Theatre talent

Aravinda Hettiarachchi

Meril Suasantha is a common name in the 1980’s Lankan theatre. He did not prefer to deal with the then popular trends of theatre, cinema and teledramas. Yet now he, to a certain extent, has altered his policies of practice in art. Meril’s move was significant in the socio-cultural change in the art field of this isle

You entered theatre as an actor when the local theatre witnessed three tendencies: traditional, modern and popular (commercial). You seem to be concerned only about the modern trend.

You need a talent, or rather fluency, to select a good play to perform. I recognized this talent in the mid ’80s. Before then I was an actor as well as an admirer of fundamentally na‹ve plays.

At school I liked painting. Many admired my paintings. When I had the chance for theatre it seemed a hobby for me. Those days I was not rational to pick things as traditional, modern and classical. I only wanted some kind of art practice. I liked to become an actor because I liked popular actor figures in both cinema and theatre. Still I don?t know who a good actor is.

In the ’80s I could touch some subtle practices, exercise and lessons of acting. Then I think the mere actor in me gradually faded away, and I wanted to be a method actor.

I did thrust myself into that.

I was largely influenced by Dr Salomon Fonseka and his theatre workshop.

The place and its practices erased my simple and naive intentions of acting. This was a totally complicated arena on acting compared to my previous position. Undergraduates, law students, journalists and political activists took part in this workshop. Their company enlightened me a lot on the society. Yet I wanted more and went beyond the levels of this workshop.

I slowly understood acting is far beyond mere commercial or popular expectations. I realized there is a space where acting can affect even the society.

The eighties are, in a way, considered as the golden era of local theatre. The thespians had a professional reputation we are form the theatre. Do you think we face quite the other way round?

The golden ear gradually faded away with the 88-89 insurgency. We had a dedicated team back then. That dedication is hardly present in present theatre.

Most of them waste their time and energy on teledramas. The 1977 open economy affected the art scene too. That is not only teledramas, but arts became a mere money-spinning machine. Mahagama Sekara would liken it to killing dogs for meat. Talented thespians go for teledramas because of financial issues.

Your performance stalled in the mid ’90s. Why?

My last performance was Chuditayo directed by W Jayasiri. This play was staged only in a handful of occasions. A lot of things frustrated me. In 1987, most of the intellects such as Sucharita Gamlath admired my acting though I was not that popular. This was enough to evaluate myself. I came to believe I am an actor. And I was dedicatedly searching for any ingredient to be a perfect actor. My objective was to give a good contribution and respect acting. But no single dramatist, even those who admired my performance, invited me to play a role. I didn’t want to go behind them and ask for roles either. I was concerned only about the basic requirements and the personality to be an actor. And it is director’s responsibility to choose the relevant actor for a particular character.

This isolation occurs because we don’t have a recommended institution on theatre or on method acting. Opportunities must be open for actors to elevate performance into a greater level. Quite later, I took up directing. I did this, not because I did not have a chance to act. In 1989 I directed the Sinhala version of Anton Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya as Vanaya Mama. I didn’t act in this play, because directing was a different dimension.

Besides I directed a play to experiment the performing art I learned from Dr Salomon Fonseka. I had a reason to select Chekhov. Even Stanislavsky, the founder of method acting, chose the plays of Chekhov, Gorky and others to elaborate his technique. I did this play without properly organizing it to be shown island wide. I then had a good cast.

You made a comeback in 2002; do you think you had to resume the 1980 techniques?

I was quite active as a spectator between 1992 and 2002. I visited many film and theatre festivals, and read many books on this subject. That is how I directed my children’s play Nariyek Nava Nam in 2002. It ran at least 200 shows. I had quite a lot of responses.

Even now I thoroughly believe in the audience. There is always an audience to admire the good plays with a message rather than mere comedies. If spectator abandons the theatre, we must innovate new styles. It can be somewhere between Gamini Hattettuvegama’s Street theatre and Sugathpala de Silva’s main trend of modern theatre.

You perform in teledramas too. Do you see it as one of your weak points?

This is very pathetic. Earlier my acting talents came through a collective group. Following the silence of 10 years, I enter art quite isolated. I have physically grown old. I was dreaming to participate in acting only in plays that can touch the depth of my soul.

Yet today I have to decline to a position of acting whatever they give me to act rather than picking plays on my free evaluation.

I perform in teledramas to get rid of my artistic isolation. I am waiting for a good character. The acting practices of classical method are still alive within me. I still try to approach the stage with a better creation of my own. In future, I hope to do a collective work in theatre. Any person interested in my kind of theatre is welcome to contact me at 117A, Kudahakapola, Ja-Ela.

..................................

<< Artscope Main Page