Resurrecting or destroying Lankan theatre?
View Point
Dr. Michael Fernando
The interview with Namel Weeramuni which appeared on October 6
Artscope under the title “Resurrecting Sinhala Theatre” contains several
factual errors and statements that definitely lead to serious
misunderstandings and aggravate the problems that already exist in the
Sri Lankan theatre. Furthermore, it insults young dramatists of Sri
Lanka.
One such instance is Weeramuni’s comment on the play Colombo,
Colombo... written and produced by Indika Ferdinando in 2009 which won
the awards for the best direction, best script, best music, best main
actress and several others at the National Drama Festival in 2010.
Answering the question put forward by the interviewer “Is it possible
for you to name a few plays that would fall into such vulgar category?”
Weeramuni answers: “I would definitely call ‘Colombo, Colombo’ as one of
them.”
According to Weeramuni “The drama portrays a scene of young people
raping a dead corpse.” It is evident that Weeramuni has not seen,
‘Colombo, Colombo’. Had he seen the play, he would not have made such an
irrational and factually unsound accusation. As a person who has seen
this play not once, but several times, the writer can state that he has
never come across such a scene in ‘Colombo. Colombo’. In a statement
which appeared in a review, published in the Daily News, Weeramuni had
commented on the play as one “that invites the audience to have sex with
corpses”. Therefore this seems to be an attempt to discredit the young
director based on entirely false information.
There is a scene in ‘Colombo Colombo’ where two frustrated old men
waiting in a funeral parlour for the arrival of a corpse of a young
girl. This scene only depicts the necrophiliac intentions of two
frustrated old men.
 What the dramatist has tried here is to portray the plight of the
woman who is abused by men from birth up to death and even after death.
As we know this is part of the reality of many South Asian societies.
As observed by the author of this article ‘Colombo, Colombo’ by
Indika Ferdinando is one of the best plays, if not the best, written and
directed by a Sri Lankan dramatist in the 21st century. This play has
already been staged at international theatre festivals in New Delhi,
Mumbai and Kathmandu.Weeramuni has also failed to grasp the importance
of the experiments carried out by present day dramatists. Weeramuni
still considers “60s and 70s as the golden days” of Sinhala theatre and
finds it difficult to overcome this mental block.
Weeramuni answering the question by the interviewer : “Do you
consider cultural change to be totally negative?” answers “It is totally
negative” and further says “We are trying to embrace someone else’s
culture.” One of the main problems of Weeramuni seems to be his
misconception regarding the “cultural change”.
But isn’t the evolution of any culture inevitable? And shouldn’t we
investigate this evolution parallel to its socio-political and economic
conditions rather than exist in a cocoon of denial. Weeramuni’s
ideologies have led him to reject everything new and venerate all that
is old or traditional.
According to Weeramuni “ The music has already become an industry.
Theatre and film also have to be turned into an Industry”. In reality
cinema also has already become an industry but making theatre an
industry is not an easy task as he thinks.
As we know in countries where there is a commercial theatre the
dramatists carry out serious experiments to overcome the negative
effects of commercialization.
Therefore it is not advisable to try to find short cuts to solve the
problems of the Sri Lankan theatre.
One of the most acute problems faced by the Sri Lankan theatre is the
lack of a serious tradition of theatre criticism. The statements made by
Weeramuni are very good examples of irresponsible criticisms by the
critics of the old school. Wittingly or unwittingly they also do a great
harm to the Sri Lankan theatre.
During the 1970s one critic attacked the plays produced by several
young dramatists calling them empty (papadam) political plays.
In 1992 the same critic withdrew his attack and apologetically called
them “ a kind of agitation and propaganda” plays. But at the same time
made an irresponsible statement saying that Bertolt Brecht has become a
booby trap for Sri Lankan dramatists (kavandayaka katandaraya 1992 by
Gunadasa Amarasekera).
The lesson we have to learn is that it is imperative for the Sri
Lankan critics to avoid irresponsible and harmful criticism if they
really wish the progress of the Sri Lankan theatre. Otherwise their
criticisms will contribute to the destruction of the Lankan theatre
instead of helping to resurrect it.
[email protected] (Writer is Former Head, Department of
Fine Arts University of Peradeniya) |
