16. STRUCTURAL BEAUTIES

STRUCTURAL BEAUTIES

In the construction of plot and arrangement of events, Surana perhaps is second to none. Nobody knows better than he where to begin a story and where to end, which details to be brought in and which to be omitted. Even the twentieth century which boasts of its advance in techniques has nuch, it seems, to learn from him. There are no less than fifteen parts or episodes in the story of the Kalapurnodayam. They are :- (1) The earlier life of Kalabhasini, (2) Närada's conflict with Tunburu, (3) Manikandhara's pilgrimage, (4) The episode of Manistambha, (5)The comedy of errors, (6) the story of Sugatri and Salina, (7)the dallance of Sarasvati and Caturmukha, (8) the story of Svabhava, (9) the birth of Kalapurna, (10) the episode of Abhinavakaumudi and Salyäsura, (11) the tale of Alaghuvrata, (12) the marriage of Kalāpûrna and Madhuralālasa, (13) Kalāpurņa's expedition of con- quest, (14) the past history of Satvadätman and finally (15) Liksmi- Nārāyana-Samvāda. That these parts are not arranged in order 161

of their chronology is evident from the very opening of the story. Chronologically speaking, the beginning is the middle, and the middle is the beginning. The poet deliberately adopts this ar- rangement so that readers may find themselves directly in the mid-stream of the story and become all the more curious to know the succeeding events. To bring about the same effect, this is not the only way. Instead of beginning the story with the introduc- tıon of Kalabhasini, Nārada, Maņikandhara, Nalakūbara and Rambha directly himself, the poet could have made the baby, Madhuralalasa, narrate the story as it stands. Such an alterna- tive is not altogether ruled out, because the baby has that divine vision. This new arrangement of course involves some changes which are not too difficult to be effected. Why does not the poet follow the latter course instead of the former? Has he gained anything by this method? Worlds he has gained and nothing he has lost by his own method. Ifhe had followed the second alternative, the story would have become al the more complicated. Instead of securing sus- G. V. Krıshna Rao

pense, this would have contributed immensely to confusion and thereby to tediousness, because this would have landed him in the muddle of weaving a story within a story. That means, the contents of the first four cantos will be nothing but a story within a story. That is rather an aberration than an artistic creation. Secondly, the advantages of dramatic presentation, i.e., directly perceiving the characters as they move, act and struggle, will be altogether denied. Thirdly, the special significance which Madhuralālasa's narration bears will be lost beyond repair. Fourthly, all realism with which it is suffused will fade away into the supernaturalism of the fairy tales. (This statement does not mean that fairy tales are not bealutiful, but what is meant here is that one will have anything but not the poets heart and soul). Fifthly, it will become only a third rate imitation of Bana's Kādambari without its word-music and beautiful imagery. In a 162 word, Telugus and Telugu literature are lucky enough in this that Surana did not fall into the snare of the second alternative. Another interesting point in the first part is the reference to the story of Kalapurna and to the result that accrues to narrators and the audience without revealing even a single part of it. This is technically known as bindu which intensifies curiosity and se- cures suspense and continuity. This first part on the Whole in- troduces to the readers all the important characters and sug- gests the coming events. Nowhere in Sanskrit drama is this so finely introduced as in the present work. The second and third parts, i.e., Narada's conflict with Tumburu and Manikandhara's pilgrimage to several places are considered by some critics as inappropnate and unnecessary. But these arguments are hardly convincing. If they had been ommitted as these critics advocate, there would have been no cause for Narada's regular visits to Srikrsna on the one hand, and Kalabhasin would not have been so easily duped by Manistambha on the other. Besides, there are other considera- tions also which need not be discussed in this context.

Stuthes in Kalapurnodayam

Coming to the fourth, the story of Salina and Sugatri is not brought in and narrated by Sumukhasatti to Kalabhasinı because of three reasons. Firstly, the tension of feelings so far roused in the minds of readers will be shattered. That is, Karuna which is the rasa in that context will be nullified by the digression into new avenues resulting in akandaccheda.192 secondly Manikandhara will be left with no means to express his sincere belief in Kalabhasini's explanation. Thirdly, the element of sur- prise will lose much of its intensity if the story of Sugatri and Salina and their recognition and reconciliation are separated. As a matter of fact, such separation will not be helpful to Manstambha and Sumukhäsatti to recognise each other. If the incidents, on the other hand, are transferred in toto to the earlier part, the whole story will have to be something quite different from what it is. In that case it will be a demand on the poet to wrte according to the taste and fancy of other individuals-a de- mand ethically immoral, aesthetically ugly and politically totalı- 163 tarian. Why does not the poet commence the comedy of erros proper with the conflict between Nalakubara and his counterpart, and end it with Rambha's curse on Maya Rambha? It is true that the comic element will not suffer in the least by the transposition. The other changes to be effected are also practically nil. Just when Kalabhasini cries for protection, Nalakubara himself may be made to appear on the scene and meet Maya Rambha first and Maya Nalakubara later which will result in the conflict. So far it is good and probable. But the trouble comes in distinguishing the real Nalakubara from the impostor. How can Maya Rambha be expected to tdo it? She has never had before any contact with Nalakubara which can provide a clue to his identification. Nor can Nalakubara convincingly prove his own identity to a com- plete stranger. Even granting that he or she can overcome this obstacle by some way or other, the transposition is quite unaesthetic because the character of Kalabhasini suffers terri- bly. In the latter case she will have to spend some time at least with real Nalakubara. This is not wanted by the story. Secondly G. V. Ensnna Rao

such a behaviour on her part will destroy all our sympathy for her and defeat the purpose of the poet which is to present the psychological workings of a particular kind of soul in a particular environment. The reasons for making Sarasvati-Caturmukha Krida the seventh part instead of relegating it to some other part of the story are not very difficult to find. If it is narrated after the birth of Kalāpurna, the story of Svabhāva, the episode of Salyasura and the other parts, Alaghuvrata will be presented as meeting his sons and wives. Besides, he will be seen as rolling in rches thereby contradicting the boon of Caturmukha. That means he will be shown as enjoying all the fruits ordained by Brahma even before hearing the story of Kalaprna. Secondly, if the dalliance of Sarasvati and Caturmukha is not given at the head of the above-mentioned parts, the element of wonder and suspense will

164 be lost and the story will become unspeakably tiresome. Hence this episode is given this particular place in the story. The next three parts, i. e., the birth of Kalapurna, the story of Svabhava and the epidode of Salyasura and Abhinavakaumudı are arranged strictly in accordance with the laws of flash-back technique whose sole am is to maintain curiosity and interest. Why the tale of Alaghuvrata follows these parts and does not succeed the marriage of Madhuralālasa, the conquest of Kalapuma and the story of Satvadätman is evident on its very face. Its postponement requires a cause to be invented. Such an inven- tion will make the story unnecessarily complicated, without add- ing any new interest. Nor such a thing will serve any purpose. The last four parts which comprise the marriage of Madhuralalasa, the conquest of Kalapurna, the story of Satvadatman and the discussion between Laksmi and Nārāyana are intimately connected with each other. Critics headed by Dr.C.R. Reddy have censured the poet for bringing the marriage and the expedition of conquest of Kalapurna and Lakshmi Nārayana-Samvada into the story. Their arguments are that they have already been suggested in the episode of Sarasvati and Stuces in Kalamumodoyam

Caturmukha, and that by describing them once more in an elaborate manner no purpose is served except making them tedious and flabby. If these arguments are valid, of course they are not, the tale of Alaghuvrata should have been immediately followed by the story of Satvadatman. Even this, as has been pointed out, is not advocated by them. Omission of the story of Satvadatman makes the work incomplete and defective. Hence, the question where the sotry of Satvadatman should be inserted depends on the importance of the remaining three episodes, the marnage, the conquest and the Lakshmi-Nārayana-Samvada. If the latter are important and should find a place in the body of the Kalāpūrnodayam, it is natural for the story of Satvadatman to come after the expedition of conquest. That is the only way of maintaining the interest of the readers and of creating suspense. It may be asked why this cannot be narrated at the very end of the poem. Such an arrangement, it may be argued, will augment suspense all the more. This is not followed because of two rea- 165

sons. Firstly, the Lakshmi-Narayana-Samvada is known by the hero and the heroine with the help of the manihara. Without seeking an answer for the immediate question of Satvadatman's past history they well seek after something which does not con- cern them immediately. For such a thing there must be a cause, and that is lacking. Secondly, it is a custom with all the ancient Indian writers to close their works with benediction. There is an injunction from Patanjali that a work must have an auspicious beginning, middle and end. What can be more auspicious than ending the poem with the Lakshmi-Narayana-Samvada. Hence the poem closes with it. Now one has to face the question whether the marriage, expedition of conquest and the Lakshmi-Narayana-Samvada are important and intemally needed. Critics have mentioned that they are superfluous and not necessary to the plot. With the foregoing survey in view, can one fall in line with these critics? Can one say that the poet who has given such a close-knit story in the preceding twelve parts has failed in the last three inci- G. V. Knsnna Rao

dents? Can one attribute mefficiency and lack of creative faculty to one who has provided the readers with such a gallery of beau- tiful characters, significant background and above all nama vakrata which plays such an important role in the inner events of the story? If one should admit that the poet's genus has faled him in this part, he must account for it. As long as this is not explained, his conscience cannot remain at rest In this context Dr.C.R. Reddy says that the poet has become a victim to alamkara sastra in the later parts of the poem. Why should he commit the blunder at the fag end? So one must beg to differ with the critics on their judgment that the last three episodes are unwarranted and superfluous. Against this view it may be argued in this way. It is true that the first twelve parts of the story are closely knit and form a coherent part. But that does not positively prove that the poet has not failed in the last three episodes. Is there any rule that a man who has succeeded on ninety-nine occasions 166 should not fail on the hundredth occasion? At the most what one can say is that the probability of success at the hundredth time cannot be completely denied. That is exactly what is being hinted Because the poet has given such beautiful parts and characters significant background and nama vakrata, he may have some object in view, some purpose to be served, some internal neces- sity to be satisfied. What that object is, one has to investigate and explain. So judgment on this issue may be deferred in the meanwhile.

THE BEAUTIES OF PRESENTATION

Now Surana's methods of presentaton and the beauties therein can be taken up for examination It is well known that there are altogether three methods of presentation, firstly. the dramatic method, secondly, the narrative method and thirdly, an admixture of these two. Again each one may adopt the flash- back technique or the common techmque of proceeding from the beginning to the end. None of these methods in nself is beauti- ful. People may like one method better than the others just as some prefer a certain colour to others Ths Hlang or preference Stres in Kalapumedauam

is more a question of temperament or personal predilection tnan one of beauty. If one is to attribute beauty to the method itself, he has to consider that some literary forms are more beautiful than others. As a matter of fact this view is upheld by some lterary critics like Vämana193 when he says that plays are better than other forms of creative literature. The reason he advances Is also rather strange. In his opinion the play (rūpaka), as it contains all the excellences, is attractive like a painted cloth. With due respect to Vamana this question may be put forth. Is the reason self-evident? Is there any rationale in that the Abhıjnanasākuntala is more beautiful than the Kumarasambhava simply because the former is a play and the latter a Mahakavya? Another example which brings out the fallacy more clearly may be provided. If Vämana's judgment is right, the Prabodhacandrodayam of Krsna Misra must be more beautiful than the Kumarasambhavam, or the Pratima of Bhasa than the Rämayana. One may be accused of hiding the real reason pro- 167 vided by Vämäna for the supenorty of a play over other literary forms. Let that also be considered He says that a play is supe- nor to others, because it is the source from which other forms emerge and because all the other literary poems are the result of the ten kinds of play. Now, is this too valid? Simply because one happens to be a father or mother, can anybody say that he or she is invarably superior or better than his or her progeny? It may be argued that the main reason according to Vamana for consid- ering the play to be superior to other literary forms is in its hav- ing all the excellences, namely, the fourfold abhinaya. This also is untenable because aesthetic experience or rasa as supported by Abhinavagupta and others is not an effect, and so, aesthetic expenence is neither intensified nor lessened directly by the vari- ety of abhinayas. When this point is not conceded, the conse- quences willl be appalling. There will be no necessity for plural- ity in fine arts. Nor can other literary forms or fine arts ever be expected to reach the heights of the play. This is exactly the reason why perhaps one of the greatest aestheticians of the mod- emn age, Corce, says :- C v Ansnna Rao

"Granted different arts, distinct and limited, the questions were asked: Which is the most powerful? Do we not obtain more powerful effect by uniting several ? We know nothing of this: We know only, in each individual case that certain artistic given intuitions have need of definite physical needs for their repro- duction, and that other artistic intuitions have need of other physi- cal means. We can obtain the effect of certain dramas by simply reading them; others need declamation and scenic display: Some artistic intutions, for their full extrensication, need works, song, musical instruments, colours, statuary, architecture, actors; while others are beautiful and complete in a single delicate sweep of a pen, or with few strokes of the pencil. But, it is false to suppose that declamation and scenic effects, and all the other things we have mentioned together, are more powerful than simply read- ing, or than the simple stroke with the pen and with the pencil; because each of these facts or groups of facts has, so to say, a 168 different object, and the power of the different means employed cannot be compared when the objects are different."194 Hence neither beauty nor superiority can be validly attrib- uted to the mere method of presentation. If any preference is shown in this respect, it reveals merely the personal predilection of the critic and not anything concerned with beauty proper. Having the preceding conclusion in view, how can any one attribute beauties to the methods adopted by the poet without contradicting himself ?. It is true that beauty is not confined to any particular method when taken by itself. But when a poet has many methods at his disposal to present a theme, and when he selects only one at one place, and another at another place, he is definitely showing certain preferences. These preferences in the case of great poets cannot be arbitrary and temperamental; on the other hand, these will be deliberately chosen in view of the aesthetic expenence. Threfore, to talk of beauties in the methods of presentation in a poem when there is ample choice, is neither selfcontradictory nor irrational. Now, what are these beauties one comes across in the Kalāpūrnődayam? Stumes m Kalapurnodayam

Pingalı Surana begins his poem with the dramatic presen- tatıon of Narada, Manıkandhara, Nalakubara, Rambha and Kalabhäsini. Of course as a prelude to this he gives a description of Dvaraka and Kalabhasını in the manner of dramatists giving stage directions necessary for the creation of proper atmosphere. Why does he follow this method instead of resorting to direct narration? The reasons are firstly, almost all the important char- acters can be presented immediately thereby creating immense interest for the readers; secondly, the bulk of the poem well be reduced to the minimum, and thirdly, the bija can be brought to the forefront immediately thereby rousing cunosity and creating suspense in the minds of readers. The next phase of the story, i.e., Narada's meeting with Krsna. his cultivation of music in the harem and his boon to Kalabhāsıni, is presented by the third method. That means some portions are narrated and others dramatised. This has resulted in bridging the gulf of four years and in concentrating on the 169 important events by shutting out all the unnecessary details. The succeeding phase begins with a scene in the garden of Kalabhāsıni when Manistambha appears all of a sudden. No stage drections regarding the attire and appearance of a character can be more crisp and pointed than the following lines'-

ஜம்ன் மப்து்விலஸ் சக்வ்ரி் வவ்லடரகன்வலல்

Through the conversation of these two characters one comes to know the conflict of Narada with Tumburu, the former's advice to Manikandhara who afterwards goes on a pilgrimage and finally G. V. Knshna Rao

his (Manikandhara's) penance in the forest. These are all past events which are being now recounted by the siddha to the hero- ine. This flash-back technique is utilised for two definite pur- poses: firstly, this helps to impart to the reader all the necessary information required to follow the story without taxing his pa- tience; secondly, it occasions surprise in the reader who will be- come eager to know how this new character who will become eager to learn all these things and in what way he is going to have a part in the story. The elaborate description of Narada's conflict with Tunburu on the one hand, and the pilgrimage of Manikandhara on Ithe other, may appear to be undramatic in form. But it cannot be helped. The poet who is alive to this handicap gets the former narrated by the siddha in the form of a monologue. The second is deliberately undertaken by Manistambha so as to convince Kalabhasini of his spirtual bent of mind. 170 The fourth part of the story, i.e., Manikandhara becoming victim to physical lust, is directly taken by the poet for narra- ion. Why should the poet introduce a sudden change in the method of presentation? Why has he not made Manstambha narrate this too along with the previous incidents? The reasons are quite obvious. The siddha has already talked long enough to blunt the edge of surprise. Secondly, a true siddha cannot be expected to indulge in the description of amorous deeds. Had he done this, throwing away this decency to the winds, Kalabhasini would have immediately suspected his horrible intention. One may take objection to the second reason pointing out that the siddha has withont the least hesitation described the union and that he has given out the secret words exchanged between Manikandhara and Rambha. In support of this argument he may even quote the following lines :-

3லி8மதீத கதி. 196 Studies in Kalapurnodayam

197

But this is beside the point, because the siddha does not narrate these events of his own accord. After being requested more than once, he reveals these things taking every care to show his de- tachment at every step. Let the words of the siddha speak in his behalf :-

171

The underlined words suggest clearly his detachment, his disap- proval of Manikandhra's deportment and self-confidence in his moral superiority. Therefore this part cannot be narrated through the medium of Manistambha. It may be true that the siddha is not the appropriate character to narrate this episode in detail manifesting srgara rasa, pure and simple. Nevertheless he can, it may be argued, narrate the event suggestvely without his de- tachment being impaired in the least. This argument has no grounds because such a narration under these limitations will be G V. Knshna Rao

completely devoid of that particular rasa twhich can be mani- fested by those incidents. Besides, the temperament and char- acter of the siddha will gain greater importance than that of the hero proper. Hence the poet seems to have taken the strings of the story into his own hands. In the succeeding part the poet once again reverts to the dramatic method which gives not only relief but also a concrete pıcture of Kalabhäsını enquiring after Manikandhara's penance and the whereabouts of Nalakubara, and of Manistambha pre- paring the ground to encourage her to follow him to the forest. The sixth part consisting of the travel and arrval of Manistambha and Kalabhāsin at the temple, the former's attempt to sacrifice her to Mrgendravahana resulting in their terrible fall on a flowery bed and the meeting of Sumukhāsattı, Kalabhasini, Manıstambha and Manikandhara, is presented by the narrative method. This device has enabled the poet to bring in so many incidents in such 172 rapidity that one almost forgets even to breathe. The tempo thus gained and the economy of space thereby effected so compete with each other that it cannot be said which gains the upper hand. Next comes the 'comedy of errors' presented through Manistambha. In so far as it is told by the siddha, it is a narra- tive, but from the mode of presentation it is highly dramatic. The method provides relief after the previous part and helps to make the present episode concrete and picturesque. The real question in this context is, why has the poet selected Manstambha alone and not Kalabhäsini or Manikandhara to present this comedy? As a matter of fact the poet himself could have directly presented it in the form of a drama. There are weighty reasons for not following such a course. Had the poet selected Kalabhasin to present this story, one would not have the full-fledged comedy because, firstly, she did not know anything about the conflict between Nalakubara and his counterpart, and secondly, her quar- rels with Rambha couldl not be a comedy from her standlpoint. If that cannot be a comedy, can it not at least be a tragedy? And what objection is there to turning it into the latter? There are Stuches in Kalapurnodayam

altogether two considerations: firstly, it is necessary to provide the reader with a proper perspective of the situation as well as characterisaion, and secondly, proper background or contrast is to be supplied for the coming tragedy so that it may gain more in intensity. The same considerations hold good for not selecting Manıkandhara also as the agent to present this comedy. Of course there is this difference: while Kalabhäsini is present inthe first part of the comedy, Manikandhara participates in the whole play. Above all these, the element of wonder and surprise would have been lost thereby making the latter portion dealing with identifi- cation monstrously dry and drab if the poet had presented it ei- ther through Kalabhasini or Manikandhara. As for the last ques- tion, why the poet himself has not directly presented it, the rea- sons are not too difficult to grasp. Were the poet to undertake the presentation of the 'comedy of errors,' he would have to nar- rate the part also relating to the identification of Sumukhāsatti, Manıstambha, Māya Rambha and Maya Nalakubara with Sugatri, 173 Sālina, Kalabhașıni and Manikandhara. In that case the whole contents of the third and fourth cantos will have to be presented by the narrative which by reason of its unwieldy length will grow slow and torpid. Moreover, such a presentation will not be con- ducive to minimising the psychic distance between the reader and the characters to be presented. In other words, such a nar- rative method will not help the reader to identify himself with the characters. In view of all these points, it seems, the poet has presented the 'comedy of errors' through Manistambha and has given a work that is superb and unique. The succeeding part which is a simple revelation from the beginning to the end, is given through the baby Madhuralālasa. The method generally followed in the fifth and sixth cantos is narrative with intermittent questions posed by the other charac- ters. There is no question of adopting the dramatic method here because so many incidents taking place in different worlds at different times are to be brought together within a very short compass. For example, the episode of Sarasvati and Caturmukha G. V. Knsnna Rao

takes place in the world of Brahma, while the birth of Kalapurna, the episodes of Salyasura and Yajnasarman take place in the world of human beings at different times. Such episodes natu- rally canot be summed up in one or two scenes or acts. As a matter of fact rules of drama do not permit it.199 Hence the poet has followed the narrative method. Now one has to answer why he has selected the baby to narrate these events and not some other character. It is well known that celestial beings are pre- cluded from narrating the story of Kalapurna by Brahma's words. For mortals it is a closed book and one cannot know it unless he is aided by the manihara. Suppose the goddess, Mrgendravāhana, had instructed Alaghuvrata how to wear the manihara and know the story of Kalapurna. It would not have helped him in any way, because, in that case also Pratimagama etc. would have lacked the means to recognise their father. Instead of cre- 174 ating another event leading to this reconciliation, the poet makes the goddess fling Alaghuvrata into the court of Kalāpūrna and thus achieves compactness and intencity of emotions. Even if Alaghuvrata were made to narrate all the relevant events in the king's court with the help of Manihara, Kalapurna, Prathamāgama and others would not have believed him. They would have on the contrary grounds for suspicion and foul play. The same thing would heve happened if any one of the courtiers or officials were to narrate them. Supposing the kıng Kaläpurna got the Manihara enlarged and then wore it, he would not have told every detailed that is wanted because such a revelation would not in confirmity with his character. Thus Alaghuvrata, Kalapurna and the cortiers have disqualified themselves to be the narrators. There is one more point to be cognised in this context. The events to be re- vealed are intimately connected with the dalliance of Sarasvati and Caturmuka, and to describe such a dalliance or sexual un- ion of devas is considered to be a great fault and hence strictly forbıdden by the alamkarikas. So far, reasons for not selecting other characters than the baby, Madhuralalasa, alone are given.

Studies in Kalapurnodayam

Now, it may be examined why the baby, Madhuralālasa has been assigned this role. Because she is a baby, she cannot be suspected of any motives in narrating the events. Secondly, the Manihara to manifest its supernatural powers to her does not require any enalargement or lapse of time. Thirdly, recounting of Sarasvatı-Chaturmukha-Krida through her will not involve the narration in the alankārikadosa mentioned before. Fourthly, by way of narrating the events the baby will describe the personal history of her would-be -husband. This means she will behave in a manner that is expected of a parama patwvrata and thus will make Brahma's words effective.200 Lastly, the events to be nar- rated are mainly of wonder and surprise. To get them narrated by a merel baby will greatly enhance their effect. Hence this selection. The theme except for the story of Satvadatman and the dialogue of Laksmı and Narayana, is presented by direct narra- tion. Here and there, there may be very brief scenes, but they do 175

not matter much. Why the poet relies on this method is not at all difficult to understand. No amount of ingenuity can help to drama- tise the growth of the baby into a beautiful maiden. Much less do the expeditions of conquest lend themselves to this method. This does not mean that it is absolutely impossible. There are drama- tists like Eugene O'Neill who have thrown to the winds all the rules advocated by the ancient crtics on dramaturgy and yet have succeeded. What is implied here is that the dramatic method cannot be easily adopted. The reason why the last two episodes are narrated by Madhuralalasa is evident and needs no further elucidation. The foregoing survey thus reveals how the poet has made the best of all the methods of presentation taking every care to avoid monotony, to provide contrast and to bestow the highest significance or suggestivity on the narrator. How many poets can claim this credit?

G. V Knsnna Rao