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
A variant of the Nāṭikā is the Saṭṭaka, [748] which differs from it
merely by being all in Prākrit, in having no introductory scenes of any
kind, and in having the acts called Javanikāntara. As the name denotes
a form of dance, it is quite possible that it owes its origin as a
species to the use of such dances in these plays. We have an example in
Rājaçekhara’s Karpūramañjarī.
The Troṭaka [749] or Toṭaka is merely a variant of the Nāṭaka; the
Bengālī recension of the Vikramorvaçī which contains Apabhraṅça verses
and an appropriate dance of the distracted king alone gives the name.
The term denotes both a dance and confused speech, and the origin of
the species need be sought only in this peculiarity. The other
manuscripts call it a Nāṭaka.
The other species enumerated have no representatives in the old
literature, nor is this wonderful, for they show the character rather
of pantomime with song, dance, and music than of serious drama; the
Goṣṭhī [750] has nine or ten men and five or six women as actors; the
Hallīça [751] is clearly a glorified dance; the Nāṭyarāsaka [752] a
ballet and pantomime; the Prasthāna, [753] in which hero and heroine
are slaves, is based on a mimetic dance; so also apparently are the
Bhāṇikā, [754] or little Bhāṇa, and the Kāvya, both one-act pieces; the
Rāsaka, of the same general type, includes dialect in its language. The
Ullāpya may have one or three acts, and its hero is of high rank, while
battles form part of its subject, as they do also in the Saṁlāpaka,
which may have one, three, or four acts. The Durmallikā has four acts,
a hero of low rank, and a precise time-table of duration of acts. The
Vilāsikā has one act, but is interesting in that the hero has, to
support him, not only the Vidūṣaka, but also the parasite and a friend
(pīṭhamarda); the sentiment is erotic. The Çilpaka is mysterious, for
it has four acts, allows all the manners, has a Brahmin as hero with a
man of lower rank as secondary hero, excludes the calm and comic
sentiments, and has twenty-seven most miscellaneous constituents; if a
pantomime, it was clearly not amusing. The Pren̄khaṇa, or Prekṣaṇa, is a
piece in one act, with a hero of low birth, full of combats and hard
words; it has no introductory scenes, and both the benediction and the
Prarocanā are performed behind the scenes, but none of the late works
which bear approximately this title conforms to type. The Çrīgadita is
in a single act, the story legendary, the hero and heroine of high
rank, the manner verbal; the word Çrī is often mentioned, or the
goddess is presented seated and singing some verse. The only play known
of that name is the Subhadrāharaṇa of Mādhava before A.D. 1600, which
is much like an ordinary play, but contains a narrative verse,
suggesting connexion with the shadow-drama. It is characteristic that
the theory ignores wholly this type.
10. THE INFLUENCE OF THEORY ON PRACTICE
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