Sanga Veda Guru Govi Kamkaru

A Breakthrough in Contemporary Sri Lankan Theatre:

by Saumya Liyanage

Introduction

Sarachchandra marked the turning point in Sinhala-speaking modern theatre by borrowing and integrating a myriad of elements from traditional Asian and European theatres. It is known that Sarachchandra’s theatrical legacy has introduced a new form of theatre that elevates the traditional elements of nadagam and Tamil theatre of kooththu. His theatrical intervention was a result of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism that ignited a Sinhala nationalistic sentiment and the Sinhala literary movement which were connected to Anagarika Dharmapala’s Buddhist renaissance and later to S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike’s nationalist politics. Hence, Sarachchandra’s intervention is an apt representation of the cultural renaissance that has been steered by the Sinhala Buddhist ideology.

In the following decades, Sinhala speaking theatre portrayed and mirrored many political upheavals, downfalls, and social unrests, experienced by the Sri Lankan society since independence. Stylised theatre in the pre-independence era and later been reinvented and refined by Sarachchandra was further developed and used for political theatre by two eminent theatre-makers – Hemasiri Liyanage and Chandrasena Dasanayake. Their political theatre, in the 1960s, portrayed the critique of parliamentarianism and colonial oppression through a semi-stylized form. Subsequently, Sugathapala De Silva and his followers were influenced by the American and European theatres and executed an anti-stylised form of theatre which responded to their contemporary social transformations. The rejection of stylised theatre of Sarachchandra and his school of literature were replaced and established with the new realism in Sinhala-speaking theatre. This mode of realism brought lifelikeness to the proscenium theatre by bringing daily social realities.

Protest Theatre

In the 1970s, Sugathapala De Silva and his style of naturalism were again challenged with a new theatre intervention particularly steered by a group of theatre -makers, whose ideas were moulded through the new modern theatre of Europe and elsewhere. Known as Protest Theatre, theatre writers and directors of the 70s began to explore politically and socially conscious theatre, within the framework of the proscenium arch. Yet, this theatre was criticized by Sarachchandra’s school of thought and was coined as papadam theatre (Pop up Theatre) by one of the proponents of the Peradeniya school, Gunadasa Amarasekare. Yet, Protest Theatre in the 70s have effectively brought the crises of presidency, democracy and the exploitation of the market economy steered through the economic changes proposed by the UNP Government. Now, after three decades of theatre making in Sri Lanka, Chamila Priyanka has brought a novel theatrical experience which could be a development and an aesthetic improvement of the 70s Protest Theatre.

The above description of the short history of Sinhala-speaking theatre paves the way for us to set up a discussion of the current theatre practice in Sri Lanka and how those trends and turns have influenced to continue Sinhala-speaking theatre in the current social milieu. Sanga Weda Guru Govi kamkaru (2021) written and directed by a young theatre writer and director Chamila Priyanka was staged at the recently held State Theatre Festival, at Elphinstone theatre, and has been mercilessly rejected by the panel of judges without considering its value and aesthetic intervention in the contemporary Sinhala speaking theatre. After watching this play, I realised why this panel of judges had not considered Chamila Priyanka’s theatre experimentation seriously. One of the reasons seems to be that none of these panel members have the competence, knowledge, or skills to understand the novel approach of this theatre work. Chamila Priyanka’s theatrical intervention is clearly way beyond the aesthetic framework of the judge board. As I have mentioned elsewhere, discussion and criticism related to theatre today does not exceed beyond the limit of modernism and liberal humanism which was propagated through Sarachchandra and others’ literary authority. These judges and their aesthetic sentiment are moulded and framed through these decade-old literary and theatre criticism. Hence, Liberal Humanistic understanding of theatre has rejected Chamila Priyanka’s play which is situated on the verge of the modernist transformation of Sinhala-speaking theatre.

As I see, after many decades of Protest Theatre and its politically conscious intervention in the Sinhala-speaking theatre, Chamila Priyanka’s theatre has attempted to continue and explore a new way of bringing political awareness and protest to the contemporary Sinhala speaking theatre. It is clearly visible that the 1990s Sinhala-speaking theatre was a theatre of hibernation after the resurrection of the 88-89 youth insurgency and the massacre of thousands of JVP supporters. This hibernated theatre has been altered with a new theatrical experimentation by Chamila Priyanka and his theatre ensemble after decades of this hibernated ‘sitting room theatre’. Chamila’s conscious theatre intervention has further elevated a novel approach to proscenium theatre which has been longing for years in the Sinhala-speaking theatre. As Gamini Haththotuwegama has clearly critiqued on the 70s protest as lack of ideological consciousness (Haththotuwegama 1998), Chamila Priyanka’s new play is not a political idiom which demonstrates mere political slogans; His actors do not speak the playwright’s political ideologies to the audience. His attempt is to bring the current social and political realities through a compelling and powerful theatrical visuality to the audience

Chamila Priyanka’s theatre work, Sanga Veda Guru Govi kamkaru explores the atrocities of the lower middle-class men and women and how the lives of other social strata have been carnal to the current crisis of social unrest. The play centrally portrays a widowed woman who has been working as a garment worker. Her brother, later reveals as her own son, has been a university medical student and is being killed by the police during a protest. The play begins with a scene of the widowed woman conversing with the dead brother. While her son’s body is being kept in the house, the play evolves through a series of situations revealing the widower’s obscure relationship with other protagonists.

The sewing machine, which is the central metaphoric prop, plays a significant role throughout the play. The main protagonist Kaushalya’s performance is choreographed around this stage prop which depicts the historical and political transformation of the people’s affinity to the emerging capitalistic economy which was introduced during post-independent Sri Lanka. During the colonial period, several goods, such as powder for women, canned fish, porcelain plates and sewing machines, were introduced. As Nira Wickramasighe argues, the gramophone and the sewing machine symbolise the mark of the Sri Lankan society being transformed from the colonial era to the modern age (Wickramasighe 2014, P. 4). Thus, Chamila Priyanka has used this vital symbol as a key metaphor in his theatre work to visualize the agony of the woman and her plight in the economic transformation of the country. The play evolves around this sewing machine and the woman who has lost her son during a protest. The play ends when the main protagonist carries the sewing machine from its pedestal and runs from home.

Style of theatre

Chamila’s theatre is significant among the theatre-makers of contemporary Sinhala theatre not because he touches some of the untouched thematic areas of the human lives but his ability to use theatre as a powerful medium of meaning-making. Particularly his ability to portray characters on stage with multi-dimensional ways enhances the diverse perspectives of human desires and agonies. He demonstrates his broader understanding of the power of theatre and its theatricality through using actors’ bodies and exciting theatrical props and sets. However, Chamila’s play is minimalistic and centers the actors’ bodies and their gestus behaviours through multiple situations. Chamila portrays characters representing communities and their current plight and social conditions symbolically. Yet these characters are portrayed in a way that their behavioural patterns are being purposely moulded into a caricature-like manner.

Reminding Bertolt Brecht’s estrangement theory, Chamila manages to develop a style of acting which depicts the in-betweenness of empathy and detachment. Kaushalya Fernando portrays a witty and satirical character of a woman who demonstrates the duality of human nature. Her portrayal of this woman captures the history of the Sri Lankan lower middle-class womanhood which is being exploited and marginalized within democratic governance. Kaushalya’s matured theatre performance is further enhanced through her fast dialogue delivery and a lower middle class woman’s mannerism. Her son, her secret lover, the labourer, the monk, the local politician and his bodyguard are intelligibly portrayed by a group of young actors. The key to their performance lies within the parameters of detachment and performing the social and political gestus which signify their class bases.

Craft of Acting

Modern theatre directors, such as Brecht, Grotowski, Artaud, and Meyerhold, have conceptualized the human body as a bearer of social class significations. Yet among these theatre practitioners, Brecht is unique in his understanding of the body as a symbol of social signification and the way it can be utilized to portray a character’s dialogic and ambiguous relationship between human beings and the society. When Chamila’s actors portray a character on stage, it depicts her/his historical and social affinities through the bodily motility and mannerism. The most significant aspect of Chamila’s theatre is how he has consciously portrayed these characters’ mannerism and acting style to signify a novel approach to Sinhala speaking theatre. As Liyanage has argued these habitual bodies that actors have portrayed on stage demonstrate how these people have been physically and ideologically transformed through the torrents of economic and social changes in the country (Liyanage, 2016).

As a theatre piece, Chamila’s work is a highly refined and choreographed theatre experience which has consciously been directed and designed to heighten the theatrical experience. All the scenic structures are blended and supported to create theatrical visuality. The lighting and sound scape also supported to enhance the experience of theatergoers to capture the minute details of the actors and the scenic situation. The clever music scope which semiotises the parodic usage of the ‘mission impossible’ theme music, conveys the intertextuality of theatre and the popular movie. Thus, Chamila Priyanka has clearly demonstrated his ability as a playwright and a director who has a clear political and social consciousness of how this society has been evolved and transformed. He has demonstrated how these social and political nuances can be transformed into highly theatrical semiotics.

Conclusion

Yet, this refined form of contemporary Sri Lankan theatre has been rejected and disregarded by a panel of judges at the State Theatre Festival held recently at the Nelum Pokuna Theatre. However, as theatre artists, the arts council, drama panel, and this year’s judge board need to be held accountable for theatergoers. This rejection has proven that young theatre makers such as Chamila and others should be more and more aware of the ideological traps set up by the state and how these structures regiment young thinkers’ creative impulses. Theatre artists should be held more accountable for the people and should avoid state sponsored theatre festivals which could be ideological and political traps for them. Chamila Priyanka has proved that he is a fine writer and director amongst the young generation of theatre artists. He has demonstrated his potential and brilliance of theatre making to the contemporary Sri Lankan theatre. I thoroughly believe that he is one of our hopes in the years to come and that he will definitely nourish Sinhala-speaking theatre with his bold talent.

References

Haththotuwegama, G 1998, ‘Unresolved Contradictions Paradoxical Discourse and Alternative Strategies in the post-Colonial Sinhala Theatre’, in R Abeypala, A Vickramasighe & V Pathiraja (eds), Abhinaya, Sinhala Drama Panel, Ministry of Cultural Affairs, Sethsiripaya, Baththaramulla, pp. 130–169.

Liyanage, S 2016, Meditations on acting: essays on theory, practice and performance, Dev Publishing, Mount Lavinia, Sri Lanka.

Wickramasighe, N 2014, Sri Lanka in the modern age: a history of contested identities, Hurst & Company, London.

Prof. Saumya Liyanage

Dept. of Drama Oriental Ballet and Contemporary Dance

University of the Visual and Performing Arts

Colombo.

5 April 2022