The Sanskrit drama : $b in its origin, development, theory and practiceKeith, Arthur Berriedale
History
The Sanskrit drama : $b in its origin, development, theory and practice
Keith, Arthur Berriedale
Sanskrit drama -- History and criticism
‘If the cloud must thunder, then let him thunder; cruel were men ever;
but, O lightning, can it be that thou too dost not know the pangs of a
maiden’s love?’ [285]
The merits of the play are sufficient to enable its author to dispense
with praise not deserved. For Çūdraka, regarded as the author, has been
credited [286] with the distinction of being a cosmopolitan; however
great the difference between Kālidāsa, ‘the grace of poetry’ [287] and
Bhavabhūti, ‘the master of eloquence,’ [288] these two authors, it is
said, are far more allied in spirit than is either of them with the
author of the Mṛcchakaṭikā; the Çakuntalā and the Uttararāmacarita
could have been produced nowhere save in India, Çakuntalā is a Hindu
maid, Mādhava a Hindu hero, while Saṁsthānaka, Maitreya, and Madanikā
are citizens of the world. This claim, however, can hardly be admitted;
the Mṛcchakaṭikā as a whole is a drama redolent of Indian thought and
life, and none of the three characters adduced have any special claim
to be more cosmopolitan than some of the creations of Kālidāsa. The
variety of the characters of the play is unquestionably laudable, but
the praise in part is due to Bhāsa, and not to his successor. To the
same source also must be attributed the comparative simplicity of the
style, which certainly contrasts with the degree of elaboration found
even in Kālidāsa, and carried much further in Bhavabhūti. The variety
of incident is foreshadowed in Bhāsa, but the development of the drama
must be attributed to the author, and frankly it cannot be said to be
wholly artistic; that the drama is unnecessarily complex must be
conceded, nor can the action be said to proceed with complete ease and
conviction. The humour of the play is undoubted, but here again to
Bhāsa must honour be given. Bhāsa again is the prototype for the
neglect of the rule of the dramaturgy which demands the presence of the
hero on the stage in each act; the naming of the play, in defiance of
convention, from a minor incident may justly be ascribed to the author
himself.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account