Charting out the role of Vidushakas in the plays of
Sanskrit playwright Kalidasa:
Kalidasa
undoubtedly is the most highly praised and deeply appreciated for his
works. He is the reputed author of best known works like the poem Meghadutam
and plays like Vikramovarsiyam, Malavikagnimitram and Abhijnanasakuntalam.
According to him, drama is the study and not moral of life.
All the
three great plays of Kalidasa deal with love stories of kings. The two plays
i.e. Vikramovarsiyam and Abhijnanasakuntalam are based on traditional
mythological stories whereas Malavikagnimitram is based on King
Agnimitram, the son of the founder of Sunga dynasty. Apart from the theme of
love the other common feature of all the three plays is the role of the
Vidushaka.
The character
of the Vidushaka can be traced to some of the earliest Sanskrit plays like
those authored by Bhasa. Since most of the Sanskrit plays majorly deal with
stories and life of the king, his companion and friend- Vidushaka then becomes
an important part of the play. He is a close and intimate friend of the hero
king who proves quite a resourceful person during any type of crisis in the
king's life.
R.V.Jagirdar in his book DRAMA IN SANSKRIT
LITERATURE says
(vidushaka)
He is the only character, who helps to introduce the hero, who serves as a foil
to the latter and who is the only medium between the hero and the other
characters on one hand and between the hero and the audience on the other.
The
Vidushaka of the Sanskrit drama is similar to the fool in William
Shakespeare's plays. Prof. Chandra Rajan says that although the term Vidushaka
can be loosely translated as a clown, court jester, buffoon; none of these
terms actually define the 'fool' of the Sanskrit drama.
So
a general character sketch of the vidushaka can be drawn as someone who is a
figure of fun, ill-favored, physically handicapped but at the same time a witty
experienced man, a keen and clever observer who usually comments on human
foibles. The vidushaka is always a Brahman, who is repository of the knowledge
and most respected as well. so it comes as a surprise as to why was a
traditionally cultured Brahman made to play the role of a fool in
Sanskrit drama!
All
the three vidushakakas in Kaildasa's plays are witty, figures of fun and
comic in nature yet they all have their own unique qualities and roles in the
plays which shows them as contrasting characters to each other. None of them is
typical in characteristics. Each one of them stands out for his individuality.
It appears as if the role of the Vidushaka decreases in each of the plays
starting with Gautama in Kalidasa's first play Malavikagnimitram (Malavika and
Agnimitra), Manavaka
in Vikramovarsiyam (Urvasi won by valor) and Madhavya in Abhijnanasakuntalam
(The recognition of Shakuntala).
Gautama
in Malavikagnimitram
is
responsible for the development and fulfillment of King Agnimitra's love
affair whereas the other two vidushakas Manavaka and Madhavya in Vikramovarsiyam
and Abhijnanasakuntalam respectively do not play very
significant roles in their king's love affairs. Gautama is the 'mastermind'
behind King Agnimitram's meeting with his beloved Malavika. He starts a feud
between the two gurus Gandasa and Haridatta so that the heroine Malavika gets a
chance to perform in front of the king. On another occasion he makes Queen
Dharini deliberately fall from her swing so that she hurts her foot and the
Dohada ritual then is performed by Malavika who gets a chnace to meet her
lover, the king. Thus the vidushaka Gautama comes across as a very shrewd
character. He even tricks the Queen into giving her signet serpentine ring when
he fakes a snake bite in order to rescue Malavika from the prisons. One feels
sympathetic for the poor queen when she remarks
Alas!
Alas! What cruel blow of fate is this!
That I
myself should have become the cause of danger to the Brahman's life!
(act 4)
The
tricks played by Gautama then appear too cruel and heartless. Although
his plans are brilliant, he does not taste success all the time. His first
failure is to get Malavika close to the king after the dance performance and
the second failure happens when he plans the meeting of the two lovers near the
lake but on both the occasions Queen Iravati disrupts his plans. He always
guesses the king's temperament and state even before anyone else does so. He
says to the king knowingly
You are
like a poor patient who looks to a doctor's medicine (which he cannot afford)
(act 2)
Gautama is
a master at his work of manipulation and planning strategies for the king so
that he could meet his beloved. In fact his importance is well defined in the
king's remark
Here we
have my other minister, in charge of 'other affairs'.
These
'other affairs' of course happen to be his amorous affairs.
Prof. Chandra Rajan states
In the world of realpolitik if we
consider the Chief Minister, Vahataka as master of policy and political
strategy, in the world of the pramadavana, Gautama is undoubtedly the master of
stratagem.
She
says so because the main plot of the play is located in the harem or the
antahpura and pramadavana where the women compete for kings' affections. This
brings out another significant aspect of the vidushaka's character i.e. his
contact with the female world and his movement within the inner palace, in the
world of harem and maid servants gave him access to the jealousies rife
in them. To help the king in his love affairs he had to be good at intrigue.
Being a Brahman he could poke his nose in any affairs and his inborn
capacity for scandals earned him the name of 'scandal monger'. The play
therefore appears as if meant for the performance only by the vidushaka as
Gautama is at the helm of affairs and plans the course of action for the union
of the two lovers. His quick wittiness helps save the king from awkward
situations as often he tries to ward of suspicion in Queen Iravati. On one such
occasion he tries to create a diversion for the king by telling him
Come
along, Sir. I shall create an occasion to tease her.
and later
even intervenes on behalf of King Agnimitra in front of Iravati by saying
My lady
ought not to charge his honour with showing a lack of consideration towards her
ladyship. If exchanging a few pleasantries with one of the Queen's retinue met
quite accidentally becomes an offense, then her ladyship should perhaps clearly
prescribe what is proper and what is not.
(act 3)
Thus
Gautama truly is the manager of King's other affairs as he makes every effort
to help the king lost in love.
However
where on one hand Gautama is such an active participant in the king's life, the
other 2 vidushaka's are completely different in their participation
levels. Manavaka in Vikramovarsiyam appears distant from the king's love
life and comes across as a somewhat clumsy clownish figure for his inabilities
to help the king. He only causes unfortunate and comic incidents. The first
silly mistake committed by him is to let out the secret of King Vikrama's love
for Urvasi when Nipunika begins to question him. In fact she even throws light
on his character by saying
...no
secret of the king's can remain safe for long in this miserable wretch's
bosom...any more than a dew drop trembling on the point of a single blade of
grass.
(act
2)
Manavaka
is completely different from Gautama he lacks that wit, cleverness, brilliance
at planning and so appears a fool as he only creates hurdles fr the king.
Although none of his actions are pre-planned or aimed at hurting the king, he
always ends up creating problems for King Vikrama who is forlorn and lost
in thoughts of love for Urvasi. Prof. Chandra Rajan writes
Manavaka
is a kind of ideal vidushaka though he is a mediocre one at that. He has
neither the brilliance of misapplied ingenuity and moral waywardness of Gautama
nor the profundity of Madhava.
Whatever
follies he commits unintentionally he makes up for all of it by being
devoted to and a good listener to the king. He becomes the audience for the
king's out pour of feelings. He also advises the king as the moment arises
Here
comes the queen. Control your tongue, my friend. Be careful what you say.
(act3)
He
sympathizes with the king when the latter is moaning and
feeling restless to meet his beloved.
Now,
seated comfortably as you are with your eyes dwelling on thee lovely flowering
vines, charmed by them, my friend, dispel the deep yearning that your honour
feels for Urvasi.
(act2)
Manavaka
almost makes an exit from the play after act 3 and is completely absent from
act 4 but comes suddenly in act5. Thus unlike Gautama, Manavaka does not
witness the entire course of action of the king's life. He therefore does not
take part in handling or managing the love affair of the king but only behaves
as the attentive listener to the king as he talks of Urvasi. Prof. Chandra Rajan
has pointed out that Manavaka is the only vidushaka to display some sympathy
for the queen consort, Ausinari as she readily accepts the king's love and
desire for Urvasi and when Manavaka asks her the reason for giving up her
husband so easily she retorts,
You
fool, I am concerned for my lords happiness even at the cost of my own
(act3)
Manavaka
then becomes a contrast to Gautama as he is sympathetic towards the queen
whereas and the latter does not bother about what the other queens will feel,
rather he goes about planning and doing mischievous acts like faking a
snake bit or tampering with the swing. Gautama only swears faithfulness towards
the king's goal but Manavaka feels torn between the state of the king and the
queen alike. His feelings are true to both of them.
Another
completely different vidushaka is Madhavya in Abhijnanasakuntalam. He is completely new in his set
of characteristics. Although a companion of king Dushyanta he does
not stop mocking at him for his follies. He is in every way a critic of
the king. Everyone around him is the subject for his witty
criticism. Unlike Gautama he makes no effort to make Dushayant and
Shakuntala meet or unlike Manavaka he is not even a sympathetic listener to the
Kings State of emotions. He's a figure of fun but is deeply attached to
the king. The court jester Madhavya here is an ill-favoured
hunchback. In act 2 itself we come across his witty criticism as he
remarks
As my ill
luck would have it, he chanced upon a beautiful hermit girl, Shakuntala is the
name. From that moment, sirs, the very idea of returning to the capital
finds no place in his thoughts.
(act 2)
His sharp
and caustic wit is evident yet again when Dushyanta asks him what has paralyzed
his limbs and he answers
A fine
thing to ask; do you hit me in the eye and then ask why it is watering?
He
appears to be the typical creature of the court who hates the forest and
everything about it. He complains to the king that he misses the good life of
the palace. He unlike the other two vidushakas reminds his king of his duties
and responsibilities as a ruler and that he needs to go back to the kingdom
instead of indulging in hunting. He pretends to not to understand what
Dushayanta feels for Shakuntala and as he compares his craving for her
like he himself craves for sweet dumplings and candied dates. In a way it
appears as if Madhavya condemns his love for Shakuntala. Although he
seems distant from Dushyantaa's love affair he does advise him and that too
wisely. As he tells him
Hurry
Sir, and rescue her before she falls into the hands of some forest dwelling
hermit with greasy head and hair plastered down with Ingudi oil.
Madhavya
does not spare any one, but openly criticizes anything he does not like
fiercely. He also makes fun of how restless the king is to get
Shakuntala
What Sir!
did you expect then her to leap into into your arms as soon as she set eyes
on your honour?
It is
easily visible how he sweetly criticizes the king. Madhavya provides all that
there is required to ascertain that the king is in love with Shakuntala.
He is also absent during most part of the play. Firstly he is sent back to the
kingdom to take part in the rituals. He is absent at the crucial stage
when Dushayanta gets married to Shakuntala and also during the trial scene
of Act 5. Hence this absence of his explains his inability to help the
king or for that matter say anything in favor of Shakuntala as he never meets
or sees her.
He is
only aware of his qualities as told by Dushyanta. Shakuntala truly belongs to
the green world of nature as no one except for Dushyanta happens to meet or
know about her. Hence Madhavya is only seen as complaining or criticizing
but never really interested in knowing about Shakuntala.
Hence
through these three Plays of Kalidasa it becomes quite clear how important the
role of the Vidushaka is. The different dimensions that are added to the play
and the story are done through the character of the vidushaka. So we can
confidently state that although Kalidasa makes Gautama the vidushaka an active
figure in the first play, the role of the vidushaka or the importance accorded
to that character deteriorates in the successive two plays.
The
Vidushaka in a way is the comic element in the play as he amuses everyone
including the audience and not just the characters but at the same time offers
valuable truths as well. As M.V. Jagirdar author of Drama in
Sanskrit literature says of the fool/ court jester/ vidhushaka:
He is the
only character who offers the dramatists a most convenient, powerfully, happy
charms to be more amazed.
Not only
does he provide comic relief in the narrative but also speaks such wisdom at
times that no one can claim that he is a fool. The vidushaka is the privileged character
who has the license to mock the king, to ridicule those around him and at the
same time present wisdom and absolute truths without fear.
For
further reading, refer :
Drama in
Sanskrit Literature, R. V. Jagirdar
(Popular Book Depot, Bombay)
Rangacharya, Adya, Drama in Sanskrit
Literature, Popular Prakashan, 1967.
Chandra
Rajan,
Kalidasa: The Loom of Time (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 1990)
Kalidasa (Tr.: Chandra
Rajan): The Complete Works of Kalidasa.
Very helpful
ReplyDelete