Sunday, February 11, 2007

On Shaoli Mitra's "Nathaboti Onathbot"

After a long time, watched a really interesting Bong play. A play called "Nathboti Onathbot". Its a well known play (at least among Bengalis) by Shaoli Mitra (daughter of Shambhu and Tripti Mitra, the doyens of Bengali theatre). The play is a feminst interpretation of the life of Draupadi. It questions many established orthodoxies:
(a) Why did Kunti allow Draupadi to be married off to her five sons? Although the popular myth is that she did not know what her sons had brought, she could easily have rescimded her order. She did not because she realised that Draupadi was too beautiful to not awaken desire in all her sons which could lead to conflict. Instead of treating Draupadi as a human being, she allowed her to be treated as a thing, a pice of meat (to put it crudely).
(b) While the decision to marry her off to all five brothers was being made, no one even thought of asking her what did she want!!! Although, Hindus tout the Swamvar as a sign of women's emancipation (in those times), the very fact that she had no choice in this matter shows the hollowness of the claim.
(c) Was Yudishthir a real Dharma Putra? Although the shastras forbade games of chance such as dice he agreed to play the game. Not only play the game but decided to put up not only wealth and kingdom but also his brothers as collateral!!!! When he lost all of them (including himself), he pledged Draupadi (obviously without her permission as she was considered his property) and lost her too! When Draupadi was dragged to the court by her hair, he never raised any objections....neither did any of the other brothers except Bhim. The only people to have protested were Vidur and Vikarna (one of the Kaurava brothers).
(d) Was the Kurukshetra war a dharm yudh in the true sense of the term? Both sides played tricks on each other, unfairly deceived their opponents and killed them. While it is understandable that Kauravas would resort to such tactics, the fact that Pandavas also do them with equal panache shows that in reality there was nothing to distinguish between the two.
These are some of the main issues that she raises through her acting and its amazing to watch. For nearly two hours one is mesmerised by her performance.
I just had one small problem. While she has highlighted the plight of Draupadi extremely well, she is not as perfect and blameless as she has been portrayed. Bringing these points up would not have detracted from the story one bit. Instead, it would have humanised her a bit from just being a victim of circumstances and male avarice.
Although she mentions it in passing, Shaoli never explains why Draupadi did not want Karna to win the swyamvar. Now, one can question the very nature of a swyamvar saying its demeaning for a woman to be seen as a prize to be won after performing a task. On the other hand, if that is the rules of the game (winner gets the princess) then she did not play fair. She did not want to marry Karna so even though he was capable of passing the test, he was not allowed to take it. This actually soured Karna towards Draupadi. So, while it is true that he played a pivotal role in her humiliation, it was not totally without basis.
Also, she could have learnt the art of protecting herself rather than depend on her husbands to do so all the time. That might have given her more confiedence. Now, this might sound to some like too much new age feminism, however, it was not entirely unheard of. We have the story of Chitrangada who was not beautiful but was adept at the art of warfare. So why not Draupadi?
Anyways, Shaoli's performance was fantastic and the questions she raises about the role of a woman, a wife and a mother remains pertinent even today.

No comments: