyajan staged on 6 March 2026.        

A FRESH NEW START

 

A FRESH NEW START

After a very long long time I have once again come back to my blog. The last blog that I wrote was in November 2024.

Before going any further I would like to apologise to my readers for being so unfaithful. Along with this I should also tell my readers the reason for my being absent for so long and also why I have decided to come back to my blog-writing. Along with this I would also like to state that I have also decided to write my blogs regularly this time, without any discontinuity or long absence, as I have been doing since I started this website in 2011. In other words, this is an explanation for being absent and also for my returning back with a fresh new start.

As most of my readers know that I have been regularly writing out review articles in Bengali for the fortnightly Desh magazine for the last twenty-one odd years. And this engagement together with other writings as well as some very personal preoccupations that had kept me pretty much on my heels so as to get very little time for concentrating on blog-writing. Lately things have changed both in my personal life as well as in my related world outside. And with the changed bearings my daily world has also altered. So, I thought it prudent to give my blog a fresh start.   

I have been associated with Desh since 1984 – since the legendary editor Sagarmoy Ghosh asked me to do film-review articles for his magazine. After a stint I stopped writing as I had some differences of opinion with Sagarda regarding an article. In the mean time I was doing theatre reviews for The Telegraph, The Metropolitan newspapers. Then in 2006 Harsha Dutta the then editor of Desh asked me to do theatre reviews for his magazine. And so, I have been doing this work uninterrupted for the last twenty-one years. And I fear I am the seniormost theatre reviewer around.

Lately I find that things have changed in the running of the magazine. Once Desh had a tradition of regular cinema reviews together with theatre and music, apart from art. But then the organisation, planning and management of the magazine was different. And Desh was then more of a weekly literary and cultural journal. However, with the changing times the character of the readership has also changed. So, Desh, too, is different from what it was. Theatre had a place of pride in the ‘Shilpa-Sangskriti’ section of the magazine. In the recent past because of space crunch the reviews used to take time to be published – a couple of months at the most. And I was told to restrict my articles to 400-450 words. But this restriction of number of words could not do justice to a performance. I tried to keep my reviews within 700 words. In the very recent times, the scenario has taken a drastic change, sort of. Selected films are reviewed in every issue even of Hindi and English language ones. Of course, these are all policy matters of the house to which Desh belongs, and no one should have any grievances.

However, my point is that the theatre groups that strive hard to put up a show with all their energy and resources, are denied of their legitimate demand of their works being reviewed, as the magazine had accepted their prayers for a review. And naturally they eagerly wait to see their works being discussed in print. And this is truer for the off-Kolkata or off-off-Kolkata groups, who are struggling to get a foothold in this competing world, and equally for the not-so-known or established groups, These groups do not get frequent opportunities to stage in Kolkata. And moreover, majority of the shows have almost no box-office returns, and so have no financial gains. They still do theatre for the sheer love of it. So, for them the only return is a few words about them in the printed media, which might get them some sponsorships or other assistance for the future productions. At the same time, it is also true that apart from Desh there are no other periodicals or newspapers where drama reviews are published on a regular basis.

But the situation at present is not very enterprising. In the recent issues I find the reviews of the plays that were staged in February last are yet to see the light of the day. Since February till July, I have reviewed fourteen productions. It is my practice to jot down the articles and mail them to Desh within a couple of days of my seeing the productions. The fourteen pieces seem to be gathering dust on the editor’s desk. I have also figured out that the groups who had prayed to Desh for a review of their works also seem to be reluctant to enquire with Desh why has there been so long a delay for the reviews to be published.

Till date 632 review articles written by me have been published in the magazine in this stint of twenty-one years. But under the prevailing circumstances I doubt how long will my reviews would be published in Desh. To be frank, a sense of remorse has taken over me, and I personally feel obligated to the groups for this inordinate delay. I have decided instead to write in my blog the reviews of the plays. At the beginning I would devote on the fourteen productions the reviews of which are yet to be published in Desh.

The fourteen productions are listed below:

SANKO of Belgharia Rooptapas staged on 27 February

MARSUMER EKDIN of Newtown Bratyajon staged on 6 March

EKTA ISKOOL of Chakdaha Natyajon staged on 18 March

STREER PATRA of Nirbak Abhinay Akademi staged on 22 March 

KUNDUBABU of Sayak staged on 3 May

PRATHAM PARTHA of Sansriti staged on 13 May

SESH BASANTA of Naihati Rangasena staged on 27 May

JATRA GOPAL of Chadaha Natyajon staged on 28 May

RUPANTAR of Paramik staged on 1 June

ABU HOSAIN of Nandiranga staged on 10 June

SESH MATHATA KATA PARAR AAGE of Chaturtha Matra staged on 14 June

LAGAN CHAND of Thealight staged on 20 June

CORNER PLOT of Rangalok staged on 5 July

I should mention here that on 7 March I went to see GADAIBABU of Theatre Workshop, and the discussion of which was in the above list. But Desh had published it out of turn in its 17 August issue. So, I am not including it as my blog material.

Apart from these I have seen a few more plays – six I suppose – this year not for review purpose for on behalf of Desh. But unfortunately, I will not do justice to them if I rummage through my very fragile memory and try to discuss them now. These are PUNARJANMA of Anya Theatre, HEMLAT THE PRINCE of GARANHATA of Gayashpur Sanglap, ANTIGONE of Sansriti, RAMANUJ of Jadavpur Manthan, BAAKI ITIHAS of Nirbak Abhinoy Akademi, MORCHE PARA AALO of Shudrak, and TUMI THIK JODI BHABO TUMI THIK of Ancham Baidik.    

The first of the reviews that I would be posting in my next Blog will be SANKO (trans. Footbridge) staged by Rooptapas of Belgharia.