Chapter
VIII
SHAKES PEAtlE MD POST-PRASAD DRAMATISTS
The analysis of the influence of Shakespeare on
Jaishanker Prasad in the l a s t two chapters
should
indicate how Prasad established and perfected his dramatic
technique by judiciciusly blending the Sanskrit and the
Shakespearean techniques.
The dramatists a f t e r him continued
more or l e s s , the same t r a d i t i o n , g i v i n g , here and there,
t h e i r own Individual touches, u n t i l the influence of other
European dramatists set i n .
For the sake of convenience, we
may divide them into two categories:
those who purely belong
to the school of Prasad and those who began with Prasad's
technique but broke away l a t e r on.
In the f i r s t
we may include Badrinath Bhatt, Harikrishna
category,
'Premi',
Govindballabh Pant and \^rindabanlal \/^arma and, in the second,
we may include Laxminarain Mishra, Seth Govind Das,
Udayashanker Bhatt, Ram Kumar Varma, Upendranath 'Ashka', and
Jagdish Chandra Mathur.
We s h a l l take them up one by one to
measure up Shakespeare's influence upon them.
Badrinath Bhatt;
Badrinath Bhatt read Shakespeare's plays in B . 4 .
wrote many plays but only Chandragupta (1913) and Dureawatl
He.
(192S)
-250--
bear out Shakespeare's influence.
a merchant of Greece
In Chandragupta, Mahendra,
r e f e r s to the sinking of h i s
ships.
The short dialogue connected with this incident has d e f i n i t e
trace of the influences of Shakespeare's dac dialogue in The
Merchant of Venice ( I , i ) .
The friendship between Mahendra and
Randhir and Mahendra's preparedness to die in otder to save
the l i f e of Randhir r e c a l l the friendship between Antonio and
Bassanio and Antonio's risking his l i f e for the sake of h i s
f r i e n d Bassanio.
At other places also the dialogues bear some
resemblance with the dialogues of the English p l a y .
resembles Shakespeare's h i s t o r i c a l plays in general.
Dureawati
This
is
a h i s t o r i c a l tragedy with much of external c o n f l i c t revealed
through b a t t l e s , murders e t c . ,
and internal c o n f l i c t revealed
throiigh the s o l i l o q u i e s .
Harlkrishn^
'Premi';
Harikrishna 'Premi' derived most of the influence of
Shakespeare through Jaishanker Prasad and D . L . Roy, the Bengali
dramatist influenced by Shakespeare.
pauranik play, Bandhan (I94i)
Except Fatal Vi.iai. a
and Chhava (1941), a l l his plays
are h i s t o r i c a l and mostly deal with the heroic deeds of the
heroes of Mewar.
'K and 1 ' ,
As a r u l e ,
'S utr adh a r ' ,
'Premi' avoids the observance of
' Purv ar ang a ' ,
and 'Bh ar atvakya', and
almost i n v a r i a b l y , v i o l a t e s the 'three u n i t i e s ' and makes the
-261--
action and c o n f l i c t as his main object in place of the evocation
of
sentiments.
In Pratishodh (1937),
'Premi' dramatises the prolonged
tussle between Chhatrasal and A^rangzeb.
The linking up of the
love story of Baldlwan and Vijaya in the sub-plot with the main
plot and the play of chance in the main plot r e c a l l ShaKespeare,
In characterisation too i t reminds us of Shakespeare.
The
characters of Lalkunwari and Hiradevi.and Bakikhan and Fidaikhan
have been paired o f f on the p r i n c i p l e of contrast,
Chhatrasal
i s a brave Bundela but i s sometimes given to brooding
Hamlet.
like
The internal c o n f l i c t has been depicted in the hearts
of V i j a y a and Zebunnisa.
^t^T #
^ebunnisa speaks l i k e Richard l i s
=f3ix jf ^qf t^g ^cT f r ^
i^X 5iT=r q^^crr!? f ^ ^ ^ n r ^ t o ^
wl ^
t^
I
fch-X jfr t r r
I
I ^f m m m ^ i ^
r m ti ' f ^ ^ f r ^ »fr ^ c n ? i
? ^
? go 4o
In the chaTgCter of Hiradevi we find t r a i t s of the v i l l a i n s of
Shakespeare.
She is jealous of Champatrai and his queen
L&lkunwari and, t o block their way, indulges herself
intrigues gaining nothing thereby.
'motiveless malignity' l i k e l a g o ' s .
in many
This may be said to be her
She dies but does not leave
her v i l l a i n y .
1. Shakespeare, Richard 11^ 111,iii,146-51.
"The name of king? o' God's name, l e t i t go;
I ' l l give my jewels for a set of beads,
My gorgeous palace for a hermitage,
My gay apparel for an almsman's gown,
My f i g u r ' d goblets f o r a dish of wood.
My sceptre f o r a p aimer ^s w a l k i n g - s t a f f , e t c . "
-252-^
Rakshabandhan i s a tragedy ending in the backing of
Ghittore and in the deaths of thousands,
Uith the main plot
is linked the tragiiz love story of Shyama.
The whole plot
evolves through external c o n f l i c t between Chandkhan and
Bahadurshah, between Rajputs and Bahadurshah, and between
Humayun and Bahadurshah whose characters are w e l l contrasted.
In the construction of the p l o t , at l e a s t two stages of
development are c l e a r l y marked: there i s
'denouisaement' when^
Karmavati sends RaSiii to Humayun in the hope of getting his
hBlp and thus avertiLng the d i s a s t e r of Bahadurshah's attack and
we have 'catastrophe' at the death of Karmavati and the f a l l
of Ghittore.
There is internal c o n f l i c t in the minds of Shyama,
Karmavati ^ d
Vikramaditya.
The humorous remarks of Dhandas
are calculated to r e l i e v e the t r a g i c atmosphere.
The
arrangement of o r a t o r i c a l and declamatory speeches b e f o r e the
b a t t l e i s c l e a r l y a Shakespearean device.
Vishpan (1945) is a tragedy depicting the death of
Krishna with much of external c o n f l i c t In. the shape of feudal
war between two Rajput f a m i l i e s .
f u l l of internal c o n f l i c t .
The character of Krishna i s
Maharana is also a r e f l e c t i v e
character and sometimes speaks l i k e King Lear:
#
w ^
qg
fq^
^
^
snf ^ i ^ ^ r
f I
^ OT ? go ^
)
-253--
The characters of S;mgram Singh, the leader of Shaktavats, and
AJit Singh, the leader of Chudawats are well contrasted.
i s a v i l l a i n and p a r t l y resembles Edmund in King Lear.
Jawandas
He says
l i k e EdmuM:
t i f W o T cpfr m^
qcT
f i ^
-m-R
W r ^ qf
W
rr^
I ^tr i r ^ W
m
wW
I ^
^^fr
efr ^
^tr
JRI^ ^
^ trc^Tit' § ifr
m i
ii
QMTra ^T t e ^ ^ t t
C^^ ?
? "30
Shiva Sadhna (1937) , Ahuti
| i
J
(1940) , K i r t i Stambh (1951) ,
Swapnabhanga (1940) Uddhar (1949) and Sanrakshak (1958) are a l l
h i s t o r i c a l plays with much of external and internal c o n f l i c t and
with love stories in the sub-plots connected with the main p l o t s .
Each of them has a Shakespearean v i l l a i n and some characters of
brooding nature r e f l e c t i n g upon either the ingratitude of
or upon the transience of power.
others
They a l l v i o l a t e the
structural rules of Sanskrit drama; do away with the
'unities'
and include scenes of violence etc.,which go against the
principles: of decorum.
They set r h e t o r i c a l speeches b e f o r e
c f . King Lear. l , i i , 6 - 2 2 .
">lhy bastard? Wherefore base?
Vihen my dimensions are as w e l l compact,
My mind as generous, and my shape as t r u e ,
As honest madam's issue? Why brand they us
With base? with baseness? bastardy? base, base?
X
X
X
X
X
W e l l , my legitimate, i f this l e t t e r speed,
And my invention t h r i v e , Edmund the base
Shall top the l e g i t i m a t e : - 1 grow, I prosper;
Now, gods, stand up f o r b a s t a r d s i "
-254--
b a t t l e s ar4 presei^t contrasted characters,
Raktadan (1962)
is
a h i s t o r i c a l tragedy dealing v/ith the story of the l a s t Mughal
jimperor Bahadurshali and his contribution to the war of
independence of 1867.
that i t Las a l l the
I t i s almost in the same vein except
'three u n i t i e s ' .
The characters of Hakim
Ahsanullah and k i r z a llahibaksha r e c a l l Shakespeare's
villains,
Govindvallahh Pant;
Govindvallabh Pant began his dram^ic career as a
drama^st for the 'Vyakul Bharat Company' of keerut and came
under the influence of Jaishanker Prasad in the very beginning,
Like his predecessor Prasad, Pant gives importance to action
and c o n f l i c t
plays.
alongside of the evocation of sentiments in his
He avoids
'Kandi',
'Sutradhar',
'Purvaranga' and
'Lharatvakya' and v i o l a t e s the c l a s s i c a l p r i n c i p l e of decorui^
and the 'three unities ' .
Varmala (1925) i s a Pauranik play with an atmosphere
charged with external and internal c o n f l i c t ,
Ra.imukut (1935)
i s a h i s t o r i c a l play presenting the well-known story of Panna,
Udya Singh and B a n b i r .
It r e c a l l s Shakespeare's
historical
plays in respect of i n t r i g u e s , murders, b a t t l e s e t c .
The
character of S h i t a l s e n i , the mother of Bahbir, seems to have
been inspired by Lady Macbeth.
Like her, she i s ambitious and
instigates Banbir t o k i l l Maharana, his benefector and close
-255-^
f r i e n d , Udya Singh and others t o f u l f i l her amhition of •becoming
tile queen-mother.
She i s a persistent v i l l a i n .
At places, the
dialogues of the Hindi play also seem to have been influenced
by the dialogues of Shakespeare's Macbetht
-
i^cr f r n f r
rr
qi ^
#
I
\ m
?
m f r
^ m
^ ^
^
These words r e c a l l the words of Macbeth when he says:
"^^ill a l l great Neptune's ocea-fe wash this blood
Gleam from my hand? No, t h i s my liand w i l l rather
The multitudinous seas incarnadine,
Making the green one red,
(11,ii,61-64).
Angur k i B e t i
(1937), Antahpur ka Chhidra (1940) ,
Sindur k i B i n d i . and Yavati too r e c a l l Shakespeare in the
dispensation of the Sanskrit preliminaries and in the
continuance of both external and internal c o n f l i c t s ,
murders, b a t t l e s e t c .
soliloquies,
The characters of these plays too include
lagos and Aarons as well as r e f l e c t i v e characters l i k e Hamlet
and Richard 11.
Vrindabanlal Varmat
1
Vrindabar.lal Varma studied Shakespeare and translated
1. Sahitva Sandesh (July-August, 1955), Hindi ke Matakkar aur
Unke Hat.aji^^ p.95.
^
&
fl^fM-ai ^ W,
^
qs
^ FSIP7 otTT^
q^t^
^ef^T
.-256-
1
The Tempest in 1908.,
This f a c t in i t s e l f
indebtedness to Sha^ieapeaxe.
accounts f o r Varma's
He also read Bhartendu HarisiichandraS
plays and was influenced by Jaishanker Prasad.
In a l l he has
written about t h i r t y plays, big and small, but Shakespeare's
influence is traceable only in Jhansi k i Rani (1948), Hans Mayur
(1948) and Purva k i Oar (1950).
A l l the three plays are
h i s t o r i c a l and employ Shakespearean t r a i t s of a h i s t o r i c a l p l a y .
In a l l these plays his mind i s exercised over the problem of
relationship between the king and his p u b l i c , the r u l e r and the
ruled.
A l l Z these plays have a l o t of external c o n f l i c t in
the shape of b a t t l e s , murders, suicides, sieges with long
declamatory speeches before b a t t l e s .
They avoid a l l the
preliminary paraphernalia of Sanskrit drama and v i o l a t e the
'three u n i t i e s ' ,
x'hey have s o l i l o q u i e s to reveal
internal
struggle in the minds of characters and humorous scenes to
r e l i e v e us of the t r a g i c
situation.
The p l o t of Purva k i Oar bears the influence of
The Tempest.
Like Prospero, Ashvatunga is banished by his uncle
and reaches Fagdweep in a ship where he gains power.
The
storm-scene of/fehe Hindi play shows clear signs of the influence
of the opening scene of The Tempest.
The terms of seamanship
used in storm r e c a l l the Boatswain in Shakespeare's p l a y .
1. See Chapter 1 of the present work.
-257-^
Mahanavik says to the other s a i l o r s :
ll" n^T ^
fl"
I
^T 1
^^
(oi'^ ? ^
? go
)
These words r e c a l l the command of the Ship-master to Boatswain:
" f a l l to ' t , y a r e l y , or v/e run ourselves aground:
bestir, bestir,"
(I,i,4-5).
Mahanavik comnands to lower the topmast:
^
I
^^ qielf ^
-PriT ^^ \ i
This seems to have come from Shakespeare's Boatswain:
"Do\m with the topmasti yarel lower,
lower!"
The character of i-iahanavik seems to have been closely modelled
on Shakespeare's 3oatsrwa,ln.
'Ihile at work, he is
by Ashvatunga and Chandraswai^i vjith a v o l l e y of
interrupted
questions
regarding the future of the ship, he, l i k e Boatswain, gets vexed
and speaks in an angry tone:
nji T^l" I ^ f f Ott?" ^^f m x t f ^^T^
qr^
ft
^ qp 5f 5iT T f t i t Ml
^sfri q t ^ T t^wTT
^
1
^ I!
m^ ^
^f I I I
I q q r ^ m i ^MTT
I
Lazioninarain Mishra:
Laxminarain Mishra read Shakespeare at the B . A . stage.
His preface to his play Mulcti ka Rahasya also reveals that he had
.-258-
1
a thorough knowledge of Shakespeare's plays and dramatic technique,
lipto 1930, before the writing of Sanvasi
(1931), he was
consider at) l.y influenced by Shakespeare.
Later on he took to
Ibsen's
tenBinique.
His f i r s t dramatic \^riting Ashoka (1927) places b e f o r e
us both the escternal and internal c o n f l i c t s .
The external
c o n f l i c t takes place betv^een Ashoka and Vindusar, between Indians
and Greeks and betvreen Ashoka and Sarvadatta.
The internal
c o n f l i c t mainly rages in the heart of Ashoka on the question of
violence versus non-violence, but other characters also are not
f r e e from such a c o n f l i c t which may be seen in t h e i r
soliloquies,
i'he draiiiatist provides a love story alongside of the main
historical plot.
The story of the unsuccessful love of Antipater
and Diana r e c a l l s
the story of Romeo and J u l i e t .
In i t too
the members of the families of Antipater and Diana intercept
their love.
The same thing may be said regarding the love story
of Arun and kaya.
The play has r e f l e c t i v e characters and, in
the character of Dharmanath, we f i n d t r a i t s of Shakespearean
villain.
In Sanvasi
(1931) and Ral^shas ka Mandir (1931) the
inspiration of Ibsen is unmistakable.
Kevettheless,
Shakespeare's
influence is manifest in the presentation of the plot with too
many ramifications,, in the v i o l a t i o n of the *three u n i t i e s ' ,
1. L.N. Mishra, liul^ti ka Rahasva. Preface, pp.1-24,
-259--
in the d i v i s i o n of acts into scenes, in the painting of emotive
characters and in the use of songs.
In his h i s t o r i c a l plays
Laxminarain Mishra uses the s t a t i c technique of katerliBk and
Shaw but even here Shakespeare's influence i s not quite e x t i n c t .
In Garuddhwa.i
(1945), yatsara.i
(1949), Dash ash vamedh (1950) and
Vitastq k i Laliren (1953), Mishra keeps the outer structure
Ihsen's plays presenting one scene in one act, giving
detailed
stage directions and a sort of i n t e l l e c t u a l d i s c u s s i o n .
they a l l have traces of Shakespeare's
like
But
influence•
In Garuddhwa.1 ^ Kishra intertwines love s t o r i e s of
I'lalidas and Vasanti, Malayavati and Vishamsheel and Kaumudi and
Devbhuti v^ith the main ^lot in the manner of Shakespeare and
v i o l a t e s the 'three u n i t i e s ' .
human actions, the d i v i s i o n of
The emphasis on destiny behind
acts into scenes and the
presentation of p a t h e t i c - f a l l a c y in nature also link the play
with Shakespeare.
In Vatsara.i and Vitasta k i Lahren.
Shakespeare's influence may be seen in the v i o l a t i o n of the
'three unities ' and in establishing a link between the p o l i t i c a l
theme of the raain plot and the love stories in the s u b - p l o t .
Seth Govind Das;
Seth Gcvind Das read and studied Shakespeare
thoroughly well: t h i s f a c t is clear from his theory of drama
as propounded by him in his book Natyakala Mimansa.
1. Seth Govind DaS, Natyakala Mimansa. pp.8-9.
He also
-260-
adapted 3haict speare's ks You Like I t
l^omeo and Juliet
(Krlshakamini, 1912), and
(Surendra Sundarl^ 1912)^
Seth Govind Das
2
considers u n i v e r s a l i t y to be the nark of a good play and stresses
the importance of both internal and external action in
3
contriving his p l o t ,
.ftien v;e examine his dramatic p r a c t i c e , we
f i n d such Shakespearean devices of dramatic technique - the
presentation of a hero of high e s t a t e , the supernatural element,
the hand of destiny behind human actions,
p a t h e t i c - f a l l a c y in
4
nature f o r man, dramatic irony e t c , - most e f f e c t i v e l y u t i l i z e d
a l l his early and in some of his l a t e r dramatic w r i t i n g s .
Each of ti..e two parts of Kartavya (1935) has f i v e
acts further divided into scenes and depicting the l i v e s of Ram
and Krishna.
The plays show nuch of external and internal
c o n f l i c t ending with a t r a g i c note on the death of the heroes
and various other persons.
Ram is always tormented by a keen
struggle between love and duty, between v^iat i s and what ought
to be.
the
The plays avoid the Sanskrit preliminaries and v i o l a t e
'three u n i t i e s ' and the Sanskrit rules of decorum in drama.
In the f i f t h act of the f i r s t part of the play, an earthquake
takes place, the earth gives r i s e to water and Ram i s seen
dro\ming in the f l o o d .
This extension of Ram's mental torment
1. Govind Das Abhinandan Granth. Parishistha, p.972,
2, Seth Govind Las, Hatyakala Mimansa^ p.16,
I b i d . , pp.15-16.
4 . A. N i c o l l , An Introduction to Dramatic Theory, p^,103-118,
in
-261--
into the doiaain of physical nature may be regarded as the
Shakespearean device used in his tragedies s p e c i a l l y King Lear.
Harsh a (1935) is a h i s t o r i c a l play f u l l of external
c o n f l i c t in the fonr: of gloomy incidencts, events of war and
conspiracy, and murders of Hajyavardhan and Grahvarma a l l of
which r e c a l l Snake speare's history p l a y s .
Shrivastava puts
But, as D.K. Lai
it:
"the e s s e n t i a l c o n f l i c t in the play is between two
forces good and e v i l . On the side of good are Harsha and
R a j y a s h r i . On tne side of e v i l are Shashank, Narendragupta
and conservative brahmins. In the play the bravery, n o b i l i t y ,
l i b e r a l i t y , charity and s a c r i f i c e and forgiveness of Harsha,
the disappointn.ent and sorrow and tenderness of B a j y a s h r i ,
the v i l l a i n y and wickedness of Shashaak, Narendragupta
and the Brahmins have been s u c c e s s f u l l y portrayed. Govind
Das has follovred Shakespeare's dictum as mentioned by
Bradley 'Character i s D e s t i n y ' , " 1
The play avoids the technique of Sanskrit drama and v i o l a t e s
the unities of time and p l a c e .
Ha;jyashri and Harsha are
brooding characters and their internal c o n f l i c t has been
depicted through s o l i l o q u i e s a M expressive songs,
and ITarendragupta have t r a i t s of the two types of
Adityasen
villains
as delineated by Shakespeare; the one who turas virtuous
the end and the other who persists in his v i l l a i n y t i l l
in
death,
Kullnata (1940) opens with the c o n f l i c t between V i j a i
Singh Deo and Sarabhi Pathak.
It depicts the c o n f l i c t f o r
kingdom between / i j a i Singh Deo and YadurAi ending in the death
1. D.K. Lai Shrivastava, Influence of Vfestern Drama on
Modern Hindi Drama^ p,208.
-262--
of the former and also of Nagdeo, Chandrapid and Vindhyabala.
The main plot deals with the theme of r e l a t i o n s h i p hetvjeen the
high-born and the low-born,
With this main plot is linked
the love story of Yadurai and Revasundari to give i t a
romantic t i n g e .
There has been shoi^ internal c o n f l i c t raging
in the heart of Yadurai.
Chandrapid i s a v i l l a i n whose death
conforms with the idea of
'poetic-justice'.
The play is
c h a t a c t e r i s t i c a l l y l i k e some of the tragi<i-comedies of
Si^akespeare showing some deaths and murders on one hand and
y the r i r k i n g b e l l s of the marriage of Yadurai and Revasundari
on the other.
The speeches surcharged with emotional excitement,
the s o l i l o q u i e s revealing the deep inner c o n f l i c t , the v i o l a t i o n
of the 'three u n i t i e s ' e t c . c l e a r l y bear out Shakespeare's
influence.
At one place we f e e l the inspiration of Shakespeare's.
Hamlet working behind the speech of Yadurai.
^tqfr
i^fr
itH^ t
#
He says:
TT
9ilT sT-qx
^^
^^ w^
^
^ i j i t ^
T^T f ^ T T l f ? toT % Wl
H^f ^'wf^
^TT
^TcTf^
tr^
TO
Jft^ m i w r ^ t ^ % f e i q i ^
rrt ^e^f
./e may place it beside the words of Hamlet spoken by him in
^ct 1, scene i , of Shakespeare's p l a y .
The following v;ords
of Revasundari r e c a l l the words of Perdita in Shakespeare's
-263--
The '.Jinter's Tale "beginning vdth "The self-same sun that shines
upon his court"
(1/,iii,457-59):
I^^HT^T
^ ti -f^xcrf
f r ^CT^rf
4t ^ ^
e^TBtf^cf T i ^ % ^^
^frx ^ I
f q r x ^ T 'T^TI ¥T
^ ^ f t ^ * ^t^rt' ^ QF^. ^ T
^ mr^
iTM 4
wt^f i
(go ^
Shashigupta
)
(1942) deals with the h i s t o r i c a l story
of the great Maurya king -handragupta.
The external c o n f l i c t
has been depicted betv;een Alexander and Ambhik, betvreen
Alexander and Parvatak, between Alexander and Ghandragupta,
betv/een Mahapadmanand and Shaktar and betv;een Ghandragupta
and Hand,
vlith t h i s is linked the story of the love of
Ghandragupta and Helen ^^iiich gives the play a romantic touch.
The play is f u l l of action in the form of b a t t l e s ,
deaths and acts of diplomacy.
events,
There is inner c o n f l i c t in the
minds of Ghandragupta, Ghanakya and Helen.
The px play avoids
Sanskrit preliminjiries and v i o l a t e s the unities of time and
place.
There is even the echo of the words of Shakespeare's
plays at one or two p l a c e s .
qTr=r
^
Helen says:
^^
^TT^
^I
^IT^^T ^
^ T ^TcT
(
go
}
These words r e c a l l the words of Perflita in As You Like I t ;
"The self-same sun that shines upon his court
Hides TOt his visage from our cottage, but
looks on a l i k e . "
<IV,iii,457-59) .
-264--
In the sane speech Helen continuess
m
f
f t
I
^
^^^
^
TTm^
Jp
^crf ^ ^ ^ q f ^ ^ - q ^ ^ ^
^^ HTX^'
t?! % ^^ Cr
OFT ^ T l ^ t % »fr I t^p-T
m
f^^t^ ^
i
,
qo V30)
Tx.ese words seem t o Lave been inspired by the famous speech of
Shylock in The >xerchant of /enice;
"Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jev/ hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, a f f e c t i o n s , passions? fed with
the same food, hxart vrith the saine weapons, subject
to the sane diseases, healed by the same means, warmed
and coolcd by the same winter and summer, as a
Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? i f
you t i c k l e us, do we not laugh? i f you poison us,
do we not die? and i f you wrong us, s h a l l we not
revenge?"
(Ill,i,59-68),
K^na
(1946) is a Pauranik play with external and
internal c o n f l i c t s .
The exterhal c o n f l i c t is presented in the
b a t t l e s e t c . and the internal c o n f l i c t is depicted in the
characters of Kama and Kunti revealed through t h e i r
soliloquies.
At one place Kohini speaks l i k e Edmund in Kins Lear
(111,i,6-2^)i
^
csiTq^^
^cpffq ^
f
The play ends at the death of Kama and v i o l a t e s the unities
of time and p l a c e ,
Shershah (1950) dramatises the h i s t o r i c a l story of
Shershah with the presentation of external and internal c o n f l i c t
-265--
avoiding a l l the Sanskrit preliminaries and v i o l a t i n g the
'three u n i t i e s ' .
The love story of Nizam and Ladbanu, conneeted
with the main p l o t , gives i t a romantic setting
Shakespeare's h i s t o r i c a l p l a y s .
like
In the plays of Shakespeare,
the hero gets his inspiration to act either from some
supernatural agency l i k e the witches in Macbeth and the ghost
in Hapilet or from some hiJman agency, f o r example., Duke of York
gets this inspiration from S a r i of Salisbury and E a r l of
Warwick.
In the same way Shershah gets his inspiration fran
Brahmaditya who leads his way to the throne of D e l h i .
The other f u l l - l e n g t h plays of Govind Das, Ashoka^
Prakash (1935) , Bhoodan Ya.ina (1954), G a r l b i va Amiri
(1947),
Sevapath (1950) , Bhikshu se Grahastha aur Grahastha se Bhikshu,
and Mahatma Gandhi
(1959) and others also bear out the general
influence of Shakespeare in the d i v i s i o n of acts into scenes,
in the presentation of s o l i l o q u i e s
and songs and in the
v i o l a t i o n of the 'three u n i t i e s ' .
But they mainly deal with
s o c i a l problems and mostly bear the influence of Ibsen, Shaw,
Eugene 0 ' K e i l l e £ind other European dramatists.
Upendr anath 'Ashlca':
TJpendrjinath 'Ashka' must have studied Shakespeare in
B . A , and in one of his a r t i c l e s , he himself acknowledges that he
1
read the plays of nearly a l l the famous Eaxisp Western dramatists^
1, Upendr anath 'Ashka', Men Hatak Kaise Likhta Hun in
Natakkar Ashka. pp.346-47.
-266--
including, of cours(3, Shakespeare.
In a l l , Ashka has written
about f i f t y plays, iLncluding "both f u l l - l e n g t h and one-act plays,
but only Jaya Para.iaya
(1937) , Clihata Beta
(1940) , Laxmi ka
Sy/ag;at (1938) and tarda Uthao Parda Girao (1950) bear more or
less obvious marks of Shakespeare's
influence.
Java Par a jaya dramatises the theme of the famous story
of haharana Laksha Singh and his son Jhand as derived from Todd's
kajasthan, but the way i t has been dramatised bears out the
influence of Shalcespeare's h i s t o r i c a l p l a y s .
With the p o l i t i c a l
story of the main plot is linked the t r a g i c love story of
xiaghava and Bharmali to give i t a romantic s e t t i n g ,
The
external c o n f l i c t in the play is presented in the form of
i n t r i g u e s , murders, suicides, b a t t l e s e t c , and the internal
c o n f l i c t is revealed tlj?ough the various s o l i l o q u i e s .
Both
the preliminaries of Srnskrit drama and the 'three u n i t i e s '
have been neglected.
The idea Irtiat destiny underlies human
actions Las been expressed at several places.
t r a i t s of an lago, who dies persisting
Ranmal has
in his v i l l a i n y .
play also uses draraa';ic irony and p a t h e t i c - f a l l a c y .
The
The use
of p a t h e t i c - f a l l a c y in nature in Act \/, scene iv s t r i k i n g l y
r e c a l l s Act 11, scene i i of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.
Just
as, in the English play, Calpurnia wants to prevent Caesar from
going to Capitol and describes various h o r r i b l e i l l omens
f o r e t e l l i n g the death of Caesar, s i m i l a r l y Bharmali wants to
-267--
prevent Raghava frori going to the court and recounts various
t e r r i f y i n g i l l omens portending the death of Haghava.
And
a f t e r these scenes ""ootL Caesa.r and Raghava meet t h e i r death
in the two p:|.ays.
^^T ^ ^
BhaxCiali describes her dream thus:
% ^
^^
cfq ITT^ ^T I t
f=wTt ^ f n m e m f r TO ^ iJtx my^^
^ ^
x^cT I
^'r T f r ^ I
#
This r e c a l l s the \:crds of Caesar describing Calpurnia's dream
to Eecius:
"3he drea^.t tonight she saw my statue,
l i k e a fountain ••.o.th an hundred spouts
Bid run pui'e blood; and many lusty Romans
came s m i l i ^ , anc did bathe their hands in i t . "
(II,ii,76-79) .
i\ie reply given by .^aghava to Bharmali:
' T T T ' ^ I m ^ ^ IiRRrf ^
m
i gcq"*^ ^
SXTfr ^
1
^ I T
i s s t r i k i n g l y reminiscent of Jaesar's reply to
Calpurnia:
Gowaxds die triany tines before t h e i r ueaths:
"G
R
N
The
valiant never taste of death but once."
(II,ii,32-33)
Eharmali gives an account of the h o r r i b l e i l l
mm
^
T^m
t
I m
Vm
^
^
I
f ^
^ gc^
^f^ci' ^
Xtcf f
x^
i^TT
xt^f I
(
omens thus:
tliqTX
i m
^^^
f^^
^
"t^t^W
mi-^
« go
;
-268--
And t h i s may vrell be placed "beside Cassa's words:
"And yesterday the b i r d of night did s i t ,
Even at noon-day, upon the market-place.
Hooting and shrieking, ^Jhen these prodigies
Do so con;3ointly meet, l e t not men say,
'These are t h e i r reasons, they are natural'5
For 1 b e l i e v e , they are portentous things
Unto the cl imate that they point upon,"
(I,ii,26-32)
In Chhata Beta^ the playwright dramatises the
ingratitude of children towards their father quite in the manner
of Shakespeare's King Lear,
Pandit Basantlal faces the
ingratitude of his g: f i v e sons just as King Lear faces the
ingratitude of Goneril and Regan.
The following words of the
fool:
"Fatheisthat wear rags
Do make their children b l i n d ,
But fathers that bear bags
S h a l l see their children kind.
Fortune, that arrant whore.
Ne'er turns the key to the p o o r . "
ai,iv,48-53)
seem to have inspired Ashka in describing the w i s h - f u l f i l m e n t
dream of Pandit B a s a n t l a l in which he v/ins a l o t t e r y and the
f i v e sons are seen running about at his command doing
kinds of jobs f o r him.
all
But the old man, when he wakes, gets
the same indecent behaviour from th©n.
The play is a tragedy
of a f a t h e r ' s hopes.
In the t r a g i c one-act play Laxmi ka Swagat nature has
a symbolic significance as in Shaliespeare's King Lear,
There
i s the storm of sorrow raging in the heart of Roshan and this
nature
storm within finds echo in storm, thunder, and rain in/outside.
-269--
Nature seems to be in sympathy with the s u f f e r e r ,
Parda Uthao
Par da Glrao r e c a l l s Shakespeare's r i d i c u l e of the rehearsals
and the acting of amateur dramatic societies as expressed in
A Mid-3imter H j g h t ' s Dream ( I , i i and
lll,i).
Ram Kumar Yarma;
Ram Kumar Varma is well acquainted with the works of
Shakespeare,
He has himself acknov/ledged Shakespeare's influence
upon his e a r l i e r drajnatie v/ritingsi"
Today, \<re know him well
for
his one-act plays but i t is in his f u l l - l e n g t h plays that
Shakespeare's influence is most potently f e l t ,
Shiva.ii
(1945) deals v/ith a s i n g l e event in the l i f e
of S h i v a j i , the famous Maratha hero.
It is a big one-act play
which bears out Shakespeare's influence in the frequent use of
long s o l i l o q u i e s to unfofld the c o n f l i c t in the minds of
S h i v a j i , Sona and Goharbanu,
Satya ka Swapna (1954)
recalls
Shakespeare's '.finter's Tale« in the portrayal of a passion-swept
hero l i k e Madhava, in respect of i t s pastoral and romantic
s e t t i n g , and in the treatment of an i d y l l i c love s t o r y .
yi.iaya Parva (1955) dramatises the h i s t o r i c a l events
in the l i f e of the great Maurya Emperor Ashoka,
spotlighting
the replacement of violence by non-violence in his l i f e a f t e r
1. E r . riam Kumar Varma, Prithvira.i k i Aankhen^ Purvaranga, p.12,
-270--
the b a t t l e of Kalinga.
The play is crowded vdth events,
to much inner and external c o n f l i c t .
i n t r i g u e s , b a t t l e s and deaths.
leading
There is no dearth of
The internal c o n f l i c t mainly
rages in the hearts of Ashoka and Charumitra,
The scene on the
bank of r i v e r Son in v/hich Ashoka shows a s t r ^ e
oratorical
s k i l l to win over his other brothers from the side of nis
brother Sueata c a l l s up tc our mind the scene in Julius Caesar
v;here Antony likewise wins over the crowd to h i s own side by
his f u n e r a l speech.
Shakespeare.
There are also some verbal echoes of
At one place Ashoka says:
q f t t ^ t ^ T WJ t^CTT
^T ^^
Wt siTcTT I cTt
f t
1
(
^^
t
| 3ilT
IH^I^l
)
This r e c a l l s the speech of Edmund ^vhen he says:
"This is the excellent foppery of the world,
that when we ai'e sick in fortune, - often the
s u r f e i t of our om b e h a v i o u r , - - \-ie make g u i l t y
of our disasters the suh, the moon, and the
stars;"
(King Lear. I , i i , 3 2 - 3 6 ) .
Udyashanker Bhatta:
Udyashanker Bhatta has read Shakespeare and has been
inflaenced by him.
In nearly a l l his f u l l - l e n g t h plays the
influence of Shakespeare is perceptible in the way he has
presented both external and internal c o n f l i c t s , and in his
-271--
device of linking a subordinate love story X'/ith the main p l o t ,
in i-iis delineation of passionate heroes and unmitigated v i l l a i n s .
Vikremaditya
yi.iaya
(1935) , Dahar
(1934) Mulctipath (1944) , and Shaka
(1949) are his h i s t o r i c a l plays having much in common
with Shakespeare's ^listorical plays: They deal with the prohlea
of relationship between the ruler and the ruled;
and present a
crowaed action, f u l l of i n t r i g u e s , b a t t l e s , murders e t c .
The
f i r s t two plays have the motive of revenge l i k e Shakespeare's
trageoies.
Vidrohinl Amba (1935) and Sagar Vi.iaya (1937) have
t h e i r themes culled from Hindu mythology, but the dramatist has
treated then l i k e Shjakespeare in his tragedies, and evoking the
r e a d e r ' s sympathetic response by a graphic portrayal of the inner
c o n f l i c t in the minds of the characters before t h e i r
fall,
Jagdish Chandra Mathur;
Jagdish Chandra Mathur has studied Shakespeare's plays
and has acted in As You Like I t , The kerchant of Venice, and Juliu^
Caesar^
The r e s u l t of this study i s r e f l e c t e d in his h i s t o r i c a l
play Konark
(1951) which has action and c o n f l i c t , external as w e l l
as internal, r e f l e c t i v e characters along with the persistent
v i l l a i n R a j r a j Chalukya,
1. Jagdish Chandra hathur, Nai Dhara, Main bhi Khel
Chuka Hun, p.11,