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
Such matters as are appropriate for presentation must be presented in
Acts, and each Act must contain only such events as can naturally, or
by skilful management, be made to occupy the duration of a single day,
[629] a requisite which is obeyed by Bhavabhūti in his Mahāvīracarita
and by Rājaçekhara in his Bālarāmāyaṇa despite the difficulties
presented by the effort thus to condense the epic. But it is essential
that the events described shall not be disconnected; they must flow
from the same cause, or issue naturally from one another. There should
be an effective development of the plot within the Act; at the time
when it comes to an end by the departure of the actors—three or four at
most, one of whom should be the hero—at the moment when they seemed to
have attained their immediate aims, a new motive should come into play,
and a fresh impetus be given to the movement of the drama. But it is
neither necessary nor usual that Act should follow Act without
interval; on the contrary, anything up to a year may intervene between
the action of one Act and that of the next; if the events as recorded
in history covered more than that time, as in the case of Rāma’s
fourteen years of banishment in the forest, the poet must reduce the
period to a year or less. To reveal to the audience the events during
such intervals the theory permits a choice of five forms of scenes of
introduction (arthopakṣepaka), which serve also to narrate things,
whose performance on the stage is forbidden by the etiquette of the
drama. [630]
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