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
This amusing play on the unwillingness of Çiva to prolong the dicing
after he has unsuccessfully staked his necklace of skulls and serpents,
and his clothing of ashes and hide, is followed by a wearisome eulogy
of the glances of the god in the Tāṇḍava dance, alluding to the great
moments in his history. Similar bad taste is shown in the curious and
unusual form of the last verse of the drama:
yenādiçya prayogaṁ ghanapulakabhṛtā nāṭakasyāsya harṣād
vastrālaṁkārahemnām pratidinam akṛçā rāçayaḥ sampradattāḥ
tasya kṣattraprasūter bhramatu jagad idaṁ Kārttikeyasya kīrtiḥ
pāre kṣīrāmbhusindho ravikaviyaçasā sārdham agresarena.
‘Through all the universe beyond the ocean of milk, heralded by the
fame of his bard, the sun, may the fame wander of that scion of
heroism, that god of war, who bade this drama be performed and who in
keen delight at the pleasure he found in it gave daily to the poet
abundant store of raiment, jewels and gold.’ Such a mode of
immortalizing himself, and his patron can hardly be regarded as
precisely dignified, and it certainly is not in harmony with the
traditions of the drama.
XI
THE DECLINE OF THE SANSKRIT DRAMA
1. THE DECADENCE OF THE DRAMA
We have seen already in Murāri and Rājaçekhara the process which was
depriving the drama of real dramatic quality. The older poets were,
indeed, under the influence of the epic; they lived in the atmosphere
of the poetry of the court and their dramatic instincts had always to
fight against the tendency to introduce epic and lyric verses into
their works, heedless of the ruin thus wrought on the drama. Had the
stage been a more popular one, this defect might have been
counteracted, but the audience for whose approval a poet looked was
essentially one of men of learning, who were intent on discerning
poetic beauties or defects, and who, as the theory proves, had
singularly little idea of what a drama really means.
Other factors doubtless helped the decline of the drama. The invasion
of the Mahomedans into northern India, which began in earnest with the
opening of the eleventh century, was a slow process, and it could not
immediately affect the progress of the dramatic art. But gradually, by
substituting Mahomedan rulers—men who disliked and feared the influence
of the national religion, which was closely bound up with the drama—for
Hindu princes, the generous and accomplished patrons of the dramatists,
it must have exercised a depressing effect on the cultivation of this
literary form. The drama doubtless took refuge in those parts of India
where Moslem power was slowest to extend, but even there Mahomedan
potentates gained authority, and drama can have been seldom worth
performing or composing, until the Hindu revival asserted the Indian
national spirit, and gave an encouragement to the renewal of an ancient
national glory.
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