5
CHAPTER I
A BRIEF DISCUSSION ON TRAGEDY
and
TRAGIC ELEMENTS IN SANSKRIT DRAMA.
The discussion on tragedy usually starts with the
definition of Aristotle. "Tragedy” , according to Aristotle,
" i s a representation of an action, which is serious, complete
in itself and of a certain length; it is expressed in speech
made beautiful in different ways in different parts of the
play; it is acted, not narrated; and by exciting pity and
Bear it gives a healthy relief to such emotions". I f we
examine the definition critically we find that every part
of it is open to controversy and accordingly critics have
given different interpretations. Though in course of time
the idea of tragedy as expressed by Aristotle in his defi­
nition has undergone some changes, it has not been possible
for any body uptil now to ignore it completely and in some
form or other it still holds good and has still been accepted
as the basis o f tragedy. Without entering into any contro­
versy we can, for our convenience, define tragedy as an art
of telling story of the sorrows and sufferings of human
being. Man* s life in this earth is dominated by pain, and
'happiness', as we know, 'i s an occasional episode in this
6
general drama o f pain*. So in depicting a picture of the sad
lo t o f human l i f e the tragic dramatist gives us a true picture
o f l i f e and thereby aims at re a lity . But at the same time i t
i s a work o f art and lik e a l l other works o f art the main
function o f tragedy should be to give pleasure. The trage­
dian, therefore, i s to bring about a compromise between two
opposite things-to draw a picture o f the sorrows and
sufferings which lead to sadness and to evoke pleasure out
o f the -sufferings.^ This d iffic u lt task i s performed by a
tragic dramatist by means o f a r t is t ic devices. His success,
therefore, depends on the successful employment o f those
devices which particu larly include the instruments o f tragic
, r e l i e f and the infusion of the idea o f n obility and grandeur.
Although a tragedy i s said to be the story o f a
man fa llin g from happiness to misery i t i s again a matter
o f dispute whether tragedy should always end unhappily. The
Greek dram atists did not think so. But, even then, the Greek
tragedy always ended unhappily. The Shakespearean tragedy
i s associated with the death o f the hero. A tragedy where
the hero remains alive i s not a tragedy in the Shakespearean
concept.
2
But th is meaning o f tragedy has been changed in
the present time. I t i s no longer believed that tragedy
should always end with an unhappy scene and now we come
across tragedies which do not close so. what i s necessary
1. P.K. Guha - Tragic R e lie f, p. 5.
2. A.C. Bradley - Shakespearean Tragedy, p.3.
7
fo r a drama i s not the c lo sin g scene but the im pression i t
le a v e s on the audience or the readers. A tragedy or a comedy,
th e r e fo r e , i s to be judged not from a p a rticu la r scene but
from the t o t a l im pression and i f the im pression l e f t i s a
gloomy one we can c a l l i t a tragedy,
From the time o f A r is to tle i t has been assumed
that the hero o f a tragedy should be an extraordinary man.
But t h is does not mean that he should be trea ted as a super­
human. He i s a man having superior q u a litie s but not e n tir e ly
fre e from human weaknesses. In other words, he i s good but
n ot p e r fe c t. The purpose behind i t i s to crea te a double
im pression in the mind o f the audience. He i s taken above
the ordinary le v e l so that the audience may fe e l that the
s u ffe rin g s which overtake the hero cannot touch them; but
at the same time in order to have a human in te r e s t in i t ,
they must fin d in the hero something common with than. This
dual purpose i s served by a tragedian by endowing the hero
with excep tion al power and by g iv in g him the common human
flaw s. The hero i s sometimes put in a p o sitio n which any
oth er man could have e a s ily avoided, but which, because o f
the p ecu liar nature o f the hero, cannot be overcome by him.
From the time o f A r is t o t le , both in the c la s s ic a l and the
romantic trag ed ies we find that the hero i s somebody eith er
o f a royal fam ily o r some one o f m ythological legend. In the
1, " I f there i s an unhappy ending, we may c a l l i t a tragedy;
but i f the play i s a serious attempt to represent l i f e ,
i t makes no great d iffe r e n c e whether o r not food fortune
in terven eesin the la s t scene". Lucus - Tragedy, p.33.
8
modern time when the idea o f kingship has lo s t i t s meaning,
the greatness o f the hero i s retained in a d iffe r e n t manner.
The hero i s chosen from ordinary men but i s made eith er a
rep resen tative o r a symbol o f a p a rticu la r cla s s or fa ith or
id e a lis e . So in a modern tragedy the importance o f the hero
l i e s not as in d ivid u a l but as symbol o f some fo rc e s or
id e a ls . This i s one o f the means by which the modern drama­
t i s t s aim at obtaining u n iv e rs a lity o f a tragedy. A tragedy
may be w e ll-co n stru cte d , but i t w ill be in fe r io r as a work
o f art i f i t does not contain the universal a p p ea l.1 We must
fe e l that the su ffe rin g s o f the hero or the heroine are not
lim ite d to him or to her alone. In other words, the action
o f the play should take us to a wider world, not lim ited to
a p articu lar man o r woman or to a p a rticu la r p la ce. The
in trod u ction o f supernatural and the su b-p lot was some o f
the common methods by which the former dram atists tr ie d to
achieve u n iv e rs a lity . These things serve not on ly as elements
o f u n iv e rs a lity but also as instruments o f tr a g ic r e l i e f .
The supernatural element s t i l l plays an important r o le in
some o f the great traged ies o f the world, ( e . g . Riders to
the Sea). Of cou rse, the dramatist w ill have to look to the
s o c ie ty in the use o f these instruments. I f he introdu ces
something merely as a convention without thinking o f h is
audience fo r whom he i s w rittin g , i t w ill not be e f f e c t i v e .
1. " I t i s a s p ir it o f u n iv e r s a lity that marks out every
great drama, no matter when or where that drama was
Produced" - N ecoll - Theory o f Drama, p. 100.
9
B u t m o s t l y t h e m odern d r a m a t i s t s
them to
a great
lite r a tu r e ,
T h is i s
of
in
e x t e n t to
c la s sic a l
t r i e d to
tragedy i s not
But i t
is
also .
there,
c h a r a c te r o r by d o in g
c la ssica l
away w i t h t h e
some o t h e r
tragedy there
c o n flict.
T h e r o m a n tic t r a g e d y d e v e lo p e d
co n flict.
In
c o n f l i c t m akes t h e
m a n 's i n n e r
the m o d e m
m ents i n
c o n flict.
psy ch o lo g y or o f th e
and T e r r o n ' .
d e als w ith the
p ity
we
see th e
do n o t
feel
case o f
su ffe rin g s o f
p ity
as i s
o f in te rn a l
a r e m o s t ly
and t a k e s u s i n t o
In
se e n i n
f o r h im .
a c c o r d in g
We h a v e
su ffe rin g s o f
can a r i s e i n
t r a g e d y to
t h is respect
su b co n scio u s th e in w a r d n e s s o f
s t i l l m ore r e c e n t
T h e aim o f t r a g e d y ,
'P i t y
the
gone a s t e p f u r t h e r , w i t h new d e v e lo p ­
tra g e d y has g r e a t ly in c r e a s e d
arouse
sub­
The p resence o f in te r n a l
s i d e w h i c h i s m ore im p o r t a n t .
M aeterlin ck or i n the
the
respect
the id e a
s u f f e r i n g m ore i n t e n s e
tragedy has
has
w as o n l y e x t e r n a l
Shak esp earean trag e d y the h ero es
a f f l ic t e d by in te rn a l
s e v e rity
tragedy in
m odern t r a g e d y h a s d e v i a t e d from t h e c l a s s i c a l
In
help s
to c l a s s i c i s e .
t h e m od e rn t r a g e d y
eq u ally tr u e that in
a great extent.
w h ic h
The m odern
Though the
th e econom y o f c l a s s i c a l
form o f d i a l o g u e ,
p lo t.
sy m b o lic
has turned back
case o f tragedy
a ch iev e
at
secure u n iv e r s a lit y .
some r e s p e c t s ,
true in
aim
the
a m an who i s
a m an who i s
The
dram as.
to
alread y
great.
t h e dram as o f
A r isto tle ,
is
to
s a id that tra g e d y
But
the
in fe rio r
questio n
of
to u s .w h e n
a b o v e u s we c e r t a i n l y
se n t im e n t
w h ic h
comes o u t o f
10
p ity i s pathos but pathetic and tra g ic are not same and the
sentiment which tragedy aims at i s not pathetic but tra g ic .
A sense o f te rro r or fea r or wonder w i l l come when we see
the su ffe rin g or f a l l o f a great man -
a man who stands at
a higher le v e l, but i f we p ity a man th is sense of fear or
wonder cannot a ris e . Of c o u rse,in casd o f a great man also
th is sense may not come i f in the treatment o f the plot the
dramatist f a i l s to handle i t properly.
Our discussion on tragedy w i l l not be complete i f
we do not speak a few words about i t s language. As in poetry,
the language o f drama cannot be the language o f common man;
i t w i l l have to be elevated. Since tragedy deals with emotions
and ordinary prose cannot express emotions w e ll, poetry i s
said to the f i t t e s t medium o f expression in tragedy. But care
should be taken that i t does not go fa r away from the language
o f the common people and give an appearance o f u n re a lity . I t
i s because o f th is that blank verse was accepted by most o f
the dram atists as the medium o f expression in tragedy. The
emotional e ffe c t o f a tragedy cannot be produced unless there
i s a poetic appeal. Moreover, the atmosphere o f poetry takes
us to a d iffe re n t le v e l and thereby acts as a r e l i e f in the
tra g ic in te n s ity .* Since the beginning o f tragedy th is poetic
appeal i s noticed in a l l great plays. In Greek tragedy i t
T . '"The basic p rin c ip le o f tra g ic r e l i e f i s the creation
o f a glowing poetic atmosphere to illum ine the gloomy
world o f dark deeds and events in a tragedy" - P.K. GuhaTragic R e lie f, p.194.
11
was supplied by the chorus. The ly rica l element in Shakes­
pearean tragedy has given i t a separate status. In some o f
the tragedies o f Shakespeare (e .g . Romeo and Juliet) the
ly r ic a l element has been so much that they can be called
pure poetry. The excessive lyricism thus sometimes stands
in the way o f proper dramatic e f f e c t .12 In the early part o f
the twentieth century attempts were made to write tragedies
in pure prose in view o f the fa ct that i t is the natural
medium o f expression. But these prose tragedies were not
regarded as very successful tragedies mainly because o f the
lack o f poetic appeal in them. Reference may be made to
Galsworthy. Galsworthy* s tragedies S t r ife . Justice do not
appeal as great tragedies mainly because they have been
written in ordinary prose and the emotional e ffe ct o f poetry
i s not there.
p
Modem writers, therefore tried to develop a
different kind o f language which is neither pure prose nor
pure poetry. I t is called poetric prose. The search for this
kind o f language is perhaps due to the fa ct that prose is
in effe ctiv e in a tragedy; pure poetry hampers the proper
dramatic e ffe ct and the days o f blank verse are also over.
Inspite o f a ll i t s advantages, i t cannot be denied that
blank verse has some a r t ific a lit y in i t . It has now been
1, N icoll - Theory o f Drama, p. 140.
2. "Tragedy basws i t s e l f upon emotion; ordinary prose
dialogue inevitably f a ils when i t essays to explore the
Passions. The failu re finds clear demonstration in
Galworthy*s play through his employment o f one parti­
cular device" - N icoll - B ritish Drama, p. 257.
n
reco g n ised by a ll th a t p o e tic appeal has much to do with
tra g e d y and th e re fo re attem p ts have been made to c re a te a
p o e tic atm osphere, i f not in language, at le a s t in th o ug h ts
and id e a s o f th e tra g e d y .
B efore fin is h in g th e g en eral d isc u ss io n on traged y
we should r e f e r to one more p o int th a t has d istu rb e d a number
o f modern c r i t i c s . According to them , th e modern a^e has not
giv en b i r t h to any m ag n ificen t tr a g ic drama, none th a t c^n
compare w ith th o se o f th e a n c ie n t Greek and th e E lizabethan
w rite rs . Some c r i t i c even goes to the ex ten t o f saying th a t
trag ed y i s dead and th e re i s no hope of th e re s to r a tio n o f
tr a g ic drama. i In support of t h i s m ainly two reaso n s have
been put forw ard by most o f th e c r itic s .o n e o f them i s th e
advance o f scien ce which h as c u to ff th e in tim a te r e la tio n ­
sh ip o f man w ith th e law s o f th e u n iv e rse . With th e " lo rio u r
achievem ents o f scien ce th e o u tloo k o f man has changed and
•trag ed y can no longer p o rtra y man as a g o d lik e P rotagonist.
in th e cosmic o rd e r o f th in g s '. 2 The o th er i s , th e lo ss o f
f a ith in G od's p resen ce. These c r i t i c s b e lie v e th ^ t th e
burden o f G od's presence i s n ecessary fo r th e c re a tio n o f
tr a g ic form o f a r t. But scien ce has cut a t th e very ro o t of
th i s id ea and th e re fo re trag ed y i s how dead. These reaso n s
however have been re je c te d by th e re c e n t c r i t i c s who b e l i e 1e
th a t modern age h as given r i s e to new forms o f th e tra g ic
1. George S te in e r, The d eath o f Tragedy.
2 . G lick sb e rg , T ragic v isio n in tw e n tie th cen tu ry L ite ra tu re ,
P. 77.
. ,
/
1 vO
-
-
vision. In the words o f Glicksberg, "Neither the Greek nor
Shakespearean tragic forms can, i t is true find embodiment
on the stage today, since the world image or the religious
faith out o f which they grew is no longer shared by the
western audience. That community o f b e lie f which enabled the
Greek or Elizabethan hero to face his destiny with ;'i<hnhearted courage i s no longer available to us on the old
terms............................. science, as i t disclosed the inexorable
lim its o f human knowledge did not silence the voiae o f th
tragic vision; i t simply compelled it to speak a new language'
We can therefore conclude by quoting the opinion o f the same
critic-"Though the s c ie n tific outlook may account for the
virtual disappearance o f tragedy that conforms to the ancient
Greek model, the tragic sp irit endures and makes i t s e l f tod^y
strongly f e l t ....................... The ideology that supported the
tragic drama o f the past has fallen apart. The focus o f the
tragic heroism sh ifts from the locus o f theology to that of
history and society................... The new form o f tragedy is not
only possible in our time, i t h^s been produced by such men
as Faulker, Malraux, O'Weill, Sartre and Camus".
2
Although the Sanskrit drama developed at a time
when the Greeks were in India, i t has now been proved that in
the development o f Sanskrit drama the Greek dr am-a has not
.
Glicksberg, Tragic vision in twentieth century Literature,
P. x ii to xLii.
2. Glicksberg, Tragic vision in twentieth century litera tu re,
P. 77, 78, 80.
1
n
exercised any in flu en ce. One o f the d iffe r e n c e s between the
Greek drama and the Sanskrit drama was that Sanskrit drama
always ended happily. The reasons which led to the happy
ending o f the Sanskrit drama are not d i f f i c u l t to tr o c e . The
Sanskrit drama was purely i d e a l i s t i c . C o n flic t which i s
supposed to be the most esse n tia l thing in a drama was cot
regarded so by the Sanskrit dramatists. The aim o f drama w-^s
to rouse sentiment in the mind o f the audience. «'ith t h is end
in view, out o f the nine sentiments recognised by the t a n s k ’- i t
r h e to r ic ia n s , in a drama one was given prominence. Of course,
the other sentiments might also be there; but they and in fa ct
a l l other things were subordinated to the main sentiment
which was aimed at. C o n flic t in the mind o f the h-rro or the
heroine was not allowed, because i t mi Hit disturb the sen ti­
ment o f the audience. For the same reason the si Hat o f death
was not shown to the audience. The Indian philosophical a t t i ­
tude i s also responsible f o r the happy ending o f th
Sanskrit
drama. The Indian b e l i e f as opposed to the western b e l i e f , i s
that death i s not the end o f a l l . There i s somethin^ after i t .
So when there i s a hope o f something new a fte r death there
can be no tragedy. This b e l i e f i s again supplemented by the
idea that the ultimate attainment o f l i f e i s happiness. The
sorrows and su fferin gs o f l i f e are only temporary ob sta cles
in the way o f happiness.^ I f the drama r e f l e c t s an idea l ik e
1. "No sins or 'transgressions can be strong "enough to strict
to a man; i t may be removed eith er by expiation or by
su fferin g . Freedom and happiness are the ’ b ir t h - r ig h t s o f
a l l men' - Dasgupta & De-HI story o f Sanskrit L iteratu re,
p. yli/H' (yd. r')
that, n atu rally the drama cannot end t r a g ic a lly .
The happy ending does not n ecessarily mean that
there i s no tragic element in Sanskrit drama. K a lid a s 's
Sakuntala. for example, i s f u l l o f t r a g ic incidents. The
departure o f Sakuntala from the hermitage, the separation of
Sakuntala from her husband are a l l instances o f i t . In
Svanavasava-datta in the descriptions o f the Brahm^chari in
the 1st.
Act and in the dream scene o f the 5th l e t tragic
elements are there. In another drama, Uttara-Rama-Charita
there are more o f such instances. The scene o f Ram1s lamen­
tatio n s at the thought o f Sita i s one o f them. In this Play
an atmosphere o f tragedy has been created from the beginning
but the happy ending at la s t mars the impression,
i sligh t
m odification would have turned these plays into tragedy.
But
since the aim was to excite a p artic u lar sentiment in the
mind o f the audience, i f there was any modification at a l l in
a drama, the m odification was towards that end and for the
subordination o f the t r a g ic in te rest which, according to the
dramatist, might disturb the sentiment o f the people,
.'/hen we
know that ultim ately the lovers are sure to be reunited, the
scenes o f temporary separation can atleast arouse pat’ os, which
as we have already said, may be in a tragedy, but w:ich cannot
make a tragedy. These pathetic scenes, therefore, may
s-'id
to be temporary hindrances i n the way o f ultimate happiness
which i s symbolized by the happy ending.
Although in Sanskrit drama there i s no tragedy in
true sense o f the term the p o e tic appeal which is esse n tia l
fo r a tragedy i s present throughout the plays. The Sanskrit
r h e to ricia n s accepted drama as Kavya. ^ So a p articu lar dram"
might su ffe r not from the lack o f p oetic atmosphere but some­
times from the excess o f i t . The aim o f giving importance on
poetry was again the same - to rouse sentiment wK:1.eh becomes
easy through poetry. The supernatural element which i s to be
seen in a tragedy i s also not e n tire ly absent in the Sanskrit
plays. In Sakuntala. for example, nymphs in the form o f «psar
and Vanadevi have been introdu ced. In Uttara-Rama-C a r it a .
r iv e r s in the form o f Goddesses appear and ta lk . Thus we find
that a Sanskrit drama has many elements o f tragedy but i t
avoids tragedy because o f the p articu lar aim with which the
drama was w ritten and because o f th e r e lig io u s and p h iloso­
phical out look o f the Indian l i f e .
In the development o f the modern Indian drama
the
European drama has played a very s ig n ific a n t r o le ; but the
in flu e n ce o f the Sanskrit drama p a rticu la r ly on those o f the
early part cannot be ignored. In the h isto ry o f the Assamese
dramatic lit e r a t u r e tragedy i s a modern crea tion . Some o f the
medieval on e-act plays modelled on Sanskrit plays end with
death but they are not tra ged ies. We shall r e fe r to them in
the next chapter. Though tragedy i s a modern crea tion and
T7"."The Sanskrit..drama may' legitim ately be regarded as the
highest product o f Indian poetry................... Keith The Sanskrit Drama, p. 276.
17
though the idea has been mainly imported from the west the
influence o f the Sanskrit plays on the early tragedies i s
noticeable. The recent dramas exhibit predominant influence
o f the western drama, p a r tic u la rly those o f Fneland.
Of course
some o f the modern western ventures lik e Expressionist play,
Biographical play have not been attempted yet by the Assamese
play-wrights.