{"id":2390,"date":"2020-04-05T15:03:57","date_gmt":"2020-04-05T15:03:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/idiagress.com\/vinaaypatil\/?p=2390"},"modified":"2021-07-30T13:26:38","modified_gmt":"2021-07-30T13:26:38","slug":"ingenuity-of-limitations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/idiagress.com\/vinaaypatil\/2020\/04\/05\/ingenuity-of-limitations\/","title":{"rendered":"Ingenuity of Limitations"},"content":{"rendered":"

Many like to argue about the role of art in society, importantly in changing the course of social flow. Even the aggressively atheist Richard Dawkins, who otherwise uses every faculty of his, to disprove, dislodge, destroy religion, faith, and God, acknowledges the sublime nature of art, poetry, music. He limits his rationality to debunking God, however, for art, he finds accommodation in the yet unknown nature of the neural network of the human brain.
\nHowever, I think the role of art is vastly exaggerated, it might have some effect, however, it\u2019s efficacy is rarely long-lasting. Maybe I am biased or maybe I am not exposed to that sublime art, or maybe I don\u2019t have the faculties to experience that sublime nature, or maybe I am not \u2018enlightened\u2019 enough. However, rationally speaking, the course of human history is rarely defined by the arts, contrary to this, events have shaped the arts.<\/p>\n

Art is more for pleasure, more for enjoyment, more of an escape, more of an insight.
\nIn this context, performance art, especially plays are to be viewed in the context of enjoyment, more for the moment. Hence, enjoyment is my prime criteria in viewing any play.<\/p>\n

Is such a thinking shallow? Maybe. Some might point to serious plays or movies and argue they create awareness, curiosity and other such virtues. Then again, maybe not. Only an avid science enthusiast will enthrall in complexities of the universe after watching Interstellar, for the other guy, it is just about CGI, the beauty and the thrill of it.<\/p>\n

Then again did Sairat really change attitudes towards inter-caste marriages and honor killing, maybe, for a few weeks. Ultimately all it achieved is recognition for a previously obscure Nagraj Manjule, a beeline of ‘A list’ actors including Amitabh for his projects. Otherwise, society is fairly where it was before the movie.
\nSocial change is painfully time-consuming, events shape it, necessity, mandates, etc, drive it and any social change is invariably resisted. Did women enter the workforce under social change or by the sheer economic need placed by urbanization? If economic status makes working as optional, then many such women do not work. As income and class levels rise, working women are few and far between.<\/p>\n

If you are looking for social change, then literature, books, education, sometimes government intervention, etc are the steps in a long and arduous journey. Art can be a reinforcing mechanism, it cannot become an initiating mechanism. Would caste equality (still a distant dream), rather can you achieve caste tolerance without reservations!<\/p>\n

Now, the rant so far is so serious. This is especially odd, as the play\/movie I want to discuss is far on the other side of the spectrum, frivolous, illogical, infantile, and absurd. The saving grace for the natak is its extremely enjoyability. And hence you should watch it, only for pleasure, if you have any serious goals from theatre then the preceding paragraphs should dissuade you from doing so.<\/p>\n

First, the play, colloquially better known as \u2018Natak\u2019. Pu La Deshpande by giving an example of the cat highlighted the weakness of the English language. A male cat, known as HE Cat, needs an adjective, aggressive, sharp, swindler to complete his description, whereas the Marathi word for him, \u2018BOKA\u2019 encapsulates all the connotations within a single word. Similarly, the Marathi word \u2018NATAK\u2019 encapsulates all requisite connotations within it.<\/p>\n

<\/h2>\n
\"\"<\/a>
Marathi Natak (2004) Shrimant Damodar Pnat<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Natak:\u00a0Shrimant Damodar Pant<\/h2>\n

This natak is an enjoyable performance with Bharat Jadhav in the driver’s seat and Vijay Chavan as his excellent navigator. Vijay Chavan is \u2018Anna\u2019, the father of Damu (Bharat Jadhav). Anna\u2019s wife Shanti, Anna\u2019s elder son with his wife, and Anna\u2019s daughter complete the supporting cast in this family.
\nDamu is the stay at home, unemployed son in the family, by the day. And by night, or rather after 6 pm, his body becomes the vessel for the ghost of Anna\u2019s father: Shrimant Damodar Pant.<\/p>\n

What ensues is a comedy of epic proportions as the family prepares for its daily routine of the arrival of the elderly ghost, wherein the ghost is more like a gust of wind. The ghost ebbs and flows in and out of Damu. One moment he is the dominating grandfather, full of visions of grandeur and the other moment he is the innocent grandson void of any pomp.<\/p>\n

The story is simple, with very little twists, it is just a play of characters. The interactions between Anna and Damu are comic gold. The jokes are of the caliber of PJs (Phaltu Jokes). What carries the natak is the Bharat Jadhav’s performance. This is one of his earlier performances when he was a rising star in the Marathi landscape specifically the Marathi stage.
\nHe traverses from one role to another as a matter of seconds, from Shrimant to Damu at the blink of an eye, body language, diction, presence, all change at his will. This is a performer at his peak control over his craft.<\/p>\n

This is part of an array of similar performances from Bharat Jadhav. Another natak, \u2018Sahi re Sahi\u2019, he is a magician appearing at different corners of the stage, with different costumes and different personalities. His performance in the Marathi movie \u2018Pachadlela\u2019 is epic, wherein not only he imbibes the ghosts of men but also of a woman, again with an effortless switching from one personality to another.<\/p>\n

But what makes Shrimant Damodar Pant special is that he shuffles his personalities with the least reliance on props. Sahi re Sahi, he has the gamut of costumes and makeup, in the movie he has camera angles, cuts, and edits, however, in this natak he is on his own. Initially, we see him in different costumes for his different personalities, however, as the natak progresses he remains in a t-shirt and a half pant, and still manages to convey the presence of two entities, simply \u2018brilliant\u2019<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Marathi Movie (2013) Shrimant Damodar Pank<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Movie: Shirmant Damodar Pant<\/h2>\n

The natak was such a runaway success that a spin-off movie was inevitable. However the movie is a reminder as to why the natak is brilliant.<\/p>\n

As with any movie, the canvas of the story expands. The grandeur of Shrimant is showcased with elaborate props, horses and stuff. The movie features a much wider supporting cast, the story has cinematic tropes like flashbacks, special effects. The most crucial deviation from the natak is the presence of a \u2018villain\u2019.
\nTypically all those extra ingredients should spice up the movie, however as a connoisseur of food in the city of Pune, I can tell with experience between my ears, below my nose, on my tongue, that all that appears red is not spicy, sometimes it is just food color. Two individually good-tasting ingredients always do not go together, like cheese on fish. Hence, what we get is an appealing dish, good in bits, but never wholesome.<\/p>\n

The added supporting cast needs accommodation in scenes to justify their presence, the villain needs a backdrop, plus he needs his own assistants, add to this the convoluted angle of a treasure hunt. In all this tapestry, the crown jewel stays hidden, we get distant glimpses of it. Both Vijay Chavan and Bharat Jadhav go underutilized in the movie. The comedy in the nuances of Damu\u2019s expressions gives way to overt physical comedy.
\nPlus the movie came out in 2013, way later than some of Bharat Jadhav\u2019s better films. Thus it gets caught in capturing the tropes of Bharat Jadhav the film star and Bharat Jadhav the simple stage actor from 2004.<\/p>\n

This highlights the ingenuity in limitations of the stage. Limited scenary, props are limited and only a certain number of actors are accommodated on the stage at a time. This means the natak has to rely on \u2018performance\u2019, \u2018narration\u2019, and the most key factor of all, the intelligence of the audience.
\nAgain, not all Natak’s are good, nor all natak\u2019s are performances. It still needs skill and talent for natak to become memorable. Some jokes like \u2018Pamolive ka jawab nahi\u2019 might become dated, however, the performances will remain fresh from Shrimant Damodar Pant<\/p>\n

Now, after reading about the natak and the movie, you might ponder how the initial few paragraphs fit into the narration of this article, then again, remember, that the name of the site is Idiagress, and in the name is spelled incorrectly.<\/p>\n

Watch the Natak here
\n