1. The Indian Stage Vol 3 - Hemendranath Das Gupta. 1944

THE INDIAN STAGE

Vol. III

GIRISH CENTENARY EDITION

By

HEMENDRA NATH DAS GUPTA

First Girish Lecturer, Calcutta University,

Author of Bankim Chandra,

Deshbandhu C. R. Das,

Girish Chandra,

Girish Protiva

&c.

1944

Published

by

M.

K.

Das

Gupta

B.A.

124/5B,

Russa

Road,

Kalighat,

Calcutta

Printed

by

K.

V.

Apparow

at

Metropolitan

Printing

&

Publishing

House

Ltd.,

90,

Lower

Circular

Road,

Calcutta

Dedicated

to

Sri:

Jadu

Nath

The

famous

litterateur

Late

Devendra

Nath

Bose

Cousin

of

the

Great

Dramatist

Girish

Chandra

Ghose

Who

first

suggested

to

me

the

idea

of

writing

a

regular

History

of

the

Bengali

Stage.

Author

FOREWORD

Stage, at one time in Bengal, was a very useful institution for mass-education and for inspiring the people with noble and lofty ideals, though it now seems to have lost its former glory. Records of the achievements of the great pioneers in this who had devoted their lives for the furtherance of its cause constitute a vital chapter in our national history. That the subject is of general interest is evidenced by the fact that the famous Standard Literature Co., has undertaken to push the sale of the History of the Indian Stage.

For the publication and compilation of these volumes however, if I am to express my sincere, grateful thanks to any person, it is to Mr. Sachchidananda Bhattacharjee, one of the famous business-magnets of the present time. Most people know Mr. Bhattacherjee only as a business-man, but those who had the privilege of coming in close touch with him know what a rich and philanthropic heart he possesses. Endowed with a keen philosophical bent of mind and an acutely logical intellect, he is devoting his valuable time in devising means and measures from Shastras for uplifting the economic and moral condition not only of his countrymen, but also of the whole world. But for the invaluable help of this remarkable man, none of my books since 1933 would have seen the light of the day. May he live long to the delight and great benefit of his countrymen !

Next, I am duty-bound to express my gratefulness to some gentlemen of position for their encouragement and ungrudging help. Of them, I should first mention the name of the famous journalist Mr. W. C. Wordsworth, late Director, Public Instruction, Bengal, who took the trouble of

procuring for me some old files of the Statesman from its Delhi office. Such goodness and

courtesy are quite rare. I ought to thank Mr. R. G. Stephen, Managing Director, and Mr. A. N.

Banerjee, Manager of the Standard Literature Co. for urging me to proceed with my work. Next my

thanks are due to Mr. Nalini Ranjan Sarkar, a worthy son of India who always takes a lively

interest in my literary works.

For the “Marathi Theatre”, I am deeply indebted to Mr. V. B. Chitale, who has taken great pains to

collect all facts for me especially from Marathi Natyakala and Natya Wangmoy. My thanks also

are due to Dr. S. P. Agarkar, M.A., Ph. D., for the interest he has taken in this history.

My research work has been pursued mostly at the Imperial Library since 1918, when Dr. Van

Manen, who has kindly written a masterly introduction to my first volume, was the librarian and I am

thankful for the interest that the library authorities always take in my works.

But for the co-operation, help and assistance given to me by my esteemed colleagues Messrs. A. B.

Chatterjee, M.A., F.R.E.S., and S. N. Sen, B.Com., this book could hardly be published.

I am grateful to the authorities and staff of the Metropolitan Printing & Publishing House,

Ltd., especially to Mr. K. V. Appa Row, B.A., B.L., who is also helping me for the Madrasi Theatre.

Hemendra Nath Das Gupta.

124/5B, Russa Road,

Calcutta,

The 31st January, 1944.

CONTENTS

Girish Chandra

The Man and the Moment

Chapter I ( pp. 1—36 )

National Theatre at 6, Beadon Street—1877-1883.

Gloom after Dramatic Performances Act. Girish starts National Theatre with Kedar Choudhury—Megnadbadh performance, Battle of Plassey, Beesh Briksha, Durgesh Nandini, N. T. at Dacca, Protáp Jahuri purchased N. T. Hamir (1881) Mayataru, Mohini Protima, Madhabi Kankan, Ananda Raho, then Pouranik dramas—Rabonbadh, Sitar Banobash, Abhimonyubadh, Pandober Ajnatabash.

Chapter II ( pp. 37—85 )

Star Theatre ( at 68, Beadon Street )

Gurumukh Ray proprietor—Dakshajanjna, Dhruba, Nala Damayanti, Middle-class-men proprietors—Chaitanya Lila Col. Olcott, Ramkrishna Dev, Bibaha Bibhrat, Lord Dufferin, Buddhá, Bilwamangal, Theatre-house sold to Gopal Seal, Star at Dacca, National Theatre performs Anandamath—Girish at Emerald, Purna Chandra & Bishad.

Chapter III ( pp. 86—112 )

Star Theatre at Hati Bagan

Girish's Nashiram, Sarala, Girish at Star, Profulia, Statesman's reviews, Haranidhi, death of Bel Babu, of Kironbala, Chauda, Girish leaves Star, suits at High Court, City Theatre.

ii

Chapter IV ( pp.112–140 )

Minerva Theatre ( at 6, Bēadon Street )

Girish starts with Nagēn Mukerjee as lessee, Macbeth, Mukulmunjara, Abu Hossien, Jana, Karametibai, Profulla,

Girish leaves Minerva and joins Star.

Chapter V ( pp. 141–150 )

Girish at Star Theatre

Chandrasekhar, Kalapahar, Mayabashan Religious Unity and India's only solution.

Chapter VI ( pp. 151–174 )

Other Theatres

Beena Theatre, Emerald Theatre Mustafi leaves Minerva for Emerald. Ardhendu, Nilmadhab Chakraborty,

Bengal Theatre, City at Emerald.

Chapter VII ( pp. 175–186 )

Theatre at Gujrat

Parijat Monjari of Madana, Ramchandra, Premanonda, Akhyans, Bhabaïs, Ranchhod Bhai, first social tragedy Parsees' attempts, Garabi, Dholsaji, Nanalal, K. M.

Munshi, Chandravadan Mehta, author's ideals of National Stage, Girish Parishad.

Chapter VIII ( pp. 187–232 )

Marathi Theatre

Harikatha, Lalit, Tamasha and Ramjoshi Sangli stage 1843 Vishnudas Bhabe, Kirloskar, Sakuntala, Trilo-kekar, Kalhatkar, Dewal, Khare, Balgandarva, Kelkar,

Films.

Chapter IX ( pp. 233 )

Sanskrit Dramas

Chapter X ( pp. 234 )

Classic Theatre—Hariraj, Alibaba, Girish at Classic Pandava Gorava, Mohendra Bose, Tincowri.

Kirat

Elrwin

1917

INDIAN STAGE

Vol. III

OR

Girish Chandra—The Man and the Moment

CHAPTER I

NATIONAL THEATRE (1877-1883)

In the preceding volume of the Indian Stage, we have dealt with the Dramatic Performances Act passed in 1876, which still now stands unrepealed in the Statute Book, menacing like Damocle's sword that might at any moment fall upon the head of its intended victim. It not only produced at the time a good deal of panic among all who were closely connected with the Stage but it threatened to prove to be the very grave of the Bengali Theatre. At this critical moment came forward, however, a man who by his rare genius, wonderful power of organisation, coupled with giant's energy for work, saved

not only the Bengali Drama from a premature grave, but transformed also the Theatre to the

highest pinnacle of dramatic perfection. One can not fail to be struck with deep feelings of admira-

tion and wonder,- when he thinks of the limitations and restraints under which the great revivor had to

work, how greatly handicapped he was at every step in achieving his great purpose, how incessantly he

suffered from men, money and materials for effect-

ing his work and how yet at the end by his ceaseless 'tapasya' he triumphed over all difficulties, trans-

formed the Play-House from a mere rendezvous of pleasure into a respectable institution for moral and

cultural education of the people and raised the Bengali Drama from its early crude stage to the

highest plane of dramatic art ! The monumental achievement of this great man who is not only re-

cognized as the greatest dramatist of Bengal but also one of the greatest dramatists of the world, we

propose to deal with, in this volume.

Science has not yet succeeded in accounting for the birth of a genius. Why a Plato or Sankara, a

Kalidasa or Shakespeare, a Bankim Chandra or Chittaranjan, is born at a particular time and in

particular circumstances and what are the determin-

ing factors of a genius, Science is unable to give any answer. Yet Nature has its course and the right

man comes at the right moment. So did Girish

come forward with his genius at the time of the sorest need of the country.

It has been said of Shakespeare, “He was not a lordly poet who stooped to the stage and dramatised his song, he was bred in the tiring room and on the boards ; he was an actor before he was a dramatist,” We shall show how these lines apply in all force to Girish as well.

Now to resume the thread of our narration from the preceding second volume—

After the Surendra Binodini prosecution in 1876 which was soon followed by the Act, the National Theatre practically became defunct. Babu Upendra Nath Das, the director and dramatist left for England, all available dramas were exhausted, yet no dramatist was' forthcoming; and above all, the financial condition of the proprietor, Babu Bhaban Mohan Neogi, grew daily from bad to worse.

Mrs. Sukumari Dutt, the famous actress of the National Theatre left the stage, for the time being, as her husband too followed Upen Babu. Binodini left for the Bengal Theatre; and Babu Nagendra Nath Banerji had also to give up theatre for the marriage of his daughters. Babu Ardhendu Shekhar Mustafi with a travelling troupe wandered over different parts of Bengal, showing performances here and there. Babu Amrita Lal Bose, failing to accompany Upen Babu to England, left for Port Blair. Indeed

we donot hear of any performance shown by the

Great National Theatre for a considerable length of

time till Dec. 2, 1876, when with a good deal of

apology for its past irregularities, it opened with a

short opera called ‘Pārijāt Haran’ from the pen of

Atul Krishna Mitra. This was followed by ‘Adarsha

Satee’ of the same author and an absolutely worth-

less opera by Radha Madhab Haldar, which drew

forth Girish’s ridicule, in a poem representing the

disappointed spectators of the Gallery :

‘What a deceptiou have you practised on me,

give me back my eight anna* bit’.

Unable to run the Theatre in its tottering state,

Bhuban Mohan leased out the house to one Krishna-

dhan Mukherji, but its sale was so poor that the

lessee fell into arrears of rent, for which he had to

be sued. This ebbed the life of the Great National

Theatre. At this critical juncture, as if by Divine

dispensation, came forward Girish, who with his

eagle eye, at once found out the weak spot of the

Bengali Theatre. He found that a theatre with an

extravagant proprietor, to whom the theatre was

more a hobby of pleasure than occupation, could

never be regularly run, and the higher purposes of

the stage could not be achieved through him. A

permanent regular theatre was needed for the

country. Girish was thus in search of a business-

• Each gallery ticket was sold at annas eight.

5

like man to be the lessee of the theatre and it took

him some time. In the mean time, Girish with the

help of one Kedar Choudhury, a man of some lite-

rary taste, possessing a small zemindary at Ghate-

swarā ( 24 Pergs. ) took the lease of the theatre

in the name of his brother-in-law Dwaraka Nath

Dev and reopened the “National Theatre”, with

Kedar Nath as its Director, though, of course, Girish

was the life and soul of re-started theatre.

A Rally of Good Artists.

Girish then collected round him all the good

artists he could lay his hand upon. Binodini had

already returned from the Bengal Theatre and hence-

forth became his dearest pupil. Babu Amrita Lal

Mitra, son of a neighbour of Girish--Gopal Babu,

was seen performing an amateur Jātrā and Girish

struk by his sonorous voice and good figure persuaded

him to join the theatre and the latter became henceforth

the most favourite disciple of.Girish. These are the

two main artists, whom Girish used to select in his

dramas, generally as a hero and a heroine. Babu

Ramraton Sanyal, the well-known opera-master

whose talents were amply displayed in “Sati-ki-

Kalonkini”, the three noted Lals--Mohendra Lal

Bose, Motilal Soor and Amrita Lal Mukherjee (Bel

Babu), the famous actress Kshetromoni Devi and

the leading lady Kadambini--all came under his

banner. The troupe was thus complete.

6

For the first time now Girish composed a dramatic piece—“Āgamoni” (lit. the advent or the beginning) and staged it on Oct. 6, 1877. Āgamoni means the coming of Mother Durga during the autumn and the drama of its name too, proved hereafter as the fore-runner of Girish's dramatic compositions. It was dedicated to Kedar Choudhury as affectionate brother and was followed by “Akāl-Bodhon” the offering of worship at the untimely season. Sanyal's songs in both these pieces enchanted every body.

There was practically no drama left at the time and “Meghnadbadh” the immortal epic of the celebrated poet Michael Madhusudan Dutt came to the rescue. It was not a drama but was rendered into a drama by Girish and was staged on Dec. 1, 1877.

A few words about the technique is worth-mentioning. Sometime before Girish took up the piece, “The Bengal Theatre” too about which reference has been made in the second volume, was staging “Meghnadbadh, where practically the part assigned to Rama was left out. Another defect which mortified Girish very much was the prose-style of the actors in rendering the parts. Girish Chandra therefore on the first night of performance of the play, after the curtain was drawn, read a poem composed for the occasion wherein he made an open attack on the incorrect reading of Michael's poetry practised in

the Bengal Theatre. The recitation of blank verse

by the artists here was as perfect as possible. We

shall next see how he made further improvement in

the verse in the dialogues.

In this play Girish was in the dual roles of

Meghnad and Rama. It is very difficult indeed for

man to portray the two divergent characters in the

same play but the proud and heroic character of the

hero Meghnad in full contrast to the meekness of

Rama was fully demonstrated in true colours by

Girish in so masterly a way that it became the talk

of the day every where.

"Meghnadbadb" though immortal as a great epic,

labours under this particular drawback that the

character of the great national hero has been greatly

lowered from the original ideal. Rama has been

made weak and irresolute, rather effiminate to a

degree, but Girish's rendering of the part demons-

trated a great improvement on the conception of

Madhusudan himself. When Nrimundamalini, Pro-

mila's Sakhi or companion, challenges Rama to a

dual, Girish as Rama makes a spirited reply—

"Janam Rāmer Ramā

Raghurāj kule Bīreśwar !"

and when Bibhishana comes in a hurry and tells

him—

"Oh Lord, please come out and witness Promila's

prowess, this band of heroines is formidable like

Chāmunda, the enemy of the Raktabijas,

Rama as if in jest smiles a little and answers

Bibhisana thus—

Dūter ākriti dekhi darinu hridaye

Rakshobara juddhāsadh tejinu tokhoni

"O best of the Rakshas, I was so alarmed even

by the sight of the emissary, that I gave up then

and there all my desire for battle".

Such exquisite was Girish's histrionic art ! But,

says Gīrish Chandra, "Ram's character has been,

on several occasions so distorted from the original

high ideal, by Michael, that it is difficult with any

wit of an artist, however powerful, to reconcile it."

The part of the above "Nrimundamālini" was

played by Khetromoni Devi who was evenly match-

ed with Rama, and was a worthy attendant of Pro-

mila—the heroine—represented by Binodini who

in this and seven other parts acted by her, did full

credit to herself.

The other parts were distributed as follows—

Lakṣman ... Kedar Nath Chowdhury

Rāvana ... Amritalal Mitra.

Bibhiṣana and Mahādev Matilal Sur.

Sugrīb, Marīch, Saran ... Atul Chandra Mitra (Bedaul).

Hanumān ... Jadunath Bhattacharjee.

Indra ... Ashutosh Banerjee.

Kārtic and Dūt ... Amritalal Mukherjee (Bel Babu)

Madan ... Ramtaron Sanyal.

Mandodarī ... Kadambini.

Chitrāñgadā and Māyā ... Laksimoni Dasi.

Śachī ... Basanta Kumari.

Bāsantī ... Kusum Kumari (Khońra.)

Promilā ... Binodini.

Nṛmundamālinī ... Khetromoni.

As we said before, Girish was at his best here.

As in Neemchand he proved himself to be the best serio-comic actor, in Bheem Singh and Pasupati as the greatest tragic actor, so in the representation of the contradictory dual roles of Rama and Megha-nād, he was justly recognised as one of the greatest actors of the world.

It is said and Babu Akshoy Chandra Sarkar was heard to repeat that on one occasion when Girish as Rama bade adieu to Lakshman, the audience, specially the ladies were so much struck with grief that they forgot their position, removed the pardah (now no more) and began to gaze upon the two brothers only to be roused to the sense of their situation when that scene was shifted.

For the information of our readers we quote below from the great litterateur, Akshoy Chandra Sarkar's Sādhāraṇī where Babu Indra Nath Banerjee (another famous writer) thus wrote about the performance on a later occasion :

"We have not enjoyed for a long time the treat we had on the 2nd February last when we saw a

10

performance of Meghnādbadh. The dual roles

Rama and Meghnad were taken by Girish

Chandra Ghosh, the head of the party. One

man in representing two opposite characters

would usually look unnatural, but Girish

Chandra by his dramatic genius and extraordi-

nary powers made us forget that defect, and

at the rendering of Rama's part our eyes were

now and again drenched with tears. When

Lakshman entered the place of worship, we

were enchanted at the dignified appearance

worthy of Meghnad but immediately when

Meghnad pulled up himself with eyes flaming

with anger and expanded his chest to meet

Lakshman in a duel, then Girish exhibited his

highest histrionic skill. It was wonderful to a

degree. We were, in fact, greatly amazed at

that. We have read of Garrick, the famous

actor of England in books, but we can not

conceive that any Garrick can show greater

skill than Girish of Bengal. Let Girish live

long and win his fame by contributing to our

joy. Girish is an ornament of Bengal.*

Following Meghnādbadh, Girish next rendered

Nabin Chandra's Battle of Plassey into drama in

the same month. Here, too, Girish's part as Clive

was superb and movements of his body quite befitting

the hero of Plassey. Battle of Plassey had however

nothing of a drama in it. There is no situation

nor have characters been developed. It is only

• "Sādhāranī" 10th Feb. 1878.

those

whose

recitation

for

the

particular

part

is

captivaiting,

can

carry

the

day.

But

of

Girish

thus

does

the

contemporairy

paper

write

:

"The

actors

are

all

good

readers—Clive's

recita-

tion

and

the

delivery

were

the

best.

He

is

also

expert

in

timely

postures

and

movements."

(

Sādhā-

raṇī

January

21,

1878).

Thus,

though

National

Theatre

began

to

earn

reputation,

Girish

Chandra

at

the

earnest

request

of

his

brother,

Atul

Krishna

Ghose,

who

apprehended

that

like

other

lessees,

they

too

will

be

ruined

by

the

theatre,

surrendered

the

lease

in

favour

of

Babu

Kedar

Chaudhury.

Since

then

Girish

all

along

managed

and

conducted

theatres,

but

himself

never

had

any

connection

as

a

proprietor.

In

addition

to

the

previous

performances

Girish

also

rendered

Dinobondhu's

story

Jamāloye

Jībanta

Mānuṣ

into

an

interesting

farce.

In

January

26,

1878,

an

opera

Ānanda

Milan

(Happy

Re-union)

was

played

for

the

benifit

of

Babu

Abinash

Kar

(Mr.

Rogue)

but

it

did

not

play

well.

Girish's

next

opera—Dolelila

(significance

of

Holi)

on

the

4th

March

also

met

the

same

fate.

Babu

Bankim

Chandra

Chatterjee

was

then

in

the

meridian

of

his

glory

and

he

was,

in

fact,

the

literary

dictator

of

his

time

;

hence,

as

could

be

naturally

expected,

the

Bengali

Stage

12

also came under his powerful literary sway, and this period of the Bengali theatre may justly be termed as "Bankim Era" as we-have formerly seen that of Madhusudon and Dinabandhu.

Girish now rendered Biṣabṛkha ( the poison-tree) into a drama and had it staged on the 27th April, 1878, with a powerful cast which was as follows :

Nagendranath ... Girish Chandra.

Devendranath ... Ramtaran Sanyal.

Śrīś ... Mohendra Bose.

Sūrjyamukhi ... Kadambini.

Kunda ... Binodini.

Kamalmoni ... Kamala.

Hīrā ... Narayani.

Biṣabṛkha was very successful and Girish represented fully the various feelings in Nagendranath. Kunda, too, was excellent as also all the parts. "Bengal Theatre" did not also sit idle but took up the newly published book of Bankim—Chandrasekhar and Biharilal, Haridas, Sarat Chandra, Bonobiharini and Elokeshi respectively appeared in the roles of Chandrasekhar, Protap, Lawrence Foster, Dalani and Kulshom. It was not successful, but as they were very popular with ‘Durgesnandini’ where Sarat Chandra, expert in riding, appeared as Jagat Shingha on horse back, Girish was advised to render this novel into a drama and beat down the Bengal Theatre. He got it up and put on boards on the

22nd June, 1878 but Kedar Babu and Kiron Babu

appearing in the rôles of Jagat Singha and Osman

could not stand competition with Sarat Ghose and

Haridas Das of the Bengal. Girish then himself

took up the rôle of Jagat Singha and put Mohendra

Bose in that of Oshman. In everything except

as a rider on horse back on the stage, he stood

successfully against the rival party. The audience,

however, were disappointed not to see him on

horse back. Girish, too, admitted the superior

demeanour of a prince in Sarat Babu, hailing, as he

did, fromthe wealthy and aristocratic family of

Bengal. Binodini's Ayesha was also superb, and

the other parts were as follows :-

Katalu Khan ... Mati Sur.

Bidyadiggaj ... Bedoul Atul.

Rahim Sheikh ... Bel Babu.

Bimala ... Kadambini.

Āshmani ... Laksminoni.

Owing however to an accident, his feet having

slipped on the stage on the rest of Khichuri left by

Bidyadiggaj, Girish had a fracture in his left elbow

which kept him confined for three months. Thus

the National Theatre of Babu Kedar Nath Chou-

dhury was broken up.

We shall give here an instance as to the method

of Girish Chandra's coaching the artists from the

account given by Srimotee Binodini Dasi :-

"Girish Chandra used to give me instruction

14

with much care and affection. His method of teaching was quite novel. First, he used to give the

significance of the particular part, then we were asked to commit it to memory ; after that at leisure

he would train me up as time passed on. Babu Amritalal Mitra and Amritalal Bose, too, used to

come to our house and used to tell me about the writings of Shakespeare, Milton, Byron, Pope and

stories about the celebrated actresses of the various English schools.

"Sometimes Girish Babu used to explain passages from different English dramas and poems and

gave me lessons about the movements of the body and different postures. On account of such careful

training I began to apply myself to histrionic culture What I had learnt bofore was like a parrot,

but hence-forth I could comprehend the part easily. I became anxious to see the acting of every English

actress that came to Calcutta and Girish· Babu encouraged me in that. On my return he used to ask "how did you see"? I used to tell him

everything that I felt and he gave the proper significance where I could not follow."

In 1879, Gopeechand Sethi took lease of the National Theatre and Babu Abinash Chandra Kar

became its Manager. On the opening night ( 1st. January ) an opera Kāminī Kunjā by Gopal

Chandra Mukerjee was played,where Ramtaron Babu and Binodini appeared respectively in the roles of

Krishna and Radhika. Another notable incident was the presence of Sir Richard Garth, Chief Justice,

Bengal,on the 26th May 1879,atthe National Theatre where an opera Nandan Kusum was staged as a

benefit night for the education of destitute native children. It dealt with the episode of Aja and

Indumati and was from the pen of Babu Mono-ranjan Das, son of the late Babu Kali Mohan Das,

and cousin to late Mr. C. R. Das ( Deshabandhu ).

Hem Babu's Vṛitasamhār was also staged on the 19th April, 1879 for one or two nights.

Plays on Wednesdays & Sundays Introduced

Babu Abinash Kar was an energetic manāger and introduced a change on the stage. When the

theatre was opened, performances used to be held on Saturday alone and gradually play on Wednes-

day was also introduced, since on Saturdays office-Babus used to leave for their native places, as daily-

passenger system was not in vogue then. Next for a trial on one occasion Abinash Babu advertised the play

on a Sunday at 2 P.M. and the attendance was large. Since then performances used to be held thrice a

week including Sundays, but the time 2 P.M. was afterwards changed to candle-light.

National Theatre at Dacca

In the month of August, finding no crowded houses in Calcutta, the National Theatrical Com-

pany under Abinash Babu reached Dacca and began

to show some performances on the East Bengal

stage (Purba Banga Rangabhumi). Some leading

gentlemen of the place with puritanic ideas began

a campaign dissuading the school boys from seeing

the performances connected with public women.

This is to be noted that on previous occasions when

Calcutta theatre came, there was no female artist

with them. On the 7th August, 1879, a meeting

was held in the premises of the theatre with Mr.

Pope, Principal, Dacca College as Chairman. Mr.

Livingstone, Dr. P. K. Ray and the great

literateur Kaliprosonna Ghose dissuaded the people

from seeing plays especially at that time of

famine. The Headmasters also issued notices

prohibiting boys from seeing the performances by

women on pain of expulsion from the school.

Khaja Abdul Gani, the Nawab of Dacca, however

patronised the theatre and other gentlemen of lead

and light, prominent amongst them being Mohini

Mohon Das, also evinced great sympathy.

The following amateurs went to Dacca--Babus

Amritalal Bose, Amritalal Mukerjee (Bel Babu),

Matilal Soor, Mohendra Lal Bose, Amrita Lal

Mitter, Atul Krishna Mitter, Ramtaron Sanyal,

Kashinath Chatterjee, Nilmadhab Chakraborty and

Jogendra Nath Mitter.

After this the troupe went to Burdwan and

then to Bankipore on the occasion of the investi-

ture ceremony of Maharaja Lakshmiswar Sing

Bahadur of Darbhanga. A number of Rajas and

Maharajas were invited from different places and

Sir Stewart Bailey, the then Lieutenant-Gevornor of

Bengal, presided over the function. Meghnādhadh

was played before so august an assembly on the occa-

sion. The company was further compelled to stay

a month and a half more at Bankipore for giving

other performcnces and Rai Bahadur Durgagati

Banerjee, personal Assistant to the Commissioner

of the Patna Division rendered them all necessary

help. The Company was next invited at Bettia and

there it showed some performances.

Towards the beginning of 1880, the Company

left for Beneras, Allahabad and Lucknow and after

that they reached Calcutta. Gopichand Sethi having

discontinued the lease of the building, Babu Kalidas

Mitter (Babu Kedar Nath Choudhury's maternal

uncle) became the lessee, but the theatre was again

stopped within ten months. The theatre now

changed a number of hands, last of whom was

Babu Jogendra Nath Mitra, who with a view to

increase the number of spectators introduced for

the first time the system of making presents to

them in the shape of rings, ear-rings, looking glasses

soaps, handkerchiefs, perfumes etc. The spectators

in the pits and galleries were thereby increased and

when Jogendra Babu went to the climax by giving

fruits and vegetables, the theatre came to an end.

18

As the rent of the land whereon the theatre stood and the Municipal taxes fell in arrears, Babu

Bhubon Mohon Neogi the proprietor was sued and in execution of a decree the Great National Theatre

was sold at an auction sale for Rs. 25,000/- to Babu Protap Jahuri, a Marwari gentleman of extensive

business with shrewd business instincts, peculiar to men of his class. Jahuri (literally a jeweller)

wanted to conduct the theatre on strictly business lines. On taking possession of the theatre the first

thing he did was to approach Grish Babu with a view to enlist his valuable co-operation as the

manager of the theatre.

Now, came the right and opportune hour. Grish was pleased to find out at last a man

he exactly wanted and when Protap Jahuri approached him, Girish promised all help, as he had

hitherto done, as an amateur, but Jahuri was importunate and wanted his whole-time services with a

promise to pay Rs. 100/- a month, insisting that no man could serve two masters. Girish at this time

was a trusted officer of Messrs. Parker & Co. and was getting a salary of Rs. 150/-a month

with prospects of future emolument. The situation was a trying one—on the one hand a permanent

service with a better future in an English firm—on the other, the possibility of the establishment of a

permanent Bengali theatre which would be a very useful and nation-building institution for the country

and its people. Drama and stage were in their ebbing point ; and there was no chance of getting a new

dramatist ; rehearsals would have to be conducted, moral tone of the actors to be improved, stage to be

supervised, for all of which full energy and whole time devotion were essentially necessary. Girish thought

that co-operation with this rich businessman was the only way, by which he could realise the long cherished

object of his heart. At last the call of Ranganath, the master deity of Dramatic Performance became

paramount and he left the service. He gave up the certain for the uncertain and no persuasion

of his office master, Mr. Parker, who loved him dearly could prevail on him. He threw himself

head and heart into the great and daring venture.

After accepting Jahuri's offer, Girish began to rally round him his old associates, Mohendra Bose,

Amrita Mitra, Binodini, Khetromoni, Ramtaron Sanyal, and last not the least Dharamdas Sur,—the

architect of the stage under whose directions scenes and costumes were arranged. The assembly of

all these talents made the "National" once more a thing of great attraction to the public.

Protap's Theatre opened on the 1st January 1881, with Hāmīr a historical piece from the pen of

the deceased poet Surendra Nath Mazumdar, the author of Mahilā Kābya. Hāmīr is the story of

the Rajput prince of Mewar, who liberated Chitore from Mobarok Khiliji after it had been laid seige to

by the Khiliji King Alauddin Khiliji, and Padmini

and a number of Rajput ladies had burnt themselves

on pyres. Girish wrote to the poet's brother

Devendra Babu, asking permission to stage it, which

however was given. Girish recast the piece and com-

posed all the songs which Devendra Babu ack-

nowledged with thanks when the drama was published

some time in March 1881. There is a very long song

in the drama put in the mouth of the Bhāt (known as

the song of Padmini ) which Girish shortened to an

original composition and put it in the mouth of Mr.

Sanyal playing in the role of Cāran while passing on

the streets, and path. This was a national song with

a soul-stirring appeal :

"Listen, O, the residents of Chitore

The sorrowful tale of Padminī,

Sung by the wind.

The light of the Sun discloses

The blood that runs in stream destroying

the enemies,

Arise, awake, O, the brave and the wise

Take your leave,

The time for action has come."

Girish Chandra appeared in the title role of the

hero, Mohendra Bose in Udaybhat, Amrita Mitra

in Kakāji and Binodini in Lila, the widowed

daughter of Maldeva, governor of Chitore from

Delhi.

21

The play continued for three nights only ; but as

the National Theatre for the last four or five years

was looked upon with disfavour for its irregularity,

it failed to draw any crowds and thus went down in

competition with the “Bengal Theatre.”

The turning point of the National theatre was,

however, the small but charming opera of Māyātaru

by Girish Chandra, which was staged on January 22,

1881 as an after piece of Battle of Plassey. It

caught the imagination of the audience and its songs*

were very much appreciated. Ramtaron Sanyal

as Surat and Bonobiharini as Fulhashi were equally

pleasing with their songs and “Bhindini in the light

role of Fulhashi,” as Shambhoo Chandra Mukherjee

editor of Reis and Rayat wrote, “was simply charm-

ing”. People began to like operas, but yet there was

no large crowd.

The next opera was Girish Chandra's Mohinī

Pratimā, where the picture has been taken from an

English opera Pygmalion and Galatea by Sir W. S.

Gilbert, then played at Calcutta ( 1880 ) by an

English Opera Company, and the part of the

heroine Galatia was taken by Miss Fanny Enson, a

lady with considerable powers of expressing pathos.

The play relates, how a sculptor was so absorbed

with his model that the doll he made was actualy

*Both Bankim Chandra and Babu Rajnarain Bose highly

praised the songs composed by Girish.

22

awakend into life. Girish took Binodini to one of

the performances where Miss Fanny used practicaly

to bring down the whole house in the climax scenes.

Girish's Mohinī Pratimā, too, was enjoyable with the

following cast :

Hemanta ... Ramtaron (Pigmalion)

Nihār ... Bonobiharini.

Shāhānā ... Binodini ( Galatia )

Mohendra ... Mohendra Bose

Kusum ... Kadombini.

The next piece was Āladin played along with

Mohinī Pratimā on the 16th April 1881 where the

story was taken from Arabian Nights Aladin

(Sanyal) hanging the tuft on the back like a China-

man, Girish (Kuhaki) muttering incantations with

magic wand and, turning eyes on both sides and

Khetromoni as Aladin's mother did wonderfully well.

These pieces, operas as they were, with ephemeral

interest did not satisfy Girish's imagination and

he was simply looking for a drama. But where

was the drama? All the novels were exhausted and

Mr. R. C. Dutta's Mādhabī Kāñkan also was tried

two weeks before, Girish having taken seven dis-

tinct parts there.

After all a drama came out and it was from

Girish's pen. This was Ānandu Rāho staged on

the 21st May 1881, but was not received well.

It gives some idea of conflict between Akbar and

Rana Protap and hints at Akbar having subse-

quently poisoned the cup for Mansingh who was

invited to the palace as a guest. There were some

shades of Lady Macbeth in the character of Lahana

too, and a novel character Anando Rahu played

by Girish himself was introduced. All the same

the drama proved a failure. People could not

forget the sensation Bengal Theatre produced with

Aśrumati Nāṭak on its boards about the same

facts, a few months ago, nor could they understand

the significance of Betāl.* The first drama of

Girish met thus a hopeless fate and Bhārati a

monthly journal edited by Babu Dwijendra Nath

Tagore represented the popular view "we did not

expect such an anarchy in imagination in Girish

Babu."

Disappointed, Girish set this thoughts to Poura-

nik (mythological) dramas and the first of its kind

was Rāvonbadh, the story forming the fight

between Rāvana and Rāma. It however met with

unprecedented success and the following remarks of

the Amrita Bazar Patrika, the 4th August 1881

would be worth-noticing—

"There was a grand performance of National

• Betal (Ānando Raho) & Ākbar—Girish Chandra, Pratāp

Sing—Amrita Mitra, Mānsingh—Amrita Bose, Shelim—

Bel Babu, Nārāyan Singh—Mohendra Bose, Mahisī—

Elokeshi, Luhonā—Binodini, Jamunā—Kadumbini,

Bhāmegha—Mati sur.

24

Theatre last Saturday and we congratulate the management on the signal success achieved on the occasion. A New drama Rāvunbadh destruction of Rāvana - written in verse by the "Garrick of the Hindu Stage" and the new and splendid sceneries and dresses, to say nothing of the histrionic talents of the actors and actresses, called for the repeated and enthusiastic applause. We hope all lovers of Hindu drama, will muster strong on the next occasion.

All felt diffident at first as to how the mythological piece would appeal to the public but they were disillusioned. From July 30, 1881, Rāvon-badh* continued with unabated enthusiasm of the audience in the midst of which Sītārbonobāsh or Exile of Sita was put on boards on the 17th Sept., which attained much greater success with the following cast-

Rāmā ... G. C.

Lakṣman ... M. Bose

Bharat ... Bel babu

Vaśiṣṭha ... N. M. C.

Valmiki ... Amrita Mitter

• Rām - Girish Chandra, Lakṣman—Mohendra Bose, Rāvan—Amrita Mitra, Bibhīṣon—Amrita Bose, Indra—Bel babu, Hanumān—Aghore Pathok, Brahmā—Nil-madhob Chakrvarty, Sugrīb—Upendra Mitra, Trijatā, Nikaṣā & Kālī—Khetromoni, Mondadari—Kadambini, Saramā—Narayani, Sita—Binodini.

Darmukh

...

A. L. Bose

Sumontra

...

Atul kumar Mitra

Sītā

...

Kadombini

Urmilla

...

Bhuson kumari

Allakshorā

...

Bhuni

Laba

...

Bindodini

Kuś

...

Kusam (khoṇrā)

The theme of Sītā’r Bonabāsh representing as it did the Hindu ideal of womanhood and chastity has always been a favourite theme with the Hindus. Rāvonbadḥ too echoed the same sentiments while Sita entered into the flames after the war was won. The success of the both may amply be illustrated by the fact that the female seats which hitherto remained practically vacant began to be fully crowded with the two plays thus bringing a great change in the history of the Bengali Stage. The song of Laba & Kusa “Gāo Vinā Gāore—Sing Thou Vina, Sing” used to fill the audience with such interest and pathos that each night the house used to be packed to suffocation.

The national sentiments were roused and now theatre got its drama and people also got the stage of their heart. The mythological dramas of the 'National' became thus the talk of the day and from now on the Bengal Theatre failed to run on in competition with the National. Indeed for years till the social, historical and religious dramas came to be played, Sītā’r Banabāsh formed a great attraction for

all theatres—Star, Emerald, City, Minerva, Classic and the Unique Theatre. The well-known papers

Sādhāranī, Bhāratī, Amrita Bazar Patrika, Somprokāś etc were full of praise of these dramas and Bhāratī which complained of the dearth of imagination a few weeks ago, now wrote ( 1288, Magh and Falgun) : “Girish’s kalpana is Shphatikastambha”—a prism where sun’s rays being reflected testify to transparentness and the magnitude of the sun.

In Sītār Banabāsh there is something novel in conception too. In the last scene after Sita was brought to A jodhya from Valmiki’s hermitage and was asked to submit to the further test of her chastity by entering into the flames, the only reply that came from her was—

“Nāhi diba parikṣā anal ”

“No, no more to the fire, but the Dharitri (mother) will take me to her womb, and O my lord, I shall meet you in the next world.”

The idea was as dignified as the scene touching, and pathos formed the chief interest in the perfor­mance from start to finish.

Sītār Banabās was followed by Abhimōnyo Badh ( how the young son of Arjuna and Subhadrā—a young boy was surrounded by seven stalwart charioteers ) staged on Nov. 26, Lakśman Barjan

on Dec. 31, Sītār Bibāha on March 11, 1882,

Rāmer Banabāsh on April 15, Sītā Haran on July

22, and Pāndaber Ajñātabāsh ( the last of Girish's

dramas in ‘National’) on Feb. 3, 1883. For the inqui-

sitive readers we should give here a brief description

of each—

Abhimonya Badh

The story is awful as the fight was most unequal

and unjust and the dramatic art was fully in keeping

up with it. The opening scene exhibits a grim

picture when the piśāchas (demons) sing “Rakta

khābo sharā sharā” ( shall drink blood in saucers )

and scenes from the beginning of the meeting till the

end of the third act remind us too of the witches of

Macbeth, thus maintaining the idea of the drama

fully. The cast was as follows—

Judhișthra and Duryadhone ... Girish Chandra

Droṇ ... Kedār Chowdhury

Jayodratha ... Mohendra Bose

Rohinī ... Kadambini.

Bhīm and Garga ... Amrītalal Mitra.

Karṇa ... Aghore Pathok

Abhimonya ... Bel Babu

Śrīkriṣṇa ... Kedar Choudhury

Arjuna ... Mohendra Bose

Uttarā ... Benodini

Subhadrā ... Gangamoni

Ganak ... Aghore Pathok

Duśāshon ... Nilmādhob Chakra

Lakshman Barjana

The next piece was Lakṣman Barjana ( exile )

'an one Act drama', but which never failed to draw tears from all eyes. Girish as Rāma, Mohendra Babu as Lakṣman, Upendra Babu as Kālpurus and Amrita Bose as Durbāṣā were splendid while Lava and Kuśa represented by Binodini and Kuśum used to send a thrill of tragedy in to the hearts of those present with their song "Kāndo vinā kāndo —weep thou my lyre" which was much appreciated.

The lessee of the theatre specially wished one to be inserted as in Sītā'r Vanabās.

In Rāmer Vanabāsh, the part of Monthora as represented by the powerful actress Khetromoni was so successful that it called forth constant roars of "Dur dur, exit" from the audience.

Sitāharany, too, was equally successful and the last not the least was Pānlober Ajñatabās where the parts of Kichak and Duryadhone were as exquisitely done as those of Brhannala by Mohendra Bose, Bhim, Viṣma and Brāhmin by Amrita Mitra, Droupadi by Binodini and Hārini by Khetromoni Devi. This was the last piece of Girish in 'National Theatre.' A few other pieces— Bhotmangal, Brajabihār, Malinmālā that preceded Pāndober Ajñatabās need no detailed mention.

Now the account of the past two years of Protap

29

Jahuri's theatre is in fact the history of the first

beginnings of the Permanent Theatre in Bengal.

Unlike the former proprietors, most of whom

turned to insolvents. Jahuri conducted the

theatre on a business line and with him as

an example Girish proved how a theatre could

really be a source of profitable income. But

the principal thing needed for it was a regular

supply of dramas. Madhusudon's dramas had al-

ready been put on boards, his epic poem and those

of Nabin and Hem were rendered into dramas,

Bankim's novels were already dramatised, and every

body felt the want of dramas, without which audi-

ence could not be satisfied. Advertisements for

dramas were issued but there was no response.

At last, out of sheer necessity Girish had to take

up the pen himself ! Genius got its scope and

within a short time of two years, no less than ten

beautiful dramas were produced.

These pieces touched the hearts of the people

and they flocked to the theatre in large numbers.

Theatre now became a thing of general attraction,

and gratification of the public knew no bounds.

How from the first, these dramas met with unprece-

dented success we get fully from the autobiographi-

cal account of Binodini. Thus she.writes—

"Since Rārunbadl was staged, the theatre-hall

could not accommodate the audience, even the

seats in boxes and dress-circle were filled up.

30

Even men of wealth and culture who did not witness a performance in Bengali theatre out of derision, began how to purchase tickets for the upper seats one or two days before the performance.

It is for the constant supply of dramas which satisfied fully the national demands, and the new turn Girish gave to the theatre, touching sentiments and tastes of the people of the country he has justly been called the "Father of the Bengali Stage." We are sure that his achievements fully justify the title of honour, as otherwise we do not know what would have been the fate of the Bengali Stage and of the Bengali Drama, if Girish did not come at that time of the sorest need of the nation. Let us quote a few lines from the pen of the dramatist and manager Aparesh Chandra Mukherjee from his "Stage-Thirty years" which thus follow-

"For the worship of the goddess of dramatic art, drama is the first and foremost material. Drama is the life of the theatre. It is its only food of sustenance. So long our theatres were depended on others' charity, until the last alms were used up. But Girish came forward and brought the jar of nectar. It is only Girish who can be justly called the "Father of the Indian Stage". There is no uncle or cousin of it.

We have already referred to the first mythological plays of Girish. One might naturally ask, why

31

Girish turned to mythology instead of to history ?

Apart from other reasons, he was drawn to mythology by the force of circumstances. The country

was not prepared to get into history nor for the reception of ideas of nationalism. The historical

drama Ananda Raho did not meet with success, although we get the first germ of the famous characters

of later times, such as Bātul (Sribatsha), Ākal (Asoke) and of Karim Chāchā (Serajaddula) and

similar others. Girish thus turned to mythology for his dramas and met with amazing success. No

doubt criticism poured in from different quarters 'finding fault' with such 'ancient topics, but Girish's

defence was "that all high class books of each nation have been based upon mythology. Homer, Virgil,

Milton and Michael produced their best pieces on mythology. Hem Chandra's Bʳtrāsṃhār is borrowed

from it and the best three novels of Bankim Chandra are based on the most popular religious

piece—the Bhāgḃat Gītā. No poet's conception can surpass that of Vyāsa or Vālmīki nor has any poet

or dramatist or historian been able to depict a more sublime ideal than of Rāma or Kṛṣṇa, Lakṣman

or Viṣma, Sītā or Subhadrā." Girish thus produced no less than 72 dramas within thirty years from

Rāvaṇ Badh to Tapobal (1912) and never will Chaitanya Lilā or Bilwamaṅgal, Janā or Pāṇdaba

Gourava, Saṅkarācārya or Tupobal ever grow stale, Indeed never could a dramatist of any part

of the world nationalise Purāṇa or mythology, as

the great linguist Dr. Harinath De remarked, like

the Bengali dramatist Girish Chandra.

There was also another main reason of success

and that was the new technique in dramatic

conversation. For years poetry was the passion

of the people and prose was at a discount. Iswar

Chandra Gupta's influence continued unabated and

even Dinobondhu, Bankim, Rangalal and Monmohon

claimed to be his pupils. Madhusudon's majestic

blank verse found its brilliant successors in Hem

Chandra and Nabin no doubt, but Gupta's style still

worked. In fact, poetry of which Iswar Gupta was

the leader, domineered over the Bengali literature till

Bankim Chandra's great novels drew educated people

gradually to the field of prose. Girish's dramas

were thus written more in poetry, but a new verse

was found indispensable in mythological dramas.

The old verse in use was out of date and from

experience it was found that Madhusudon's verse, too

majestic as it was, was not suitable for the stage and

Girish thought that it would be an imposition both

upon the actors and upon the audience at large to

use Madhusudon's blank verse. Thus Girish had

to invent a new form of blank verse less scholastic

than that of Madhusudon but far more appropriate

for drama, more suitable for acting and more lucid

and melodious than the scholastic blank verse. This

new type of verse is Girish's own creation and came

to be known as "Gairishi Chhanda". It is said

that Girish got the hint from a few lines printed on

the front page of Kaliprashnna Sinha's Hutome

Panchā's Naksā. From its introduction by Girish

other dramatists also began to follow in his footsteps

and this newly invented verse of Girish contributed

not a little to the subsequent development of the

Bengali dramas and the growth and popularity of

the Bengali Stage.

As to how the verse was appreciated at the time,

Babu Dwijendra Nath Tagore, editor Bhāratī and

the eldest brother of Rabindranath, thus wrote in

his paper-

"We are very much in favour of the new type of

blank verse as introducted by Girish Chandra.

Indeed this is the real blank verse. Both the

freedom of the verse and its sweetness have

been maintained. What is required is the verse

of the heart, not that is according to the

dictates of Shastras. We tried it and we are

happy that Girish Chandra has helped us in it."

—Bhāratī, Magh, 1288.

Girish too wrote to poet Nabin Sen "Verse is

necessary in drama—but what verse ? In my verse

the language soars from easy to the high, step by

step." Late Akshoy Sircar of Sāhārānī fame, also

said "After all the language of the drama has been

found out".

The next thing to be marked was the slow but

5

steady departure from the play of jātrā spirit to true

dramatic spirit and to the technique of the theatre.

Girish did not lose sight of the fact that jātrā per-

formance was very much popular with common

people. His Anamanī, Akāl Bodhan, Tol Lālā, Rāsh

Līlā, etc. read less like dramas but more like plays

fit for Jātrā performance except that scenes are not

seen in the latter. But from Rāvanbadḥ Girish

gave such a twist to the existing form of Bengali

dramas that the difference became at once percep-

tible. All the same, such scenes e.g. conversation

between Hanumān and Trijatā were also introduced

as to provide for popular entertainment as was

derived from jātrās, yet preserving intrinsic charac-

teristics of a drama in tact. The next piece "Sītāʳ-

banabās, however, is a perfect drama in its truest

sense and the song of Lava and Kusha "Gāo vīṇā,

Gāore" is a song of a very elevated nature which

neither in grandeur nor in pathos, nor in art, a jātrā

piece could ever approach. This gradual transforma-

tion from jātrā pieces to developed dramas is an

important factor to be noted in Girish's growth as a

dramatist.

It was with these dramas and scenic reforms

newly introduced, that the stage became a thing of

extraordinary attraction for the people. The scenes

with Sītār Agniparīkṣā in Rāvanbadḥ, and illusion

respecting assemblage-more than 2000 people-in

Sītāʳbanabās when Sītā went to the vast hollow-

ness,--and the like, were the first steps to the scenic

improvement Girish proposed to have arranged.

Girish saw that he could do these and much more with

Protap Jahuri. But the latter with all his business-

tact could not however forego the stingy habits of

a scheming profiteer and he turned a deaf ear to

Girish's recommendations for artists, and the policy

he began to pursue had nothing of broadness. For

a few days of the absence of Binodini, the star-

actress, from the stage, for example, he did not

hesitate to deduct her salary. Tension of feelings

was very much perceptible, and Girish left the

'National Theatre' and with him also followed his

staunchest adherants—Amrita Mitra, Amrita Bose,

Nilmadhab Chakravorty, Probodh Ghosh, Upendra

Mitra, Aghore Pathok, Kadambini, Khetromoni,

Binodini and etc.

Those that remained were Moti Sur, Mohendra

Bose, Bhuni, Chhotarani, Jivon Sen, Bel Babu,

Radhamadhab Kar, Dharmadas Sur and others with

Babu Kedar Choudhury as their leader. Bel Babu

however left the “National” soon after, and joined

Girish. Thus arose two parties and Girish naturally

felt a great bias for his adherants and gave them all

patronage. This was one of the reasons why Babu

Amrita Mitra having always got proper scope and

preceptor's backing, rose to the top, was the master

of the premier theatre—the 'Star', lived in affluence

and died at the height of his influence, where-as

36

Mohendra Bose no less a powerful actor, with all his histrionic talents and reputation as a great tragedian, was ever in wants and difficulties, and died rather a disappointed man.

After Girish left, Babu Kedar Choudhury became the manager and two dramas only need mention here, during his incumbency. The first was the performance of Bankim Chandra’s master-piece—Ānanda Math dramatised by Kedar Babu and the parts of Jivananda, Satyananda, Mohendra, Santi and Mahapurush respectively taken by Kedar Choudhury, Moti Sur, Mohendra Bose, Bonobihiri (Bhuni) and Ardhendu Sekhar Mustafi. The play was not at all successful and none was satisfied. It was performed on the 7th May 1883 and the well-known Sādharani wrote about it.

"None has been satisfied with the performance of Ānanda Math. Not even a sparkle of patriotic fire was enkindled in our hearts. Not a drop of tear came out of our eyes".

It is needless to say that Bankim Chandra must have been very much dissatisfied with the imperfect representation. So he expressed to many.

Swapnamoyī a minor piece need no mention here and the theatre came to an end with Kedarnath’s Chhatrabhanga.

Girish Babu had not however to sit long and up came the “Star in” the horizon. Let us follow the rise and course of it in the next chapter.

Chapter II

Star Theatre ( at Beadon Street )

The origin of the Star Theatre reads almost like a romance. Babu Gurumukh Roy, a rich young man belonging to the Sikh community took fancy on Binodini the leading actress of the National Theatre and wanted to start a theatre after her name. On the other hand, the Zemindar under whose protection she was then living, would not allow her to be an actress at all !

A few months after, the Zemindar however went home and was married. This was considered by Binodini, as a breach of promise and thus provided Girish an opportunity to bring Gurumukh Roy again on the field. But the Zemindar came back and would not leave Binodini at any cost. She was, however, removed by the party from Calcutta and kept in hiding at Raneegunge, Chinsura and other neighbouring places of Calcutta till all arrangements about the purchase of land and other things for the theatre were complete. In the meantime, when the operations were in progress, Gurumukh proposed to give Binodini Rupees Five thousand if instead of joining the theatre she would live with him. Although not

of noble origin, Binodini loved theatre and she

would not give it up even for a kingdom. At last,

when Gurmukh found that without starting the

theatre it was not possible to enjoy her company,

he agreed to get the house built. This is the history

and origin of the ‘Star Theatre’ which was

instrumental in bringing out some of the first

class dramas of Girish, and raising theatre to a

high moral plane !

The land had already been leased from the sons

of Kirti Mitra, a rich citizen of Calcutta, and the

construction of the stage at 68, Beadon Street was

proceeding under the direction of Babu Jaharlal

Dhur, Stage-manager and Dashu Charan Neogi his

assistant. Babu Hari Gopal Bose was in charge of

accounts and Babu Amritalal Mitra and Amritalal

Bose were to assist Girish in rehearsals which were

held at the house of Bonomali Chakravorty in

Beadon Street. To crown all, a suitable drama was

composed by Girish Chandra for the opening of the

Theatre.

We shall quote here a few lines from Binodini’s

account of it,—“We used to attend rehearsals from

2 to 3 p.m. and finishing it there, go to theatre-house.

Even after all departed, I used to draw earth and

fill the spaces and in order that work might be

expedited, used to fix 4 Karis each basket of earth.

Work continued till late hours of night.”

39

One thing however disappointed her—she was always under the impression that the theatre would be named after her as ‘B’ Theatre. The Proprietor wanted this, but Girish did not agree and wanted to name the house as the ‘Star’ Theatre. Girish thus consoled Binodini's mother—

"Dont worry ! we are ginger-traders and have nothing to do with the news of the ships. If theatre flourishes, there will be money, but if it fails, everything of yours will go. As I dont mind, let her not mind so. She is indispensable for my dramas and I wont work any where without her. Let us work giving the burden to others"

She was appeased.

Thus did the ‘Star’ open on the 21st July 1883 and Dakṣa Yajña was the first drama staged. It was about this time Girish was suffering from sceptic doubts and from great uneasiness of mind on account of these. Mill and Spencer influenced his mind a great deal. He doubted the existence of God. Like Hume he would say, “It is more probable that men should lie than miracles be true’, In the above drama he drew the character of Dakṣa on a parallel with Milton's Satan who rebelled against the supreme God-head. Girish himself appeared in the role of the hero. Dakṣa's self-conceit, arrogance and spirit of revolt were his own and as the dramatist he displayed these in a masterly way. He appeared

40

with Promethean grandeur and solemn dignity uttering to himself :-

"How can I establish human race on earth ?"

His scolding of Satī—“Disgrace is felt by the

honourable only, what does it mean to a begger ?"

—rang in one's ears for days together. Indeed Girish's impersonation of Dakṣa was to apply the

remarks of Victor Hugo on Lamaitre's Ruy Blass not transformation but a transfiguration."* Satī, his daughter was fittingly represented by Binodini and

Mahadeb by Amritalal Mitra. Other parts were—Dadhichi—Amrita Bose, Prasūti—Kadambini,

Tapaswini—Kshetromoni, Nondī—Aghore Pathok,

Bhrṅgi--Probodh Ghosh, Bhrṅgi's wife--Gongamoni.

Amrita Mitra fully sustained his part and while mourning over the self immolation with the expression

"Give me back my devoted spouse—kere dere Satī

de āmār; Satī Satī kothā Satī, he sent a thrill of

grief in the hearts of the audience. As to how Binodini did full justice to her part, Girish himself

left his reminiscences."—

"The performance of Satī's part gave proofs of Binodini's dramatic talents from start to finish.

Only a single question Bi-yay kī mā "what is marriage mother ?" exhibited talents of a high order. For one

who would discuss in the next Act on the highest form of Yoga, with her husband, the Lord Śiva,

*Vide Indian Mirror 4th April 1393.

this might appear as a piece of affectation. But

Binodini showed a conception as if Satī was so

much steeped in meditation for Dīgāmbara—the

naked Mahadev who personified the universe—that

she was unconscious of worldly sense or concern.

In the next Act the all-merciful mother of the uni-

verse anxious for human beings puts the question

rather anxiously,

"Tell me, O Lord, why do you say

Blessed is the iron-age (Kalijuga)?"

and she was superb when thus she took leave—

"If the woman brooks insult to her husband

For whom man should condescend to

prefer human life?—

I am the daughter of the Lord of people

Why should I bear ignomy to my husband?"

Dakṣa Jajña commanded a crowded house every

night but before it was put on boards the theatre, it

had been acted by Girish's party in presence of

Goddess Kāli at Kalighat.

After this drama was staged, a miracle appeared

in Girish's life. Divine Mother appeared before

him but since it may not be appealing to many, I

would rather not relate it. Mysteriously, however,

he was not seen on the stage, except on very rare

occasions in old plays for the next ten years till

Macbeth was brought on the Boards of the Minerva

Theatre. We do not know the cause of this long absence from the stage, but Babu Amritalal Bose and others explained to us as above. Hence forward, all the leading roles in new dramas were given to his most worthy and affectionate disciple Amritalal Mitra. But his fame as a masterly dramatist began to spread steadily day by day. Indeed his fame as a writer henceforth elipsed that of an actor.

The next piece staged on 11-8-83 was Dhruba Caritra. It had its origin on the story related by him as a Kathak (reader of Pauranick legends) some time ago, basing it on Mahābhārata. Bhusan Kumari’s Dhruba was on the whole good and so did Uthānpāda by Amrita Mitra.* Its songs were as much attractive as the finding of the Padma Palāś Lochan by the five-year-old boy in the forest.

After this, the famous mythological romance, the Nala Damayantī from Girish’s pen was staged on 15th Dec. 1883, and the cast was as follows:-

Nala—Amrita Mitra, Viduṣaka—Amrita Bose, Kālī—Aghore Pathok, Puṣkar—Nilmadhab Chakraberty, Damayantī—Binodini, Sunandā—Bhusan Kumari, She-Brāhman—Khetromoni.

It is in Dhruba and Nala Damayantī that

• Other Characters : Suruchi—Binodini, Suniti—Kadambini, Viduṣak:i—Amrita Bose, Mahādev—Upendra Mitra, Nāroda—Pathok, Brahmā—Nilmadhab Chakravarti.

43

Girish's genius in the creation of fools or Viduṣakas had its first germ.

After that Gurmukh Roy wanted to sell the theatre as his desires were satisfied. His relations,

too, took him to task for his association with theatre. Shortly after he fell ill, and the sale-deed was

executed for Rs. 11,000 in favour of four persons as selected by Girish. These joint-purchasers were :-

(1) Babu Amrita Mitra, (2) Dashu Neogi, each of whom paid Rs. 2,000. (3) Hari Gopal Bose who

paid Rs. 1,000 and (4) Babu Amritalal Bose who did not pay anything but whose association was

intended by Girish for his literary merits as also his histrionic talents and personality. A sum of

Rs. 10,000 was raised by mortgaging the house to Babu Haridhon Datta with whom they were

on terms of friendship and Rs. 10,000 was raised by the performances of Nala Damayantī at the

Exhibition that was opened during the X'mas of that year.

Thus did the Theatre pass from the hands of the pleasure-loving rich man to the hands of the middle

class gentlemen who had taken up stage as their only avocation in life.

Besides, the directors were all expert in the line. Amrita Lal Mitter was a great actor, Amrita Bose

was a comedian of rare merits, Dashu Neogi, an excellent architect of the stage and Hariprasad Bose

44

a shrewd man of business and clever in keeping accounts.

In this first year of the new proprietorship, Kamalekāminī was exhibited on the 20th March 1884, when the sunrise on the sea, and a ship wrecked in a storm were of grand scenic beauty.

Padmā in the air without aid of wire or string or other support, and instantaneous transformations from Chandi to Kālí and from an old woman to Chandi constituted also great improvements of mechanical devices of the stage.

In the next piece Bṛṣaketu staged on the 26th April 1884 with Upendra Mittra as Karṇa, Binodini Padmābati and Bhushan as Bṛṣaketu, wonderful decapitation was exhibited for the first time on the Bengali stage.

Two pieces were added to Bṛṣaketu—one Hīrār Phool, an opera by Girish and another—a farce by the comedian Amritatal—Chatuyya Bāduyya adapted from Cox and Box.

Girish Chandra Śrīvatsa Chintā was staged on 7th June 1884 with Amrita Mitter as Śrīvatsa Binodini Chintā, Amrita Bose Bátool, Aghore Pathok Sadāgar, Bhusan Bhadrā, Gongamani Lakṣmī and Nilmadhab Chakravarti as Śani (Saturn).

The panoramic scene of the twilight of the dawn suddenly converted into mid-night with the stars shining, was really brilliant.

48

Bātool was a unique creation and was the predecessor of Ākāl in Asoke.

It was by that time that Girish's religious conviction grew deeper and deeper, but his spiritual monitor could not yet be found.

Chaitanya Iṭlā was written in this turn of mind, and at this period of spiritual transition.

The book has beautifully depicted the various phases of his life and his faith.

Jagāi and Mādhāi represented the gradation of that faith, how Mādhāi beat Nitāi with a broken piece of a Kalsi, a water jug, and how Jagāi prevented him Mādhāi mārilo, Jagāi bārilo and wanted the Kṛpā of Nitāi and Nimāi.

Since that performance Girish came to be treated by the puritanic: section of the people with better consideration.

Binodini appeared in the role of Chaitanya.

She seemed to excel herself, in this part—in all its phases, as a boy, as a scholar, and last in the great renunciation.

The drama was such a marvellous success that people began to flock from all quarters to hear Kīrtans on the stage.

Hari bol, Hari bol, Haribol and Keśav kuru karṇṇā dīne became the favourite songs for the boys in the streets and of people at home.

The success of the play may be gathered from the few words of Binodini :-

"I had much apprehension as to how I would tide over the critical test, I used always to call "Thou, Gour Hari, the deliverer of the depressed, pity this fallen and trodden woman".

On the night previous

to that of the play, I had no sleep during the whole

night. The thought as to how the play would be

a success worried me whole night. In the morning,

I went to the Ganges for a bath. Then I wrote the

name of Durgā repeating the same for 108 times

and begged of the Lord so that He might give me

protection in that great ordeal and that I might

attain His blessings. But throughout the day, I

entertained great doubts and fear as to the success of

my play. However, after the performance was over,

I came to know that my trust in Him was not in vain.

The cultured and the common people, all began to

speak in the most glowing terms about the perfor-

mance as a whole and specially about the part I had

played. I also felt that Gour had been kind to me.

During the Bālya Līlā—as a child, when I pro-

ceeded with the song—Rādhā bole nāiko āmār,

Rādā bole bājāi baṅsī, an energising force filled

my heart and gave me strength. When taking the

garland from Mālini, I asked her “what dost thou

see mālini?”, my eyes used to lose their power of

vision and saw only through the inner light. I saw

nothing of the outside. I used to see the matchless

beauty of Gour's feet in my heart and to feel that

Lord Gour was directing me and that I was simply

carrying out His directions. The limbs of my body

used to tremble in joy—The whole atmosphere

seemed to be covered with clouds when I used to

reason with the professor and addressed Probhu,

47

kebā kār ? shakali shei Krṣṇa—O Lord, what is this mundane relation, everything is He—the Krṣṇa. Exactly it struck me who am I to others? when I used to recite.

"Gayāi dhāme herilām bidyamān Biṣṇupada-paṅkaje kariteche madhupān Kata śata koti aśariri prāṇi."

'Many an invisible spirit I found drinking embrosa from the Lord's feet in the shrine of Gaya.'—

"It occured to me that some one was whispering these words in my heart—I was nothing—my self-consciousness seened to have been extinct. After accepting renunciation when I used to adress mother during leave-taking—

Krṣṇa bole kāndo mā janani Keṅdanā Nimāi bole

Krṣṇa bole kāndile sakal pābe Kāndile Nimāi bole

Nimāi hārābe Krṣṇa nāhi pābe.

Mother ! Don't weep for Nimai

But weep for Hari

You will get everything if you do so

But weep for Neemai you lose both me and him.

"Some of the audience, specially the women often used to cry so loud, that my heart began to palpitate audibly. Mother Śachi's heart-reading wailings

excited my heart and the long sighs of the audience

used to throw me so off my balance, that I began

to be blinded with tears of my own eyes. Next,

after becoming Sanyāsi, when I used to sing during

the Sankīrt'tan—

Hari man majāye lukāle kothāi

Āmi bhabe ekā deo-he dekhā

prāṇa sakhā rākha pāye.

O Lord ! Where hast

Thou hid thyself

After stealing my heart ?

I am quite alone in the wide wide world

Appear to me,

Keep me at thy feet

O the friend of my bosom.

"I can not adequately describe how much my

own feelings choked me. One night, when the house

was very much crowded, I fell down unconscious

in the exuberance of feelings, while playing the part

of Chaitanya. Father Lafont was present at the

theatre on the night and came inside the stage after

the curtain was down. Hearing of my condition from

Girish Chandra he wanted to see me once. The latter

brought him in my presence, and when I regained

consciousness, I found that a tall old man with long

beards was rolling his fingers on my body. As

soon as I got up, Girish asked me to salute the

Father. When I bowed down to him with my

palms joined together, he placed his hand on my head, rubbed it for for some time and asked me to drink a glass of water. I was all right”.

As to how the drama was appreciated even by persons like Colonel Olcott, the great theosophical leader and president, and the great journalist, Shamboo Chandra Mukherjee, will be evident from the following extracts.

(Mr. Shambhoo Chandra Mukherjee, Editor, “Reis and Rayat”, after a performance of Chaitanya Lila)

Defence of The Stage—Expostulation With The Puritywalahs.

“In gratitude for one of the most pleasant and memorable nights we have enjoyed for a long time, we are bound to inform our readers that we have been to the Theatre—even to that much anathematised Bengali Theatre, where, as a rule, men are men and women women and, on appropriate or desperate occasions, women personate beautiful young men, but never men, black men, venture on the preposterous game of looking like beautiful women. Of course, the men who play may not all be above the gentlemanly vices, while the women, it may at once be taken for granted, are not drawn from ladies of the bed-chamber, though doubtless they will compete with many of these, in natural parts or acquired graces or even in virtue. We know our risk, but duty must be done and the truth

told.

If

the

theatrical

world

of

Beadon

Street

be

Hell

and

no

mistake,

we

have

been

to

Hell

and

returned.

We

have

returned,

too,

without

a

conscious

taint

;

not

only

as

we

went

but

better.

Yes,

if

our

word

is

worth

anything

in

the

matter,

we

were

not

put

up

to

auction

directly

we

entered

the

precincts

of

the

notorious

Street

and

sold

body

and

soul

to

the

devil.

We

found

no

traces

of

Old

Nick

there,

unless

a

young

scapegrace,

rather

the

worse

for

liquor,

who

lounged

on

a

bench

behind

the

orchestra

and

kept

mocking

at

the

players

without

power

to

make

himself

a

formidable

nuisance,

was

one

of

his

camp-followers.

Nor

did

the

old

gent

appear

to

us

since.

Truth

to

confess,

we

are

all

the

better

for

our

visit.

Physically

it

was

exhausting

in

all

conscience.

For

the

curtain

did

not

finally

drop

till

a

quarter

past

2

in

the

morning,

and

we

did

not

get

our

carriage

and

out

of

the

crush

of

the

street

till

a

quarter

to

3

o’

clock—the

Police

arrangements

being

far

from

perfect.

But

spiritually

we

distinctly

profited

by

the

healthy

recreation—the

noble

diversion.

We

wish

the

Puritywalabs—we

shall

not

degrade

the

historic

name

of

the

stern,

dreadfully-in-earnest

if

deeply

misguided

men

who

upturned

monarchy

in

England

or

left

in

a

huff

for

newer

worlds—could

be

persuaded

to

follow

our

example.

Let

the

morality-mongers

try

a

dose

of

the

sublime

Morality

of

the

Chaiṭanya

Līlā.

We

would

not

care

to

discuss

with

them

any

proposition

in

morals

if

they

could

remain

unmoved—if

they

did

not

51

come back sadder and wiser men—with the healthy sadness of earnest cheerfulness and the true wisdom of the heart. The Chaitanya Līlā indeed is a moral exercise alike for players and audience. The play, a dramatisation of the Vaiṣṇava Scripture, is scriptural without the alloy of the disgusting side of ancient manners. The language is chaste throughout. The make-up, in the gross as well as in every particular—the attitudes—the bearing and conduct—all were unexceptionable. What a contrast to the bawdy suggestiveness of the European Stage ! We wish European gentlemen would come and see how far acting may be effective without meretricious aids or the attraction of the naked female person. Probably the average play-goer will vote Star Theatre too insipidly proper. The difference is characteristic. The contrast between the sober fully-dressed Baiji of sober motions, and the fidgety ballet-girl with her insufficient or flesh-coloured covering and her figdety leaps and curvet8, is but a type of the contrast between the thorough respectability of the Hindu Stage and the doubtful propriety of the European theatre. We can assure the reader that we particularly watched the Star Theatre in its moral side, and are bound to declare it irreproachable. We found not a single lapse in any particular or in any person at any point. Perhaps, we ought to mention that for once, only in one scene, we observed an actor in the character of a religious Brahmin expose his abdomen, but this was simply disgusting.

without being suggestive. It was true to

character, and it is not regarded with disgust

in India where Mussalmans and Hindustanis,

men and women, Nawabs and Begums, all

habitually expose their paunch, so it might pass

without remark. It sickens us, however, and

as Europeans often visit the Star Theatre, the

company had better avoid an unnecessary

offence. But, as we have said, it is not indecent

in the sense of immoral—of which kind there

was absolutely nothing.

No man can sit for half an hour in the Star Theatre

without being struck by the general superiority

—the high tone—of the acting. The players

are evidently experienced in their art. There

is not to be seen a trace of 'prentice hand' in

any particular. The firm grasp at once places

the whole business decidedly above the level of

faltering or halting amateur effort. The

genius of the people is suited to the stage.

Their perspicacity, their adaptability, their

suppleness, their dexterity, all easily lend

themselves to histrionic art. Nevertheless, we

were surpised to see the number of good

players.... (Reis and Rayat, October 10, 1885)

Colonel Olcott on "Chaitanya Lila"

His reply to the above

"THE NATIVE THEATRE"

"Sir : I have read with approval and admiration

your manly defence of the Indian Stage. I, too,

while at Calcutta recently accepted an invita-

tion to witness the performance of Chaiṭanya Līlā and the impressions I brought away were the same as your own. There had been so much

platitude written against it in certain papers, that I was glad of the opportunity to see and judge for myself. I have been for some years

promoting a movement for the revival in our country of the ancient high standards of Aryan morals, and whatever affects the spiritual and

moral interests of Indian youth has for me a deep interest. I have in this spirit for years been an ardent friend of the movement for

reformation in Native music, as represented in the Bengal Academy of Music and Poonā Gāyan Samāj, founded respectively by my

friends Rajah Sir Sourendra Mohun Tagore and Mr. Bulwant Trimbak. Their aim is to replace the vile lascivious songs in vogue by

spiritualising classical hymns and other compositions of the Aryan forefathers. A pure stage and pure music are among the most

potent agencies for the philanthropist to employ. It is too late in the day to argue this question ; it has long ago been settled to the satisfaction

of all. but narrow western bigots. Of course, the personal character of actors and singers is always an interesting, though subordinate

question, and coterie paribus, right feeling persons always prefer to see and listen to performers who, like mesdames Nillson, Mary

Anderson, Ellen Terry and many others, enjoy the reputation of unblemished private lives, rather than to others in all walks of the drama

tic profession whose lives are impure. Yet

after all what the public principally go to see

and hear is the play, the opera, or the concert,

and the bad character of the artist is something

quite apart from and subordinate to the ideal

he or she pesonifies for the moment. I need

but appeal to any travelled European in India

for evidence that the above is true, and that,

while female virtue, considering the enormous

temptations to which actresses are subjected,

is quite as common on, as off, the stage, the

play-going public of all the countries of

Christendom habitually tolerate, patronise and

almost worship actresses and actors of flagrantly

impure lives. As you say the Indian Stage has

not come to that, and the only question of the

moment is whether it will be impracticable to

so elevate the profession in this country as to

make the dramatic career inviting to respectable

native ladies by its honours and emoluments.

My official engagements since I came to India in

1879, have been so constantly exacting that

only thrice in India and once in Ceylon have

I had the time to visit the theatre. At Bombay

I saw Sītārām and Hariśchandra, at Calcutta

Chaitanya Līlā, at Colombo The Merchant of

Venice, done badly on an open-air stage by a

company of Sinhalese amateurs. I am free to

say that the threc Indian Dramas taught me

more and made me more deeply admire and

understand the stories they respectively illus-

trate than would have ten times the same

number of hours spent over books. I think my

55

enthusiastic appreciation of Aryan character is to some extent due to the impressions thus conveyed. As for the . Chaitanya Līlā I unhesitatingly affirm that it is impossible for any one but a "civilized" peg-drinking Babu, like the one you say misbehaving himself on the front bench of the orchestra, to witness the play without a rush of spiritual feeling and religious fervour. The poor girl who played Chaitanya may belong to the class of unfortunates ( alas : how unfortunate these victims of man's brutishness ), but while on the scenes she throws herself into her role so ardently that one only sees the Vaiṣṇava saint before him. Not a lewd gesture, not a sensual glance of the eye, not the slightest suggestion of animal desire, like those which make up the attraction of nautches to their patrons. I am a psychologist and watch faces for signs of hidden emotion. At the Star Theatre in Beadon Street, there was not a symptom of any bad influence working in the audience ; while at every nautch the signs of lustful desire are but too evident, and by the dancer, encouraged by responsive look and gesture.

So thoroughly does the Star actress feel the emotions of the saint she personates, so intensely arouses in her own bosom the religious ecstasy of Bhakti Yoga, she fainted dead away between the acts the evening I was there, and a medical man who shared my box had to go behind the scenes each time to administer restoratives.

Sir, I hate abòve all things cant and hypocrisy :

23/43

56

and while I shall ever be among the first to denounce and oppose every agency I find working against public morals, I cannot withhold my expression of sympathy for the courageous defence you have made of the Native Stage in this week's paper. If we must have only virtuous women as actresses and singers, all right; but then in fairness to that helpless class we drive into absolute vice, let us be equally stern in the cases of European professionals, the priests of religion the world over, not in India alone and of the writers and critics of sorts who era denouncing the drama from high pedestals. Hypocrites in religion, in virtue, in politics, in trade, in science—the world is full of them : And India included, from the sham loyalist, with his reception-hall full of political mottoes and portraits to the sham ascetic, who paints and dresses himself to play the part of the holy mendicants of yore. There is but one fit place for people of this class—Chaneph, the fabulous island of Rabelais—“wholly inhabited by sham saints, spiritual comedians, head-tumblers, numbers of avemarias, and such like sorry rogues who lived on the alms of passengers, like the hermit of Lormont.”

Yours

H. S. Olcott.

Adyar, the 17th October, 1885.

Now Chaitanya Īlā not only raised Girish very much in the estimation of the public, but payed the

way for higher things—the meeting with his Guru through whom he would at last attain the real mission of his life. It was here that Pandit Mathura­nath Pādatna from Navadwipa came to see a performance and was so much beside himself with joy, that he touched Girish Chandra's feet and blessed him with the words “Gour Chandra will fulfil the desire of your mind.” Yes, Gour actually did so.

It was at that time when the fame of Chaitanya Līlā spread far and wide, the great Ram Krishna Paramhansha one night came with his disciples to see its performance. Girish gave an account of this visit in his reminiscences about Ram Krishna and we have it also from Rām Kṛṣna Kathāmṛta from the pen of another disciple, Babu Mohendra Nath Gupta, who had accompanied him three times to the theatre. When a disciple asked him “How did you find it?”, Paramhansha Dev replied :

Āshal Nakal Ek Dekhlām

“I found the imitation and the real to be identi­cally the same.”*

After the play was over, Binodini had the good luck of a darshan (look) of him. She touched his feet. Sri Ram Krishna danced in joy singing ‘Hari Hari’ and blessed her : “May you attain Chaityana or knowledge i.e. self-consciousness,”

• For a full description we refer to our readers Srī Srī Rāmkrṣna Kathāmṛta, 2nd part.

8

58

It was a red-letter day for the Bengali Stage that it was favoured and blessed by so saintly a person (whom thousands went to see and to touch his feet) that came to seek his own dear one from the obscurity and impure elements of the stage.

The great devotee and Yogi Bijoy Krishna Goswami, on seeing a performance of the same on an occasion, danced as if in a trance.

Chaitanya Iīlā also acted as a renaissance of Hindu religion and culture at that critical time in the national history of Bengal, when young Bengal, England-returned anglicised Babus and the Brāhmos predominated in the educated society. The religious faith of the whole Hindu community was greatly revived by the religious sentiments so deeply incorporated in the drama. Thus says Babu Amritalal Bose about it :

"In cities and villages Sankirtan parties were formed, various editions of the Gītā and Chaitanya's life flooded the country. Even an England-returned Bengali instead of feeling any sense of shame rather proudly began to proclaim himself as a Hindu". His 'Ode to Girish' also composed after the latter's death, conveys the same idea :

"Who else but Girish of Bengal

Will play upon the lyre?

The stage became a shrine of pilgrimage,

And the theatre, a resort of the devotees !

59

"Horns and trimbels were sounded with glee

Hymns of glory were sung on the stage,

The head of the dandy bent down with humility

And his eyes were bathed in tears !

"Hymns of glory swept over the country,

The earth was sanctified

The unfortunate pitied by the saint

Were rolling at Kṛṣṇa's feet.

"Girish's Sādhana with the low

Sees Ram Krishna the assuager of all

sorrows.

Śrī Kṛṣṇa showed what was supreme good

In the form of Guru on the earth

Who had showered (upon Girish)

His condescension and love !

The drama of Chaitanya Līlā—which practically

electrified the whole country—was the chief topic of

the day. By this time Bankim Chandra by his

Aṇuśīlan was drawing the attention of the educated

Bengal about religion and culture and was rightly

called the "Apostle of culture". Pandit Shashadhar

Tarkachuramani and Swami Krishnānanda were

delivering most impressive lectures on Hinduism,

the Ādi-Brāhma Samāj was also giving lessons on

Upanisada, and just at this hour Girish surcharged

60

the whole atmosphere of the stage with deep religious emotions that roused an unprecedented religious fervour among the people. Thus to a very great degree Chaitanya Līlā contributed to the Hindu-awakening and Hindu revival.

This devotional drama was followed by Pralhād Charitra staged on 22nd November. In Hiranya Kaśipu represented by Amrita Mitra, Girish more or less portrayed his feelings of a time when he felt an aversion towards Ramakrishna but unconsciously was his heart being drawn to him. Unlike the drama of Rajkrishna Roy, Girish’s Pralhād Charitra was more a philosophical piece and while “the Bengal Theatre” was commanding crowded houses, Girish's drama, although Binodini acted as Pralhād, did not appeal much to the masses. Besides that Shando and Amarka of Roy's drama and songs, esp. of the snake-charmers, were very interesting. But what was lost in this drama was amply compensated by Bibāha Bibhrāt, a farce by Babu Amritalal Bose which accompanied Pralhād.

This young dramatist was a comedian of no mean order who had already earned raputation with his Chorer Upar Bātpādi and Chatuije Bapuije ( staged on 26th April '84 ) adapted from “Cox and Box.”

Bibāha Bibhrāt was a farcial comedy treating of marriage problem in modern Bengal and was a

great success. All the parts were well rendered* and

specially the part of Jhee, the maid-servant, rendered

by Khetromoni was highly successful. Both the

Lieutenant Governor of Bengal and the Viceroy of

India on seeing the performance in a private house

exclaimed—“So powerful an artist can scarcely be seen

even in a London Theatre of these days” and the

Marchioness of Dufferin too who accompanied her

husband was so much struck with the acting that she

did dot forget to refer to it with appreciation and

praise in her “Our Viceregal life in India”, from

which we quote below, the following :

A Native Entertainment

1885, 23rd January—Monday. Invited by Rai

Jogadananda Mukherjee we went in the even-

ing to a native entertainment in his house.

To get at this we drove through the bazars,

long streets of mud and bamboo hovels where

native colouring and local smells were rampant.

Groups of people were standing about and

greeted us with clapping of hands as we

passed. Near the gate of the house there

was a great crowd and a military band was

playing there.

We were seated in front of the stage and when

the curtain drew up, some very substantial

• Mr. Singh—author himself. Mrs. Kiraforma—

Binodini, Jhee—Khetromoni, Karta—Nilmadhab Chuckra-

burly—(afterwards Bel Babu), Nando—Aghore Pathak.

afterwards Probodh Ghosh). Bearer—Kashi Babu.

62

fairies were revealed standing on equally substantial flowers, and they sang the following lines in Bengali :-

"As stars round Luna's bright throne wait

When the blue vault from cloud is free

Thus girt with officers of state

Our noble Viceroy here we see.

We bless our Empress Queen who sent

A peer so just this realm to sway

With hearts and feelings reverent

Let us to him our homage pay.

And gladly now it will be our task

By art dramatic to beguile

This noble audience-we but ask

Your kind applause, your lenient smile."

"Then the play began. It was called Matrimonial Fix and we were provided with an English resume of the plot. It is a farcical satire upon the native element who set to England for 10 months and who is supposed to come back dressed in European clothes and having forgotten his own language ; and upon the educated female who is represented as giving her husband a scientific lecture upon heat, which drives him out of the house while she, during his absence makes love to a kindred and educated soul with whom in the last scene she absconds. The dress and absence of dress look more remarkable on the stage than off it. D. still saw ancient Roman in their legs. I still saw ordinary men

in cotton sheets. In one scene a bride-groom

appeared naked to the waist, with a red loin-

cloth as a costume while in the next he was

clothed in a full suit of broad cloth ; the match-

maker was highly clad, the bride-groom's father

wore the sheet or toga, the women were fully

draped.

"The best actor was a maid-servant (Khetromoni)

who seemed to say very sharp things and when

she and her mistress had a disagreement the

scolding on both sides was loud and stormy.

As a study of manners and customs, the play

was most interesting. It was in two Acts and

at the end of the first we were taken into the

house and upstairs where a new joy awaited

us."

Sometimes this farce accompanied Chaitanya

Līlā and it was no small wonder that two

antagonistic parts of Chaitanya and Bilashini

Karaforma could be performed on the same

night by the same actress in one strain. The one was

graceful and divine, while the other was full of levity

and flirtations. It is more than half a century passed

that such demonstration was put to exhibition. Few

are alive now who can give oral testimony of the

feats. We should, therefore, better quote from the

"Reis and Rayyet" of the 10th Oct, 1885, from the

pen of the distinguished journalist Babu Shambhoo

Chandra Mukherjee, the following :

"Comparisons are specially invidious where so many

are excellent players and most performed their

respective parts so well. Besides as we took no

notes we may forget names and assign parts

to wrong persons. We will run through the

names as best as we can, to the best of our

impressions and recollections of the two plays

acted on Wednesday. In order to meet the

convenience of European gentlemen who have

to come a great way after dinner, the perfor-

mance was timed to begin at 9 P. M. and even

then of the plays, the comedietta or farce of

Bibāha Bibhrāt or the Marriage difficulty was

first put forward to allow them time to come up

for the piece-de-resistance-the Chaitanya Līlā

which was to be brought on the stage for the

last time before the Puja vacation that night.

It was, therefore, late before the Līlā was com-

menced. Between the two, the players were

severely strained-for five mortal hours. Yet

they went through it heroically and both the

comic and serious plays were admirably per-

formed Babu Upendra Nath Mitter is a valu-

able, all-round man. His Promatha Nath Mitter

was good, but his Mādhāi, the Sottish robber,

by profession who molests and robs the Vairāgīs

and even attacks Nityānanda but is finally con-

verted at the latters' intercession by the Mahā-

probhu, was a hit. Jagāi was good but over-

shadowed by his companion. Kashi is a good

singer and is the picture of a Vairāgī on the

stage. His Todi was effective. Abinash a

young man deceived every body by his thorough

impersonation of stooping age in Śrīnibāsh.

Mr. Ghosh perfectly rendered Nanda Lal the

Rāī of the Period in the comedy Chaitanya's

65

Guru was not bad. "Captain Bell"—Gopinath

Sircar the seller of his L. A. of a boy Nanda

Lal for cash was first rate, though, for much

the same reason his impersonation of Chaitanay's

father was most disappointing. Gangamoni is

not a bad actress but she wanted paint on her

person. So did Bhusan Kumari who made

such a miserable girl consort for the divine

Guru. Gangamoni as Mrs. Gopinath Sircar was

all right within her small sphere. Our

young friend Amrita Lai is a young man of

parts who has always distinguished himself in

low comedy. He has now made a hit as 'play-

wright' by his "marriage difficulty" or

"Ribāha Bibhrāt." He naturally played his

own character of Mr. Singh—the Baboo

denationalised if not anglicised by a ten months'

trip to Europe—with great spirit as well

as fidelity. Nor must we forget the capital

Ghatak and marriage broker Poran. Sosti, as

the unfortunate husband of a she-graduate

had a small part assigned to him in which he

acquitted himself well. He was the picture

of a cook-consort of a scientific grey mare.

The ladies, as befits the fairest of Creation,

took the highest places. Bhumimani, no bad

actress, is a melodious nightingale who

gives no small strength to a company

dependent upon the support of a

Yātrā-loving community. Khetromoni is a

splendid actress, equal to almost any comic

business and possing great declamatory powers

for tragedy too. Her Dāsi in the comedy

9

caused roars, while her Mālinī in the Chaitanya drama showed her capacity for delicate work.

But last not least, what shall we say of Binodini ?

She is not only the moon of the Star company, but absolutely at the head of her profession in India.

She must be a woman of considerable culture to be able to show such unaffected sympathy with so many and various characters and such capacity for reproducing them.

She is certainly a lady of much refinement of feeling as she shows herself to be one of inimitable grace.

On Wednesday she played two very distinct and widely divergent roles, and did perfect justice to both.

Her "Mrs. Bilasini Kāraformā" the girl graduate, exhibited to say an iron grip of the quer phenomenon, the Girl of the Period as she appears in Bengali society.

Her Chaitannya showed a wonderful mastery of the subtle forces dominating one of the greatest of religious characters who was taken to be the Lord himself and is to this day worshipped as such by millions.

For a young Miss to enter into such a being so as to give it perfect expression, is a miracle.

All we can say is that genius like faith can remove mountains.

In the year 1885, Chaitunya Lilā Part II by the name of Nimāi Sannyāsh was staged on the 10th June and here too, the part of Nimāi was acted by Binodini.

The representation of this part was more difficult and recitation of the long passage

summarising Ṣadabhuja Darśana of Mahāprobhu

with six hands, required physical and mental

strain; and here too she was a success. The piece

had a run for about ten or twelve nights.

Prabhaśajijā commenced on the 30th may

1885 and had a run of about 10 nights. In songs,

dances and in general get-up, it was a very entertain-

ing piece and the audience was much delighted with

the performance.

The drama of Buddha Dev was however staged on

the 19th September 1885 and this too was a highly

successful drama. Kimbā Brahma Śaktihīn dukher

mōchane—'Is Brahma—God—powerless to relieve

sorrows!' gives an insight into the state of Girish's

mind of that time when he had still doubts. Thus

he enquires:-

"Where is God! where does He live?

I hear the world is a creation of His

Then why are there disease, sorrow and

oldness?

Why this world is an abode of miseries.

—Buddha Dev.

The appearance of Buddha'in the palace of Bimbi-

shāra and their conversation is one of the masterly

pieces in Bengali Literature and from dramatic

point of view also it created a great sensation.

Babu Amritalal Mitter in the role of Buddha

left an abiding impression on the minds of the

68

audience. Binodini too was very successful in the part

of Gopā. Sir Edwin Arnold, author of Light of

Asia, was present in one of the performances and

praised Binodini's acting beyond measure. He felt

that "the common populace of a nation could not

so attentively witness such a performance unless

the Hindu minds were very highly raised in

metaphysics."

The light of the drama was no doubt drawn

from Arnold's book, but it may be called an entirely

original one, from all points of view.

About the elevated nature of the drama and its

excellent representation by Girish's party, thus does

the Hindu Patriot remark :-

"Any writer on Buddha coming after Mr. Edwin

Arnold's Light of Asia must, in the nature of

things, derive his inspiration largely from that

exquisite and incomparable Idyll and we are

not surprised to see that the author of Buddha-

deb Charita claims to be no exception. But

even Mr. Arnold's manner of treating the

subject had to be departed from, for dramatic

reasons and so cleverly has the departure been

made that Mr. Arnold himself when he comes

to Calcutta in the course of his present tour

and sees the hero of the poem on the stage

will, we venture to think, have little reason to

regret the departure. The get up of the play

on the stage is excellent. The artists who

maintain the characters of Siddhārthy and

69

Gopā acquit themselves in a highly creditable manner. No praise can be too high for the rendering of Buddha's appeal for mercy in the presence of the king Bimbisāra which ultimately led to that monarch's conversion and the wailings of Gopā on Buddha's secret flight from Kapilavāstu. The chorus of the evil genii yields in no points to Bandmann's* rendering of the celebrated scene of Hecate in Macbeth. We are glad to notice that the efforts of this popular caterer of amusement are appreciated and patronised by the public. Babu Girish Chandra Ghosh has deserved well of his co-religionists and his countrymen by his endeavours to improve the moral tone of our stage to popularise Hindoo religion and to develop the slender literary and dramatic resources of the country.

Hindu Patriot, Dec. 14, 1885.

It is better that we should also quote a few lines from India Revisited† written by Sir Edwin Arnold himself, after he saw the performance :'

"Another singular pleasure was to witness a perfor- mance of the Light of Asia played by a native company to an audience of Calcutta citizens

• This company was showing Shakespeare's plays at Calcutta. The following stages of Calcutta where English plays were at that time shown were :-

( 1 ) The Opera House.

( 2 ) Theatre Royal, Chowringhee.

[ 3 ) Corinthian Theatre.

† Vide page 250. He left Calcutta on 12th March 1886.

70

whose close attention to the long soliloquies and quick appreciation of all the chief incidents of the story gave an idea of their intelligence and proved how metaphysical by nature these Hindu people are. The stage-appliances were deficient to a point incredible for a London manager and the mise en scene sometimes almost laughable in simplicity. Nevertheless, there was a refinement and imaginativeness in acting as well as an artistic sense entirely remarkable, and the female performers proved quite as good as the male."

Cast in Buddha was as follows :-

Buddha ... Amrita Lal Mitra

Suddhodan ... Upendra Nath Mitra

Śrīkāldev ... Mohendra Choudhury

Chhandak ... Bel Babu

Mār ... Aghore Nath Pathak

Bimbisāra ... Probodh Chandra Ghosh

Gautamī ... Gangamoni

Mahāmāyā ... Bonobiharini

Gopā ... Binodini

Sujātā ... Promoda Sundari

Woman who lost her son ... Khetromoni.

The next was the devotional drama Bilwamangal. It was staged on the 12th June, 1886, the theme being taken from the religious book Bhaktamāl. The hero, a dissolute Brahmin youth, squandered everything on Chintāmoni, a dancing girl, who lived on the other side of the Ganges. One day after having performed the Śrādh ceremony,

he came on the banks of the river in the evening

to cross it and come to Chintāmoni. But the river

heaved and assumed a threatening aspect owing to

heavy storm and rain and there. was no boat, nor

even a piece of wood there. It was all dark and he

crossed the river at last, mostly with the help of a

corpse which he found in the mid-stream and took

it for a log of wood. Next, when he arrived at

Chintāmoni’s house at dead of night, he found the

door bolted from inside but a deadly snake was there

dangling from the window. Bilwa took it for a

piece of string left by Chintāmoni for him and

holding fast by it, climbed up the window into

the room. Now the presence of Bilwa smelling

so nasty with the worm-eaten decomposed body

annoyed Chintāmoni beyond the measure and

the sight of the snake next bewildered her. At

that psychological moment she scolded him in

these words —“this mind of yours if wert so deeply

devoted to God, instead of to a woman of my

origin, would do you good.” These few words

brought him to senses and led him to think

of “Kṛṣṇa, the All-shelter”. The next is the history

of his struggle, ups and down again, and how

ultimately he was blessed with the beautiful vision

of śrīkṛṣṇa and Rādhā. The above story Girish

developed into an intensely devotional and lofty

drama with an exquisite art that defies all critical

analysis. The world-renowned Swami Vivekananda

used to say of it,—“Fifty times I have read the drama,

and each time I find new light in it”. Sister

Nivedita, Vivekananda's disciple and devoted to

Girish as a daughter, was so much charmed

with it that she actually translated a

considerable portion of the drama into her own

language. It is worthy of mention here that Bilwa-

mingal was practically the first drama written by

Girish after he obtained Ramkrishna Deb's blessings

and accepted him as his Guru. Songs of Pāgalini

and the teachings of Somgiri represent the great

Paramhansa in his various phases and the highest

truth of Vedantism—Nirhilālpa Samādhi is reflect-

ed in the words of Pagalini—

“Kabhu Ekākār

Nāhi ār Kāler Gaman

Nāhi Hillol Kallol

Sthir Sthir Samudoy

Nāhi Nāhi Phurāila Bāk

Bartamān Birājita.”

"All is one and there is no distinction of night and

day, present and past. That state is Nirvāna, when

there is no stir, no noise and there is an end of

the individual consciousness and one is immersed

in the mighty ocean of supreme and divine bliss

when every thing melts into Him”.

Indeed Bilwamingal is not only rich in deep

religious sentiments and lofty philosophical thoughts

but is also replete in dramatic elements as is pro-

vided by its minor characters* of varied interests

such as that of Sādhak, Thāka, Dārogā, Chowkidār,

Rākhāl Bālok and others. These characters are as

living and vivid as their representations on the stage

were quite graphic. “Krṣṇadarśner phal Krṣṇa-

darsan”.—“The fruit of the sight of Krṣṇa is the

sight of Śrikrṣṇa i.e. nothing remains after it, rang

in the ears of all and a new wave followed in the

Bengali stage.

Pāgalini was represented by Gongamoni to a

finish. Her words simply enchanted the audience,

her songs thrilled their hearts and the deep philo-

sophical significance of her expressions raised the

cultured minds to a region of bliss. Binodini too

did admirably, but there were Chintāmonis before,

while Pāgalini was a new creation, and in the

competition Gongamoni carried off the palm and was

crowned with laurels of praise. This fact, however,

was responsible for the loss of the Prima-donna

• Bilwamañgal—Amrita Mittra, Sādhak—Bel Babu,

Bhikṣuk—Aghore Pathak, Baṇik—Upendra Mittra,

Shomgirī—Probodh Ghose, Ahalyā—Bhuni ( Bonabiharini ),

Thāka—Khetromoni, Purohit—Shyam Kundu, Mañgalā—

Khoṇra Kusum, Dewan—Mohendra Chowdhuri, Pāgalinī—

Gangamoni, Servant—Parān Sil, Chintāmonī—Binodini,

Dārogā—Upendra Mittra, Chaukidār, Siṣyas—Ramtaran,

Shyam Kundu, Rākhāl ( cowherd boy ) Kashi Chatterji

Janaika Sthrī—Promoda Sundari,

10

from

the

Bengali

stage

altogether,

as

Binodini

took

umbrage

at

this

and

misundrstood

Girish's

action.

She

determined

to

leave

the

stage

and

the

Raja

under

whose

protection

she

was

then

living

promised

her

more

help.

The

Bengali

stage

lost

a

great

artist

but

there

was

no

help.

It

was

difficult

for

Girish

to

satisfy

her

vaunted

pride

which

had

grown

for

some

time

past

in

her—a

curse

that

accompanies

success

and

renown

in

cases

of

many

a

person.

The

last

piece

she

appeared

in

was

Bellickbāzār,

an

X'mas

skit

where

she

acted

the

part

of

Raṅgini,

and

that

of

Alakā

which

was

fixed

for

her

in

Rupasonātan

was

taken

by

another

actress.

The

last

days

of

Binodini,

however,

were

devoted

to

the

service

of

Gopāl

(

Krṣṇa

)

and

although

she

lived

up

to

the

age

of

78

years

with

her

grand

children,

she

was

never,

after

this,

associated

with

any

theatre.

The

part

of

Sādhak

was

inspired

by

Param-

uansha

himself

to

Girish.

The

spiritual

guide

in

the

role

of

such

imposter

showed

to

Girish

what

the

con-

ception

of

such

character

should

be.

The

part

was

super-excellently

represented

by

Bel

Babu

but

subsequently

when

Girish

himself

used

to

appear

in

this

role,

the

people

got

the

true

and

exact

conception

as

suggested

by

Ramkrishna

Dev.

The

acting

of

the

drama

left

nothing

to

be

desired

more

and

on

the

opening

night

when

about

850

75

persons came to witness the play, it was a grand

sight to see all the audience from box to gallery

following scene after scene with rapt attention, and

then, at the end, declaring in a body with ecstasy

that the play was an unqualified success.*

The last drama in the Star was Rupasonatan†

which too showed how Girish entered into the

secrets of Vaisnava Religion, but as some unhappy

incidents occured in the play, its performance

was not repeated.

Here too Mr. Amrita Bose's Subuddhi was

superb. Rupasonatan was closed, but even the

leading Vaisnava preachers used to say that unless

one had entered into the inner conceptions and

beauties of the Vaisnaba Religion, it was not

possible for him to write such a devotional drama.

Bel Babu was Chaitanya by inspiration and when he

used to call Sonatan who was then in prison, his

raised arms became stiff as that of a dead man.

*Vide contemporary papers Indian Daily News and

Englishman.

†Chaitanya Dev—Bel Babu, Sonaton—Amritalal Mitra,

Rupa—Upendra Mitra, Bullav—Kashinath Chatterjee,

Isan—Mohendra Nath Chowdhury, Subuddhi—Amritalal

Bose, Jivan—Nilmadhab Chakravarty, Hossein Sah and

Robber—Aghore Pathok. Ramdin and Srikanta—Probodh

Chandra Ghosh, Nasir Khan—Shyama Charan Kundu,

Choubey boy—Kusum, Aloka—Bonobihari, Karupa and

Choubey's wife—Gangamoni, Bisakha—Kironbala.

76

Many, including Dani Babu examined this to their great surprise.

Thus when the Star Theatrical Company under Girish's tutelage and constant care was at the zenith of its success, a great rival arose in the theatrical world. Babu Gopal Lal Seal who inherited the vast property of his millionaire grand-father Motilal with a cash of about Rs. 30 lacs, felt a hobby to start a theatre. The idea was prompted in him when he went to see a performance of Bellickbāzār. It is said that he took great offence at the expression of an actress which was explained to him as a reflection on his dark complexion. Gopal Lal now wanted to have the Star Theatre for himself at any cost.

He first purchased the land where the theatre stood, at Rs. 64000 from the son of Kirti Mitra, another millionaire of Calcutta and served the theatre-proprietors with notice for ejectment. The widow of Kirti Mitra had however a lien on the property. Girish now saw the lady and persuaded her to apply to the High Court objecting to the above notice. Thus came the chance of an honourable settlement. The pavilion was eventually sold at Rs. 30,000 but the good-will of the "Star" remained with its former proprietors.

The last performances on this stage were on the 31st July 1887, when Buddha and Bellickbāzār were repeated and as to the pathetic scenes that marked the leave-taking ceremony, we would better

77

quote the Indian Mirror of the time, which was corroborated by Bengali papers notably Nava-vibha-kar and Sadharoni edited by Akshay Chandra Sarkar, of the year 1294 B.S. page 198. Mirror runs thus :-

"On the last night, so great was the popularity of the troupe, that the house was filled to the brim and hundreds had to be sent away for want of even standing-room. At the conclusion of the performance Babu A. L. Bose one of the promising and prominent performers came forward and on behalf of the members who stood in the rear announced the fact of the pavilion being passed in the hands of Babu Gopal Lal Seal who was going to start a theatre club of his own. Then Babu Amritalal gratefully acknowledged the patronage that had been accorded to the company during the last four years. That they had catered for the public in that pavilion, craved pardon for their short-comings and concluded by expressing a hope that their patrons would continue their kindness towards them, should the company resume their performances elsewhere as they shortly expected to do. The sympathetic silence with which the affecting address was received unquestionably proved the popularity of the corps with the play-going public who had mustered strong on the occasion to bid the company au revoir."

A new site at Hatibagan (the present situation) was found and the land was purchased. Now the

78

Star Company intending to raise some money for the construction of the building left for Dacca and other places. At Dacca they began to show some performances from 22nd August 1887, at the East Bengal Stage which was just to the south of the Present Jagannath College building and just to the east of the then Jagannath School. As in 1873 and 1879 the troupe met with serious trouble this time also. Some of the Brāhmos and people of the puritanic ideas began to dissuade people—specially students—from seeing the performances and the sales were thus much affected. The Dacca Prakash ( 1294 B.S. Bhadra 12 ) however really echoed the general feeling. Thus it wrote :-

"We have been much gratified to see the representation of Chaitanya Līlā and Dhruba Charitra. Both are pure and soul-stirring. Sītāar Bonobās too, was performed very successfully. The Star is the foremost of all theatres.

"There were nuches before in the same place by the dancing girls and none objected, but now they come forward with resistance. It appears Brahmo brothers are at the bottom. If in seeing a performance for two or three hours, one's passions are excited, because women are seen on the stage, then that person should not see women at all."

But the trouble did not end. Miscreants began to throw stones on the corrugated iron-shed of the stage, and the house to the west was suspected to be

their rendezvous. The theatrical party was much

dis-spirited and information was given to the police.

The district judge Mr. Place also took up their

cause favourably and asked lawyers of Dacca to

help them. But the trouble continued ; Mr.

Clarke, the Superintendent of Police, himself came

to attend the scene every night, and matters came to

a climax when two students were brought to him

with stones in hand. Those boys were rather

roughfy handled and the whole student community

was made to take this as an insult to them.

The matter did not rest there and two notable

persons Mr. Paresh Nath Ghosh the great wrestler

and Mr. Prasanna Kumar Guha the cricketeer both

teachers of the Jagannath School and both—specially

the former—held in high esteem and love by the

public of Dacca were rather unjustly suspected to be

at the bottom. These two gentlemen were now made

special constables to be on guard there at the time of

performances. Their presence instead of abating rather

aggravated the situation. Sensation prevailed, sales

fell down and in the trouble and propaganda that

followed, the company had to leave Dacca with a

broken heart on the 16th September 1887. We get

the following again from Dacca Prakash on 2nd

Aswin 1294 B.S.

"The conclusion that the whole student community

was insulted at the arrest and persecution of

two of the miscreants who used to throw stones

80

constantly, to the loss and annoyance of the

whole community, was possible from narrow-

minded, and injudicious people only, but no

sensible man would think like this."

This was the unfortunate result of the tour, but

this was nothing in comparison with the further re-

putation that was in store for the Star Theatre.

Sādhu Vijoy Krishna Goswami was then Mini-

ster of the Sādhāran Brāhmo Samāj, Dacca, situated

just to the south of the Theatre. He used to say

"there the people create row, here I fall in trance with

the songs of Chaitanya Lila which come to my ears."

NATIONAL THEATRE

We left the account of the "National Theatre"

with Chhatrobhanga in 1884. In the following year

when Bhuban Mohan Neogi inherited some property,

he purchased the pavilion on a conditional sale from

Protap Jahuri in the name of his wife Bhubon-

mohini. He now re-opened the National Theatre on

the 27th August 1885 with the help of Babu

Dharmadas Sur and staged Pandit Haribhusam

Bhattacharyya's Kumārsambhah with Thakurdass

Chatterji as Mahādev, Mrs. Sukumari (Golap) as

Rati, Chhotarāni as Durgā and Purna Ch. Ghose

(Music-Master) as Madan.

On the 3rd July 1886, National Theatre with

Kedar Chowdhury as manager staged Raja Basanta

Roy dramatised by him from Rabindra Nath Tagore's novel Bou Thakurāṇīr Hāt. The cast was again brilliant with—

Radhamadhab Kar as Basanta Roy, Mohendra Bose as Uday, Motilal Soor as Protap, Purnha Ghose as Anangamohan, Harimoti as Bibhā (afterwards called Bibhā-Hari), Chhotorāṇī as Surama, Bhabatarini as Rāṇī, Lakshmi as Maṅgalā, Babu Nil Madhab Chakravarty as Ramchandra and above all Mr. Mustafi who returned from pretty long travels played the part of Ramāi Bhāṇḍ.

The acting was good and the songs of Mr. Kar entertaining.

Ānandamath was repeated with the original cast and Babu Radhamadhab Kar as Mr. Thomas. As before, Bankim Chandra was very much annoyed. Sometime after, he wrote the following letter to Girish Chandra :-

"My novels are being badly dramatised by others. You are a powerful writer and are possessed of great talents and you can know the mind of the author. I hope earnestly that my writings, through your efforts may attain great and unexpected success.—(Āśāir Atita).*

Notwithstanding the artists, the Great National Theatre was closed in October 1886. In a suit by Jahuri on the allegation that Bhuban Mohan though insolvent, himself purchased the property in the name

*Vide : Nava′ & Sadharani Kartic 15, 1294 B.S.

11

of his wife, a decree granting permission to sell the

pavilion was passed. On the auction-sale that

followed, the Star company purchased it and had it

demolished, probably with a view to keep no two

rivals on both sides of it.

GIRISH AT THE EMERALD THEATRE

After the Star Theatre left the house at 68,

Beadon Street, Babu Gopal Lal Seal began to spend

money like water to secure artists of both sexes and

opened the Emerald Theatre on the 8th October

1887 under the management of Kedar Nath with his

Pāndava Nirvāsana. But the theatre promised

not much success. It now struck Gopal Seal to

secure Girish at any cost, but the Star Theatre could

ill afford to spare their guide and master (Guru).

Gopal, however, offered him a bonus of Rs. 20,000

Rupees Twenty Thousand,with,again,a pay of Rs. 350

a month, putting up at the same time a threat that

unless Girish agreed to come, he (Gopal) would

secure all the artists of the “Star” by offering any

wages and thus strike at its very root. Girish

accepted the job in the interest of the “Star Theatre”

and gave the proprietors a sum of Rs. 16,000 out of

his bonus for the construction of the new house at

Cornwallis Street, keeping for himself only Rs. 4,000

in the way of the salaries that were due to him as

manager of the Star for the past few months. When

the

above

sum

was

given,

Girish

distinctly

gave

his

disciples

a

piece

of

advice

in

the

following

words

:-

"After

being

harrassed

by

different

proprietors,

you

are

now

your

own

masters.

See

that

no

gentle-

man

coming

under

your

protection

do

ever

suffer

in

your

hands,"

At

the

time

Girish

joined

the

Emerald

Theatre,

Bidhabā

Sañkat

a

worthless

piece

was

still

running

on,

and

the

Indian

Mirror

found

fault

with

Girish

for

having

"with

all

his

elevated

tastes

allowed

such

a

scandalous

piece

being

put

on

boards."

But

as

soon

as

Girish

came,

he

allowed

Nīl-darpan

to

be

acted

on

the

27th

November

1887,

which

was

again

followed

by

Sitar

Banabās,

Mrnalinī,

Megh-

nādbadh,

where

Girish

appeared

in

his

usual

roles.

But

the

greatest

attraction

was

Girish's

Pūrṇa

Chandra

staged

on

17th

March

1888

which

at

once

raised

the

sale

of

tickets

to

a

sum

varying

from

Rs.

800

to

Rs.

1,000,

then

considered

the

maximum

for

a

performance

on

the

stage.

Our

readers

should

remember

that,

at

that

time,

gallery

ticket

was

sold

at

As.

8

and

those

of

pits

and

stalls

Re.

1

and

Rs.

2

respectively.

Pūrṇa

Chandra

was

a

devotional

drama

(idea

being

taken

from

a

Hindi

drama

Pūrān

Bhakāt)

and

showed

to

what

height

of

religious

plane

Girish

had

arisen.

The

perfor-

mance with a powerful cast* was highly successful and the editor of Reis and Rayyet rightly remarked that the high bonus paid to Girish was realised from the performance of Pūrna Chandra alone.

In Pūrna Chandra Girish showed how for some persons it was possible to rise above lust and lucre, and Ramkrishna Dev was reflected in the character of Sādhu ‘Gorokshanātha’.

The next piece was Bishād, another drama from Girish's pen, the representation of which was very successful from the first performance on the 5th October, 1888,

The story of Bishād was taken from Bhaktamāl and Girish showed how Sarasvati served her husband, Alarka, who did not like her, and became his attendant in the guise of a boy, as Bishād, at the house of his mistress Ujjwalā. The part of this Bishād-Sarasvati was so ably acted by an actress named Kusum that she was henceforth called Bishād Kusum. The other characters were also satisfactorily performed by the artists as follows:-

Alarka … Mohendra Bose

Mādhab … Moti Sur

*Rājā Shāliban–Mohendra Bose, Pūrna Chandra–Mrs. Sukumāri Dutta, Dāmodar–Moti Sur,. Seva Das–Chuni Mitra, Charmakār–Shib Chandra . Chatterji, Ichatrā–Khetromoni, Sārce–Kusum (Bishād), Sundarā–Chhotarani.

85

Shibarām

...

Hari

Bhus̤an

Bhattacherjee

Ujjwalā

...

Chhotarani

Sobāgi

...

Khetromoni

Devi

Birohini

...

Purna

Ghose.

Thieves

...

Shib

Chatterjee,

Kumud

Sarkār

Rājmātā

...

Gulphan

Hari

Dāndi

...

Dashu

Babu

Coming

events

cast

their

shadows

before.

Sarasvati

(Bishād)

and

her

death

were

probably

the

premonitions

in

the

poet's

mind

of

the

coming

death

of

his

wife

Surabala

who

breathed

her

last

about

two

months

and

a

half

after

this,

on

25th

December,

She

was

a

devoted

and

pious

lady

and

gave

Girish

full

domestic

happiness.

After

the

sad

event,

he

did

not

stay

any

longer

in

the

Emerald

Theatre.

But

how

he

got

out

of

the

meshes

of

Seal,

will

be

seen

in

the

next

Chapter.

Chapter III

The Star Theatre ( at Hāti Bāgān )

After the company bade farewell to the audience at the Beadon Street, selling the Theatre to Gopal Seal, the proprietors without delay purchased a plot of land measuring 30 cottas on Rs. 27,000 from Babu Ramendra Krishṇa Dev and his brother of the Shovabazar Raj family, out of the money they received from Mr. Seal. The pavilion was then built partly with funds secured at mofossil towns and mostly with the amount of Rs. 16,000 which Girish gave them from out of his bonus. Some money was also borrowed. The proprietors were not greedy, and used to take each an allowance of Rs. 40 only, a month. By their frugal management, they succeeded in having built the theatre which still now stands as an imposing edifice in North Calcutta at 79/3/4 Cornwallis Street.

Now to appear with its former reputation that the Star had acquired under Girish, the need of a suitable drama was very sorely felt. But who would produce it except Girish Chandra ? He was however then in the employ of Seal and could not help the Star openly. He, however, devised a plan to write a drama for his disciples during the late hours of

night on the side of a canal in the east, going there

in the robes of a woman, as some people still

say, and thus concealing the thing entirely

from the knowledge of his master. With the

drama now produced, the Star Theatre was

opened in its newly-built house. The authorship

was kept a secret and Nashirām the aforesaid devo-

tional drama was hereafter published as the compo-

sition of “Sevaka”, that is, one dedicated to service.

The new building was designed and decorated

by Babu Jogendra Nath Mitra of the State Rail-

way Service and Babu Dharmadas Sur had it so

very gorgeously illuminated by gas lights that it

looked like a fairy mansion.

It was on Friday 26th May 1888, when the

Theatre first opened at 9 P.M. Babu Amrita Lal

Bose, the Manager, first appeared on the stage with

a white Punjabi shirt on his person, and read a short

poem composed by Girish Chandra which begins

thus—

Hear me, ye good people.

It is after a year's sorrowful exile

That we greet you again with due respect.

The cast was as follows :-

Nasīrām ... Amrita Bose

Jogesh Nāth ... Upendra Mitra

Anāth Nāth ... Amrita Mitra

Kāpālik ... Aghore Pathok

Sambhoo (Kapalik's disciple) ... Bel Babul

Rāj Montri ... Mohendra Chowdhury

Birojā ... Kadambini

Mādhuri ... Harimoti

Sonā ... Gongamoni

Bhutnāth ... Probodh Ghosh

We quote here a few lines from the celebrated actor Babu Amarendra Nath Dutta's reminiscences* about the opening night :

"That was a Friday the day of Phooladole. It was the first night of performance at the Star of Hati Bagan. We entered inside. The decorated house looked like the palace of Indra. A beautiful house that enchanted the eyes, a row of numberless brilliant lights, spectators dressed in different dresses all crowded together—I was beside myself with joy. I wondered where had I come. Such splendour, such beauty, such captivating sights appeared before my eyes for the first time. I thought if such bewitching was the outside beauty, what heavenly sights were hidden behind the screen ! This was what I told to my friends after my visit to the Star. Words fail to describe what I saw that day. From that evening my aspiration was to be an actor."

Nasīrām presented Ramkrishna Dev and inculcated the evils that ensue from lust, lucre and pride. Although it was not expected to appeal to

• Vide his biography by Upendra Nath Vidyābhusan P. 12-16.

the ordinary audience, yet the performance was highly successful. Babu Amrita Bose acted very well the part of Nasirām, and Gangamoni's songs were soul-stirring.

Babu Amrita Bose, the manager then rendered the famous Bengali novel Svarṇalatā by Babu Tarak Gangolee into a drama—under the name of Saralā. Svarṇalatā was one of the most popular fictions of the time and the death of Sarala, a living personation of devotion, sacrifice and sufferings touched every human heart.

The play, with Śaśi Bhūṣaṇ and Promodā, Bidhu Bhūṣaṇ and Saralā, Gadādhar and Nīlkamal* with pathos and laughter combined, drew crowds for a time but after a few nights the audience waned thinner and thinner and the necessity of another powerful drama was keenly felt.

We have said before how Girish felt the degrading company of Gopal Seal and was looking for an opportunity to shake himself off from the unholy surroundings. His wife, as we said before, also died in the mean time.

He now began to pull strings from behind and Gopal Seal was found unwilling to continue the theatre in his own name. It was now

• Śaśī Bhūṣaṇ—Nilmadhob Babu Bidhu Bhūṣaṇ—Amrita Mitra, Śyāmā—Gangamoni, Godādhar—Bel Babu, Promoda—Promodā, Saralā—Kiranbala, Nīlkamal—Paran Seal, afterwards Amrita Bose, Manager.

12

leased to Babus Moti Lal Soor, Hari Bhusan Bhatta-charyya, Purna Chandra Ghiose and Brojolal Mitra.

Nº sooner was this done than Girish left the

Emerald on the legal plea that the contract stood

with Seal alone and not with his lessees, and he

(Girish) was under no obligation to serve them. No

sooner did he leave Emerald than the news spread

like any thing and the proprietors of the Star

greeted their Guru as their “Manager”, only on the

offer of a paltry sum of Rs. 250 a month which

Girish gladly accepted. The Star now rose at the

meridian and no dearth of dramas was possible now.

On coming to the Star Theatre Girish composed

his first social drama Proful⁂la, got it rehearsed for

about two months and had it mounted by distin-

guished artists on the 27th April 1889. This

social tragedy—indeed one of the greatest tragedies

in the world's literature, has since been repeated

from thousands of platforms and like Shakespeare's

Hamlet, has never grown stale nor lost its beauty

and charm. The gradual stages of Jogesh's fall,

delineated psychologically, require the highest skill

of historionic art for their representation. Mr. Mitter

however carried the palm with his gifted voice and

his stage-suiting appearance. The other artists also

did well. We need not dilate more, but of one

artists at least it will be no exaggeration to add that

not to speak of his youthful period, but even in his

ripe old age it was a treat to see him appear in the

rôle of Rameś and that was none but Babu Amrita Lal Bose. The cast was as follows :-

Jogeś ... Amrita Mitra

Rameś ... Amrita Bose

Suresh ... Kashinath Chatterji

Bhajahari ... Bel Babu

Madan Dādā & 1st Bepāri Nilmadhab Chakraborty

Kāingālī Charan ... Shyama Charan Kundu

Ek Jan Lok (Singer) ... Aghore Päthok

Magistrate ... Ramtaran Sanyal

Jamādāar & Bank Dewan Upendra Mitra

Inspector ... Probodh Ghose

Suṇḍi ... Sashi Chatterjee

2nd Bepāri ... Akshoy Chakraborty

Inspector & Jail Doctor Pada (Binode Shome)

Mātālinī ... Bonobiharini

Jagamoni ... Tunna Moni

Jñānadā ... Kironbala

Umāsundarī ... Gangamoni

Profullla ... Bhuson Kunari

Jādāv ... Tara Suadari

Bāriwāli ... Elokeshi

Khemtāwāli ... Promoda, Kusuun (Khonrā.)

Profullla made the stage more dignified and serious and as to how the play was received at the time, we think it proper to quote the observations of the Statesman in the editorial columns that appeared in three issues of the paper of the period.-

21st May, 1889. (Monday)

PROFULLA ( At the Star Theatre )

The new social play Profullla by the wellknown

92

dramatist and manager of the above theatre

Babu Girish Chandra Ghose was produced

before a crodwed house on Saturday last. The

drama is based upon the incidents not un-

common in real life in Hindoo Society and is

intended not only to amuse but equally to im-

part instruction and moral lessons. A brief

description of the plot may not therefore be

uninteresting. Jogesh represented as a self-

made wealthy merchant who regards honesty

as the best means for attaining temporal as well

as spiritual prosperity. His family consisted

of a widowed mother, his wife and a minor

son, two younger brothers Ramesh and Suresh

and sister-in-law Profula-Ramesh's wife.

These he respected and cherished with all

tenderness and paternal affection and used to

pass a pleasant life. Suddenly there was a turn

of fortune, his business failed involving him

in large liabilities which he intended to pay off

at the sacrifice of all his properties but to

drown his sorrows, he took to intoxicicants while

his brother Ramesh who was on the contrary a

monster of wickedness and treachery contrived

to cheat the creditors and his brother too by

transferring all the estate to himself. This he

succeeded in accomplishing and thus reduced

him to the condition of a beggar. Not being

satisfied with this Ramesh planned to poison

his brother's child in order to make himself

indisputed master of his wealth, but his wife

Profula discovered the conspiracy and while

expostulating with him of his villainous attempt

93

was so violently assaulted by him that she died.

Here ended his sins ; he was arrested by the

police and justice was meted out to him. Mr.

A. C. Mitter played the part of Jogesh admira-

ly and showed how strong is fraternal love

amongst the Hindoos and what misfortunes are

brought upon a Hindoo family by that curse-

drink. At the same time his wife Jnanada

showed how Hindoo ladies adore their husbands

( even if they are drunkards ) that they donot

scruple to sacrifice their lives for their hus-

bands’ comforts. A. C. Bose sustained the

part of Ramesh and showed virtue ultimatly

triumphs over vice and what fate awaits the

avaricious for their deception and covetousness.

Profulia the wife of Ramesh on the other

hand is the model of piety and chastity and

moved the audience to tears. Her untiring

efforts to reform her husband drew the admira-

tion of the audience. The friendship of Suresh

and Sibnath is enviable. The Police Court

and the Garanhatta Grog-shop scenes were

life-like.

June 8.

THE NATIVE THEATRE

The New Tragedy at the Star

We have noticed briefly in our leading columns

the sensation which has been produced by the

new tragedy of Profulia at the Star Theatre.

The central characters in the piece are Jogesh,

Ramesh, Profulia and the plot is simple although

its evolution is dramatic and sensational in

the extreme. Jogesh is a man of means and

position both of which he has acquired by the

persevering labour of thirty years. He is of

generous disposition, a fact proved by ample

allowances he makes to the members of two

families. His brother Ramesh very much

resembles the character of the wicked brother

in Schiller's "Robbers". He takes advantage

of the weakness of Jogesh for strong drink to

ruin him while he continues to get hold of the

fortune of the remaining members of the family

by the most unscrupulous and abominable

methods. Profulia, his wife frustrates his

attempt to poison a young boy who stood

between him and his wishes, when the villain

in his fury fells her to the ground. Jogesh

meanwhile is ruined, degraded and reduced

to beggary through drink, his wife dies in the

streets and the other members of the family

suffer the direst poverty. The incidental scenes

are in keeping with the general tenour of the

play and all tend to the one great purpose of

pointing a deep moral. A description of the

principal characters will give our readers

some idea of the drama. Although ruined by

drink Jogesh has at times a sense of his

degradation and his sentiments may be expressed

in the words of Cassio :

O thou invisible spirit of wine if thou hadst no

name to be known by, let us call thee devil."

He knows the value of a good name and

expresses himself almost in the words of Iago—

"Good name, in man or woman, dear, my lord,

Is the immediate jewel of their souls ;

95

Who steals my purse steals trash : 'tis something nothing.

'T was mine 'tis his, and has been slave to

thousands

But he that filches from me my good name

Robs me of that which not enriches him :

and make me poor indeed.

Suresh though a wayward lad, and somewhat addicted to bad company is not without his good points.

He generously saved the wife of his brother Ramesh from the indignity of attending a police court and his dear friend Sib-nath from the consequences of being a particeps criminis in a false charge of theft.

He nobly strikes to avoid dragging his brother's wife and his friend into the mire and although quite innocent accepts with calmness and fortitude the heaviest punishment the law can inflict.

Iago works upon the jealosy of a husband to madden him to the crime of killing Desdemona -his wife.

Ramesh out-rivals this villainy by conspiring to ruin the brother Jogesh to whom he owes all he has, and not his elder brother only but his younger brother Suresh whom he succeeds in imprisoning upon a false charge.

He next attempts to starve to death his young nephew Jadav.

Decoying him into a secluded apartment he imprisons him there with the intention of starving him to death.

He is deaf to the passionate entreaties of the lad for water and prepares instead a poisoned draught wherewith to quench the poor fellow's thirst.

His wife Profulia who is the angel of

96

goodness in these dark scenes saves the boy by employing a supposed lunatic to trace him and rescue him from the death that seemed so near. The supposed madman hesitates at first to give Profulia any clue to the finding of the boy ; but her solemn warning that he must shortly appear before Dharmoraj to give an account of his deeds strikes terror into his heart and he atonce conducts her to the room where the boy is imprisoned. Shaken to the depths of his soul by the warnings of Profulia that he can not vanish from his minds, he declares himself no longer mad but striken with the fear of Dharmaraj and straightway resolves to save the life of the boy by the magic powder Pārā Bhūgshā in his possession which he had preserved for the renewing of his own youth and prolonging his career of crime. Profulia's noble week is done, the boy is saved while the madman is clothed and in his right mind. The villain Ramesh comes to the knowledge of what his wife has done and at first tries to dissuade her from opposing his course, but finding her resolved, he strikes a fatal blow at her in his passion which causes her death. Nothing could be finer than the dying words uttered by Profulia to her husband who is a demon in human form. Her last breath is to entreat pardon for her murderer from the Almighty power that rules mankind. The agony of the mother of Jogesh on hearing of the imprisonment of her son which combined with the numerous villainies of Ramesh dethrones her reason, affords

room for a very moving dramatic scene. We are now introduced to the faithful servant Pitambar who is ready to lay down his life for his master Jogesh. We fear we have wearied our readers however, and must give the final development of the play in another issue.

June 9

Profulla has the reputation of being remarkably well enacted at the Star Theatre under the immediate supervision of the author. The character of Jogesh is strongly limned. The change from the noble minded generous man who voluntarily divided his property which he had taken thirty years to acquire among his brethern and to the poor, heartless, degraded and hopeless drunkard was depicted with great dramatic force that had an evident effect especially that part where he is represented as begging in the streets and even at the funeral of his wife craving for a glass of wine entirely oblivious of the solemnity of the situation. It is a relief to turn from this black picture to the character of Jnanada who calmly and uncomplainingly suffers the privations brought about by the conduct of Jogesh, her drunken husband. The heroism with which she welcomes death in the streets, alone and unbefriended, drew tears from many eyes. Here is a truly beautiful character and many of her sayings are pathetic in their simple truth and feeling. In a conversation with Profullla she tearfully observes that she could observe the death of the starving boy Jadav if she could only have the pleasure of seeing him get a good

satisfying meal even for a single day. That the countenance is an unerring index of the heart was exemplified in the case of the wife of the native doctor Kāñgāli whose hideous mien is quite in keeping with her detestable disposition. She upbraids Ramesh for his softness of heart and when he is touched by the cries of the boy and is about to give him a draught of water she dissuades him from doing so and steels his heart against the promptings of humanity. It reflects very great credit on the artists of the Star Theatre that they enact their allotted roles with conspicuous ability and success. Admitting the great force and power of this drama, an opinion has been expressed that the fate of Jogesh might have been made to end differently. It is said that the shock of meeting his starving wife dying in the streets might have the effect of reforming him altogether causing him to renounce strong drink and, as one critic said, spending the remainder of his existence in penitence for the past and devotional exercises. We have to congratulate the talented author and the able manager Babu Girish Chandra Ghose on the very great success they have achieved and we recommend the public to see the play and judge for themselves.

It is always hazardous to hunt for personal sentiments of the dramatist from a drama. But we may say that Jnanada's death-scene very appropriately reflects Girish's own fellings after his wife's death, and the bitter cry of despair 'Āmār Sājāno Bāgān

99

Śukiye Galo’ (my trim garden has withered away)

seems to have risen from the depth of the dramatist’s heart.

Profulla was followed by another social drama Hārānidhi.

Though the drama does not end in bitter tragedy, the first three Acts give, however, a very

masterly representation of the sufferings and despair of an honest house-holder who was the victim of a

foul conspiracy. Hariś the hero of the piece is that unfortunate victim.

Hārānidhi too was greatly influenced by the above sad incident and the character of Sushila is

mainly drawn after his lamented wife Surabālā

The cast was as follows :

Mohinī

.. Upendra Mitra

Hariś

... Amrita Mitra

Aghore

... Bel Babu

Nilmādhab

... Kaśi Babu

Naba

... Mahendra Choudbury

Dharani

... Probodh Ghose

Tej Chandra Bahādur

... Ranu Babu

Bhāirab

... Nil Madhab Chakraverty

Brojendra

... Poran Krishna Seal

Dhanirām

... Shyama Charan Kundu

Sonāullā

... Umes Chandra Das

Haimabati

... Jagat Tarini

Kamalā

... Kiran Bala

Suśīlā

... Nagendra Bala

Hemāṅgini

... Tara Sundari

Kedambini

... Gongamoni.

100

After Hārānidhi had a run for fourteen nights or so, the Star Company lost the most powerful comedian Babu Amrita Lal Mukerji popularly known as Captain Bell or “Bel Babu” whose Gadā-dhar or Bhajabhari or Aghore stands unrivalled still to-day. His death—one of suicide—was a very tragic one and the three dramas could not further be proceeded with owing to his death which melancholy event took place on the 11th March 1890. His talents which were rather extraordinary, our pen would be too feeble to depict and we would therefore quote the few lines from the contemporary Reis and Rayyet of March 18, 1890 :—

"DEATH OF BEL BABOO"

One of the most popular figures of the native stage of the metropolis has been removed by the death, by his own hand, of Amrita Lal Mookerjee, better known as "Bel Baboo." The young man belonged to a well-known Brahman family of Calcutta, the house of illustrious Durga Charan Mookerjee. He showed a turn for mimicry from the time when he was a little boy, which afterwards developed into unmistakable genius. His histrionic powers were indeed so remarkable that he could always command attention. He became a favourite of the audience as soon as he joined the professional stage, a little over eighteen years ago. Before the pre-actress days—the Age of Darkness, as it may fitly be called, of the modern

101

Theatre–his impersonation of female roles was as clever as his later male performances were uniformly successful. His Mallika in Dinobandhu Mitter's Nobīn Tapasvinī is not likely to be forgotten by any one who ever witnessed it. Not the cleverest of lady artists has ever been able to over-shadow or even equal him there. After the introduction of actresses, up to the time of his death he filled innumerable characters, in none of which, serious or comic, he failed to make an impression. Always happy in his conception. it was rarely that he overstepped the modesty of nature. But it was more in comic than in serious impersonations that "Bel Baboo" betrayed his wonderful force and versatility.

His very appearance was a signal for fun and he spoke and strutted upon the boards amidst the deafening cheers of an audience turned mad with laughter. Comedy was his forte, and in comedy, he was equally at home, in the high and the low. He was the man who introduced harlequinade of the native stage. As harlequin, he was without a rival; he has hardly yet found an imitator. It was marvel what an artist in high histrionics was this volatile buffoon. As Gadadhar Chandra in Saralā, Bel Baboo was more than delightful–simply charming. Gadā–dhar Chandra will never allow its interpreter to fade away from our memory. In modern India, genius in any art languishes for want of proper appreciation, becoming more a source of mortification than pleasure to its possessor.

the Bohemian's art has yet to be recognized amongst us. In the West, the death of a

comedian, like the late Amrita Lal Mookerjee would be regarded as a great social, if not a

national, calamity. Here, in our unformed society, nobody thinks of noticing publicly his

death or regards it as much of a loss, and no momento perhaps will remain of his worth except

in the wicked columns of Reis and Rayyet. Of course, the Star Theatre was closed on last

Wednesday out of respect to the memory of this Prince of Actors, who was one of its

main pillars.

Bel Babu's death was soon followed by the death of another talented artist Miss Kiron Bala who

stepped into Binodini's place as the lady actress of the 'Star' after the latter retired from the stage.

She was a tragic actress of rare merit and was seen exhibiting five different postures and emotional poses

in the five acts of the domestic piece 'Saralā'. Who knew that the death-scenes of Saralā and Jñanadā

shown by her in both the roles to perfection would be the forerunner of her own death? The Star

Theatre openly mourned the death of Kiron Bala and the audience fully reciprocated it. Of her,

too, we shall quote the Reis and Rayyet of April 1890 which noticed the sad event in the following

lines.-

Death has plucked away another 'Star' from the native stage. The heroine of the 'Star' boards

103

—Srimati Kiran Kumari is dead having fallen a victim to the fell epidemic of smallpox of late raging in the city. The dead actress was a rare flower of her profession—another young genius who promised to burst before long into full bloom and splendour. In so young an age, she betrayed extraordinary talents. To natural versatility and a clear fancy, she joined a good fund of vivacity and nervous pluck that removed every obstacle before. On the retirement of the former heroine from the stage an actress of unrivalled ability, she was chosen out, while yet very young and in the initial stage of her apprenticeship, to fill the vacancy, to the mortification of the veteran lady-artists who had all hoped for the prize of promotion. It was a nervous step in all conscience for both the veteran manager and the young novice. But the trepidation was all over with the first night of the experiment. The sudden and irrevocable resignation of the lady "Star" had plunged the manager into a sea of despair, and the wreck of his bark on the rocks ahead of incompetency seemed imminent. Indeed, the success of the rather bold experiment averted what may be called a financial disaster. The young novice proved to be the real pole-star of the manager's hope to save his theatre from the impending peril. That very night she reassured all hopes and belied all fears. The test she was put to was trying for the nerves of any actor or actress in the world. She had to

104

interpret Chaitanya, perhaps the most difficult of Bengalee dramatic characters, and in her delineation of it she proved herself thoroughly deserving of the exalted lift, if not equal to her glorious predecessor.

Ever since she was fixed to fill all the title roles and she filled them with equal credit.

Her great drawback in the acting of these old parts was the brilliant triumphs of her predecessor, the glowing tints of which could never vanish or fade from the memories of her audiences.

She knew this and wisely contented herself by imitating the great actress even at the risk of being considered affected and artificial—the inevitable result of all imitations.

But soon the day of her true appreciation came.

The new drama of the realistic school was placed upon the boards, the title role being alloted to her.

As Saralā, she might be said to have made her real debut, and as Saralā, it is enough to say, she can never be forgotten, for, even now, at the mention of the picture, many a playgoers' eyes must glisten with a tear.

In short, if her imitations were wonderful, her own work was simply marvellous, and Sarala proved the greatest of financial successes to her employers.

The Star Theatre has sustained in her death, occuring so soon after that of the inimitable 'Bel Baboo', a loss which is beyond repair, unless indeed the old heroine reappears on its boards, while the lovers of the native drama have lost one who, perhaps born to be society's curse, wonderfully converted herself

105

into a boon which afforded them very high and healthy intellectual treats.

Reis and Rayyet

April 1890

The Englishman, too, calls her a Bengali Siddons and in its issue of the 24th June 1890 Tuesday reproduces the above observations of the Reis and Rayyet confirming its assertion that really the "Bengali Theatre is a temple of high art".

These tragic happenings* gave a serious blow to the 'Star' which had to close its doors for three months, after which Girish Chandra's Chanda a historical drama taken from Rajput legends was put on boards on the July 26, 1890. It was the forerunner of his great patriotic dramas Satnām, Sirā-juddula, Mīrkāsim and Chhatrapati Śivājī and in the hero of this piece Girish stressess on the self-less attributes of a real nation-builder.

Babu Amrita Mitra appeared in the title role and was ably matched by Dani Babu, in the role of Raghndev whom, the former (his guru) introduced for the first time in the public stage as a professional artist. The other characters were represented as follows by the following celebrated artists :-

• It may interest our readers that for Bel Babu's efficiency in performing the part of Aghore in Hārāndihi, this drama was dedicated to Bel Babu's memory by the publisher at the author's request.

14

106

Pūrṇarām Bhāt

Ranamalla

Śikhandī

Mukuljī

Jodh Rāo

Gunjāmālā

Bījurī

Kuśalā

Bhīl Sardār

We need not tire our readers' patience with details of Girish's Mulinā Bikāś (staged on 13th September 1890) but will pause here with a few words for Girish's Mahāpūjā an X'mas skit composed on the occasion of the sixth session of the Indian National Congress held at Calcutta. To serve the Mother-land requires self-abnegation—was the theme of this very short piece and all the contemporary papers including Dacca Prakash spoke highly of Girish and the 'Star', but alas, misunderstanding soon occured and connection of the one ceased with the other.

The apparent cause was that some of Girish's dramas Mukul Munjarā and Abu Hossain which here-after got warmest reception at the Minerva Theatre were rejected by the proprietors of the "Star" as worthless. But the real cause was that "Star" now learnt to stand on its own legs, and found that its Saralā and Tājjab Byāpār, Bānchhārām and Tarubālā from the pen of Babu Amrita Bose (although the last drama was thoroughly recast by

107

Girish Chandra and its 5th Act was completely written by him), were attracting spectators. So in its brighter days now, 'Star' failed to show the consideration due to the father of the Stage and commenced slighting him as an 'Old fool'. What brought matters to the climax was that Girish's child, the only son by the second wife, was then lying very ill and while he was staying at Madhupur for a change necessary for the dying son, he was presented with a letter of dismissal on the ground of irregularity in attendance. The company also found a dramatist at the time in the person of Babu Rajkrishna Roy, late of the Bina Theatre.

As a protest against such ingratitude, a large number of actors and actresses left the Star and began to show performances with Mr. Nilmadhab Chakravorty as their manager and guide, at some private houses under the name of the 'City Theatre' staging Girish Chandra's dramas already acted at the Star. The latter company was enraged at this and considering, rather wrongly, that Girish was at the bottom, began to take retaliatory steps not only against the 'City Theatre' but also against Girish.

Early in May 1891, when a performance was arranged at the palatial house of Babus Nondalal Bose and Pasupati Nath Bose of Bagbazar, the Star Theatre Company moved the Hon'ble High Court asking for an ad interim injunction against both the

dramatist and the new Company. The application however, was refused as Mr. Justice Wilson wanted the Star authorities to have the matter settled with Girish, since the latter in his (judge's) opinion was the principal man through whose effort Drama and Stage attained such a high status in Bengal. For the facts of the case we would better quote the Hindu Patriot of the time (May 11, 1891).

"We regret to notice that the proprietors of the Star Theatre and their late writer and manager have fallen out to the extent of going to court. It appears that Girish Ghosh's connection which was renewed not long ago, after he left the Emerald Theatre, ceased in March last and a rival company was formed under his guidance which have been giving performances of his plays in the houses of native gentlemen. The last of these performances was intended to be given at the residence of Babus Nando Lal Bose and Pasupati Nath Bose. The proprietors of the Star Theatre strongly objected to the proposed arrangement and Mr. Jackson Bar-at-Law, instructed by Babu Gonesh Ch. Chunder moved the High Court on Saturday last on their behalf for an ad interim injunction prohibiting the intended performance. Mr. Justice Wilson to whom the application was made while admitting the plaint and granting a rule Nisi refused to make the order for ad interim. His Lordship thought that the plaintiffs, had not been sufficiently diligent in preferring their claim to the exclusive right as several re-presentations

had already been given by the rival company.

Nor did his Lordship think that a sufficiently

strong case had been made out for such a

stringent order considering that the guests of

the Brother Bose who must have incurred

considerable expenditure in getting up repre-

sentations would the disappointed. As Babu

Girish Chandra Ghose and the Star have been

instrumental in raising the status of dramas

and dramatic representations in the country,

in the interest of histrionic art, the dispute

should be settled."

After this, the above ‘City Theatre’ took a lease

of the Vīnā Stage* and began to show performances

there in the same name. On the 16th May 1891

Chaitanya Līlā was staged and on the 17th Saralā,

Promoda and Mānada playing in the roles Promodā

and Saralā respectively. Both did well and Manada

was highly spoken of at that time by all the papers.

Batlte of Plāssy, Sītār Banabās Nala Damayantī,

Bīlwamañgal, Buddha, Tarubālā Bibāhabībhrāt,

Bellik Bazār, Tājjab Byāpār, Molinā Bikāś were

also acted.

Differences of the Star with Girish Chandra

were, however, made up on the 4th June, 1891 but

the suit against the “City” continued. Eventually the

“Star” lost the suit on the ground that when a play

is once published, no action lies.

The following is the substance of Mr. Justice

Wilson’s order.

• Of the Bīnā Stage, history will be given later on.

"The plaintiffs allege they are the proprietors of certain dramatic plays and the defendants have acted these plays without their permission. In answer to a question the piff's counsel stated that the plays had been printed and pulished for sale. It is clear that according to common law no such suit would lie (Murray vs Ellison). In England by Statute the right to represent plays is protected by certain statutes, 5 and 4 William IV and 5 & 6 Victoria. It is clear these statutes do not apply to works published in India (Reutledge vs Low). There is no such Act in India. There is a Copy Right Act passed by the Indian Legislature which protects copy-rights properly so called, but not the right to represent plays. The result is, there is no law in India under which such right can exist. The plaint therefore discloses no cause of action and the suit will be dismissed with costs."

In the meantime Girish lost his young son and he was much pulled down. He then left for his spiritual guide's house at the villages of Kamar Pukur and Joyrambati in company with another brother-disciple and lived for a few weeks under the motherly care of Mā, the devoted consort of Ramkrishna Dev. Having full solace and bliss from the holy mother,* he now set his head and heart to the further improvement of Stage and Drama.

Girish now secured a lessee for the land of the old National at 6, Beadon Street in the person of

• Readers may get some glance at the story 'Bāngāl.

111

Babu Nagendro Nath Mukerjee, grandson of the millionaire, late Babu Prasanna Kumar Tagore and with his help wanted to have a pavilion built up. Great was the enthusiasm and the work procceded rapidly. But the City troupe now raised trouble. Nilmadhab wanted a theatre like the Star Company and insisted on having shares. The lessee, however, wanted to have his debt cleared first. Girish too asked them not to press for any share of profits till the incumbrances were removed. This disappointed the troupe and they now parted,

Girish thus finding himself alone, gave Nagendra Babu all possible help and co-operation and under his proprietorship started the theatre with the assistance of a few young artists only, viz Dani Babu, Chuni Babu, Ranu Babu, Pada Babu, Kumud Sarkar etc. In the mean time the vateran comedian Babu Ardhendu Sekhar Mustafi also came to join him.

Shakespeare's Macbeth as translated by Girish Chandra was selected for the opening night's performance and arrangements for rehearsals were made in a room rented in that quarter.

About this time Girish as an invited guest in the house of Babu Kali Krishna Tagore witnessed the performance of Bibāha Bibhrāt and saw the part of ‘Jhee’ being very successfully rendered by Tincowrie Dasi. Girish found in her a suitable heroine for his theatre and had therefore brought her in. Thus the troupe was complete for his purpose.

Chapter IV

MINERVA THEATRE.

The year 1893 heralds the dawn of a new era in the dramatic world of Bengal when the Bengali stage was considerably improved and reached a further degree of perfection, entitling it to be favourably compared with the stages of the other civilised countries. Girish had the theatre built in the most up-to-date fashion and with the artists coached and trained by him proved to what height of perfection dramatic art of Bengal could reach. As he wanted classical dramas to be staged here, he liked the theatre to be named as "The Classic" but yielding at last to the request of the proprietor had it named as the Minerva Theatre.

The first drama staged here on January 28th, 1893 was Macbeth—the bengali rendering of Shakespeare's historical tragedy of the name, translation being made by Girish himself. Stage management no doubt was left to his friend and associate Dharmadas Soor, but dresses were under European management and make-up rightly in the Scotch-fashion of medieval period was done by Mr. J. Pym. Scenes too were painted by Mr. Willard the well-known painter of Calcutta

113

of that time. Songs put in the mouth of the

witches also had their tunes borrowed from the book

"Renowned Songs of the world" secured from

Harolds' firm at the Dalhousie Square. An instance

may be given here as to how Girish spared no pains

to make the show interesting all round. There was

a song in the book which Girish considered very

appropriate for the witches. He translated it in his

usual way and put it into their mouths which highly

enhanced the interest in the play.

The song of the above book runs thus :-

"White spirits and Black

Black and spirits and Grey

Mingle Mingle Mingle

All that Mingle may"

and the translation, too, by Girish was just fitting

and easy as-

"Dhāla Kāli Katā Lāli

Mile Jule Chole Aāye

Jhun Jhun Jhun Jhun

Jhun Jhun Jhun"

The cast was as follows :

Macbeth ... Girish Chandra Ghose

Duncan ... Pandit Haribhuson Bhattacharya

Malcolm ... Surendra Nath Ghose (Dani Babu)

Donalbain ... Nikhilendra Krishna Deb

Banquo ... Kamud Nath Sarkar

Macduff & Hecate .. Aghore Pathok

15

114

Lennox ... Binode Shome

Ross ... Krishanlal Chakraburty

Angus ... Anukul Batabyal

Caithness ... Chuni Lal Deb

Bleeding soldier and second murderer Do

Fleance ... Kusum Kumari

Siward ... Thakurdás Chatterjee

Lady Macbeth ... Tincowrie Dasi

Lady Macduff ... Promoda Sundari

Music Master ... Prof. Debkanta Bagchi

We have to pause here a little to discuss about the representation of hero's part. It was not an easy task and the most well-known actors of the world—

Garrick, Kemble, Kean, Irving and others appeared in the role before Girish,* but none could approach the first, that is, the great Garrick. Garrick was masterly in his performance, Kemble brilliant in delivery of dialogue but Kean not so successful in that part as he was in an Iago, a Shylock or a Richard III or a Sir Giles Overreach. Sir Henry Irving, too, who appeared as Macbeth shortly before, (Dec. 1888) was scarcely a success although he presented a fairly consistent figure of the hero 'who was swayed as much by his sense of subjection to the supernatural as by his wife's ambition.' Thus when the educated people were obsessed with the particular conception of Macbeth and at a time when Sir Henry was carrying the audience with his Henry VIII, Lear

• Sir Beerbohm Tree took the part long after,

115

and Becket (1893), in England, for Bengali Girish to appear in that extremly difficult role of Garrick, Kean and Kemble was rather considered an audacious attempt. The question however is --how was his acting appreciated by the Nil-adori Angle Iindian publicists ?

"Friend of India" observed—"The performance of Macbeth marks an epoch in the annals of the Native Stage." The Englishman too, a paper once associated with Stoqueler, Parker and Hume and always noted for eritism of plays 'at home' but caustic towards every thing Indian, thus observes :—

"The Second performance of Macbeth was shown before a large audience including several European gentlemen. Babu Girish Chandra Ghose, the manager, played the part of Macbeth and the play as a whole was well-rendered. A Bengali Thane of Cawdor is a living suggestion of incongruity but the reality is an 'astonishing' reproduction of the standard convention of the English stage." 8th February 1893.

This represents the view of the European community about the performance of Macbeth, but we should give an idea of the genuine Bengali feelings too, from an issue of the Hindu Patriot, then leader of public opinion of the country :—

"The representation of Macbeth in the Minerva Theatre on Saturday last as the opening piece, marks a new departure in the dramatic history of Bengal. The novelty of the representation,

116

as well as the excellence of the general get-up,

had attracted a large audience which turned

out to be an appreciative one. Babu Girish

Chandra Ghose, the father of the modern stage

of Bengal, as he may be rightly called, had

the whole of the work under his personal super-

vision, commencing with the translation of the

master-piece and including the scenery and

dresses which were as correct and effective as

might be desired. The success became, there-

fore, a foregone conclusion, when Babu Girish

Chandra took the leading character. The part

of Lady Macbeth is always one of great diffi-

culty, even in the hands of accomplished

actresses, and it is not much of surprise if it

was not so well done as might have been

desired. But as time wears on, better results

may be expected. The other actors sustained

their parts very well and the witch-scene was

full of mystic terrors that impressed themselves

deeply upon the audience. It is difficult to

predict whether translations of Shakespearean

master-pieces will be favourably received as a

rule. If this does not turn out to be the case,

Macbeth bids fair to prove an exception. The

pavilion has been built and fitted up at enor-

mous cost and the best dramatic talent of the

city has been engaged."

The easeful yet elegant and masterly translation

of Macbeth by Girish reads like an original inde-

pendent Bengali drama and it might have easily

deluded any one ignorant of English into this belief,

117

if English names of the dramatic persons were changed into Indian names. The acting of Macbeth's difficult part by Girish left nothing further to be desired. His accents and gestures, his expressions and deportment so faithfully represented the great complex tragic character, that even the carping Europeans had nothing but unstinted praise for his superb acting in some ef the most difficult scenes e.g. the ghost scene, the soliloquy, when the airy-dagger marshalls the way, with Macbeth following it, and in the last great scene when he fell fighting bravely against Malcolm and Macduff. Every one was full of admiration for Girish. Of course he deserved all the praise he got, nay even more. But in this undertaking he was very ably supported by Babu Ardhendu Sekhar who appeared in five different characters as the first witch, porter, old gentleman, first murderer and doctor, and in each of them having something original to present without giving the least sign that one person was in so many roles, Dani Babu as Malcolm, Chuni Babu in three roles, Promoda Sundari as Lady Macduff and last not the least Tincowrie Dāsi as Lady Macbeth.

The part of lady Macbeth is also a highly difficult one. Even Mrs. Siddens, Sara Barnard and Ellen Terry felt their histrionic talents very much strained. Besides as to the conceptions of these illustrious actresses of Lady Macbeth's part, each differed from that of the other in a considerable

degree.

Siddon's

Lady

Macbeth

was

an

ambitious

woman,

while

that

of

the

Divine

Sara

was

that

of

a

loving

and

devoted

wife.

Ellen

Terry's

was

on

the

other

hand

that

of

a

fascinating

woman

whose

feminine

charm

(rather

than

masculine

power)

persuaded

Macbeth

against

his

will.

Tincowrie,

a

half-literate

Bengali

actress,

at

that

time

little

known,

being

however

trained

by

Girish

acquitted

herself

rather

admirably

on

the

whole.

She

had

not

till

then

attained

that

celebrity

which

would

entitle

her

to

this

classical

part

but

on

account

of

her

stature,

Siddons-like

impressive

appearance,

as

the

"Indian

Nation"

put

it,

and

for

her

resonant,

metallic

voice,

as

Girish

called

it,

Tincowrie

was

selected

for

this

part,

which

Promoda

had

failed

to

represent.

To

mention

one

or

two

petty

incidents—Promoda

Sundari

who

had

been

at

first

given

the

part,

became

so

jealous

of

the

new

actress

at

her

success

that

she

not

only

put

her

rival

into

severe

indignities,

but

from

the

second

night

also

left

the

stage

in

a

huff.

Now

the

success

of

Macbeth

both

as

a

literary

piece

and

a

play

on

the

stage

raised

Girish

so

high

in

public

estimation

that

not

to

speak

of

the

Indians,

many

European

gentlemen

as

we

mentioned

before

began

to

entertain

very

high

opinion

about

his

dramatic

talants.

Mr.

F.

H.

Skrine's

(of

the

I.

C.

S.

and

then

the

Commissioner

of

the

Chittagong

Division)

proposal

for

some

mark

119

of honour for Girish met with a refusal, bringing only an exclamation of great regret from him—

"How little does the world know of its greatest men!"

Sir Gurudas Banerjee then vice chancellor of the Calcutta University and a Judge of the Calcutta High Court, was a class-mate of Girish during the the school-boy period. He was a man of spotless character and was held in high esteem by all who knew, saw or heard of him. He had never before witnessed a performance on the stage, but now he too was attracted to see the performance of Macbeth in Bengali, which he had considered before, an impossibility. He was however beside himself with joy and justly remarked :-

"To translate the inimitable language of Shakespeare is a task of no ordinary difficulty, but Babu Girish Chandra Ghose has performed that task very creditably on the whole, and his translation is in many respects quite worthy of the original."

Mr. N. N. Ghose, the famous educationist and publicist whose knowledge of English was the admiration of educated Englishmen, observed that Girish’s translation was better than even the French translation of that famous tragedy.

Although on the opening night, great enthusiasm was observed, Girish after the fall of curtain in

the second Act rightly observed "such books can not

be accepted by the public. There are no songs and

dances and ordinary people can not understand the

play." For some nights, of course, houses were

packed up, but the sales began to decline from

Rs. 2200/- and after ten performances only, the play

was put aside.

II

Macbeth was followed by Mukulmunjara

another drama of great finish, and both the dramas

of the newly-started "Minerva" were staged on

consecutive days, leaving nothing undone by the

management to cater to the taste of the enthusiastic

audience that nightly crowded the auditorium.

Mukulmunjara was a fitting sequel to the Bengali

translation of Macbeth. It was staged on the

boards of the Minerva on the 4th February 1893,*

and continued at a stretch for fourteen nights. It

depicts a story of love and intrigue, the object being

apparently to show how love acts as a stimulant to

the intellect (Mukul Munjarita, budding of the

blossoms), bringing into action faculties hitherto

• Thus wrote Girish in handbills on the first night of

performance-"Sheer anxiety to appear before the public

with new books by way of variety compels me to substitute

Mukulmunjara for Mackbeth on Sunday, not withstanding

the favourable reception of the latter.

G. C. Ghose, Manager.

lying dormant. The piece was well represented and

the cast was distributed as follows :-

Mukul ... Dani Babu

Chandradhwaja ... Chuni Babu (Jubaraj)

Mantrī ... Kumudnath Sarkar

Kṣitīdhar ... Nikhilendra Krishna

Rājā Jayadwaj ... Haribhuson Bhattacharyya

Barun Chānd ... Ardhendu Sekhar

Bhajanrām ... Binode B. Shome (Pada Babu)

Achyutānanda ... Aghore Pathok

Sushen ... Nilmoni Ghose

Tārā ... Tincowrie

Munjarā ... Kusum Kumari

Chāmelī ... Harimati (Bidal).

About the performance we can not resist the

temptation of quoting the observations of the Indian

Mirror on this point :

"The first representation of Mukul Munjara at the

Minerva Theatre on Sunday last was attended

by as large an audience and gone through with

as much credit to all concerned as the opening

performance of Macbeth was a week ago. The

new comedy is the outcome of the imaginative

brain of Babu Girish Chandra Ghose, and

represents the actions of a couple of heroes and

a couple of heroines, the two former being

Mukul and Chandradhwaja respectively and

the two latter, Tara and Munjara respectively

the daughters of the Kings of Pāndianā and

Karowali. The character of Mukul was ren-

dered in a style that left little to be desired. the

16

122

personator being keenly alive to the truth of the trite ( though little followed ) saying—

"Those who would make us feel, must feel themselves." Tara who feigned dumbness out

of sympathy for her brother, created sufficient interest in the character by the significance of

her sacrificing silence. Munjara was impersonated by a growing girl, who did credit to her

trainer. Chāmeli, her companion, charmed the audience with her songs, the musical composition

of which, by the way, appeared to be somewhat below her acknowledged attainments.

The role of the opium-eating Barun Chand, who at the bidding of the scheming Sushen

managed to pass muster as the son of the King of Pāndianā, was taken up by a veteran comediar

whose appearance on the stage on each occasion was the signal for vociferous laughter.

In the last scene where he bound Sushen with the silken ties of love, which in his case were

represented by a strong cord of coir placed round the villain's neck, he simply out-did

himself in the comic cast. The dialogues between brother and sister, about their mutual

objects of love, bristled with feelings, though conversation, generally speaking, seemed some-what

shocking to Indian ideas of domestic propriety. The personations, taken all round,

justified the selections made of them to fill the different parts and they well succeeded in inter-preting

the niceties of thought and the varieties of action which characterise this entertaining

production."

123

III

What, however, proved to be an irresistible success was a melo-drama called Ābu Hossain (or Mushroom Emperor) staged on the 25th March 1893.

It had been composed along with Mukul Munjarā sometime before, for the Star Theatre but was rejected by it.

But how warmly were these dramas received from the Minerva Stage, may be gathered from their successive runs and the plaudits they received from the general audience.

Ābu Hossain was a brilliant piece.

Its racy wit, light dramatic touches and above all its charming songs and captivating dances made the audience frantic with joy.

It came like a great relief to the play-goers, after the tension of tragic emotions induced by Macbeth.

As Ābu Hussain, Mustafi Saheb was at his best as a consummate comic actor and Harimati (Bidal) in her part of Roshena received unrestrained applause for her songs.

Thakur Das Chatterjee appeared as Emperor Harun Al-rashid while Tincowrie as Dāi (Nurse) and the dancing-master Ranu Babu as Moshur captivated the whole house by their charming duets and dancings.

This duet-scene was enthusiastically received with thundering applause and awakened a desire for more such ducts.

Ābu Hossain may thus fairly be called as the starting point of Bengali comic operas.

124

From this time there was an ever-increasing demand for racy comedies and for music and dancing, which later dramatists tried to satisfy by their exuberant extravaganizas amongst which Rajkrishna Roy's Layla Majnoo and Khirode Babu's "Āli Bābā deserve special mention. The play of Ābu Hossain continued for nights and fetched considerable money to the proprietor, helping him to clear a large portion of his debts. Indeed the play was so popular that we can not help quoting here the opinion of the Indian Mirror, 4th April 1893 after the end of second performance :-

"The make-up of the characters was beyond all cavil and the scenery specially the illuminated street represented a triumph of the painter's skill. The hero was impersonated by a famous fellow of infinite jest who did ample justice to the role, assigned to him. Some of Roshena's songs shed showers of liquid liquorice. The charming duet in the last scene was an admirable achievement in dance and song that formed one of the events of the evening. In his combined capacity of manager and author, Girish Chandra has well succeeded in giving the light production a delightful turn."

The Hindu Patriot also made the following observations :

"Ābu-Hossain was received well. The comic element is supreme and plot is delightful. Vocal music was continued to an unlimited extent and

125

the scenic arrangements which are a speciality with the well-known artist and decorator Babu Dharmodas Soor are all that could be desired. The piece drew a large and appreciative audience on Saturday last and passed off without a hitch. It will prove a great relief to play-goers after the tension of fealing induced by Macbeth."

IV

On the 23rd May 1893, Girish Chandra revived the mythological drama of Dakṣajajña which had met with high appreciation when Gurumukh Roy's 'Star' opened with it. Girish Chandra had been there in the leading role with his disciples Amrita Lal Mitrā and Binodini as Mahādev and Śati respectively. Here, too, at the Minerva he took up his original role with Dani Babu and Bhuson Kumari as Mahādev and Śati. Other parts were represented as follows :-

Tapaswinī ... Tincowrie

Prasūtī ... Basanta

Nandi ... Aghore Pathok

Bhiṅgī. ... Pada Babu

The following observations of the Indian Mirror will give a true picture of the representation at the Minerva given before a packed house :-

"The dignified contour of Dakṣa was capitally re-produced by Babu Girish Chandra Ghose who from the fact of being the author of the piece

126

was singularly well-justified to reflect the exact spirit of the role. His impersonation was, to apply the remarks of Victor Hugo on Lamaitre's Ruy Blass—“not a transformation, but a trans-figuration.” Next in importance in the cast is Mahadev, that unique unification in asceticism and affection. This character was represented by a budding genius whose placid presence set off the vehemence of his feelings. The other figures in the play would have done very well indeed if they had not laboured under, what was undoubtedly to them, a serious disadvant-age, which penny candles must suffer in the presence of incandescent lamps.”

V

But to crown all, the play which was the most popular at the time was Girish Chandra's mythologi-cal piece Janā staged on December 23, 1893. It depicts how Arjuna the third Pāndava was met by the young prince of Māheswamoti—Queen Jana's son Provira—who died fighting bravely with him (Arjuna) instead of submitting meekly to his im-perious demands. Janā is a high-class drama* and its merits we would better have our litterateurs to describe. As a play, however, on the stage it not only appeals considerably to the youth but also to the motherhood of India. It thus stands above the

The idea was taken from a few lines of Aswamedha-parba (Kasiram Das'a Mahabharata) as also from the poem of Madhusudon's Jana to Niladhwaja.

pure mythological pieces. Since the actress, who

acted as Lady Macbeth, impersonated Janā now,

the dramatist in delineating the heroine Janā, did

not lose sight of the previous character altogether.

Jana incites her son to the battle-field, scolds the

daughter-in-law for her weak fears that overpower

her and taunts the husband for submitting to the

enemy as a slave, and if truth be told she is more

majestic than even Shakespeare’s Volumnia (Coriola-

nus) and more determined and dignified than Queen

Margaret (Richard III).

Indeed Janā’s upbraiding of Madan Manjuri,

her daughter-in-law, for the latter’s failure to

encourage her husband Provirā, reminds us of

Volumnia charging her daughter-in-law Virgilia* for

her fears.

Janā’s leading the son to the battle-field and

doing everything possible may also be compared

with Volumnia’s dignified remonstrance with the son,

when the latter joined the enemy general Aufidius

against country’s interests, but Janā’s heroic resolve

and taunting expressions when her husband meekly

• Virgilia—“His bloody brow ! O Jupiter ! no blood.

Volumnia—Away, you fool ! it more becomes a man

Than gilt his trophy. The breasts of Hecuba

When she did suckle Hector, looked not lovelier

Than Hector’s forehead, when it spit forth blood,

At Grecian swords contemning—

submitted to the enemy, have no parallel. It is indeed a rare treasure and no literature of any country has so masterfully depicted a mother as Girish has done in Janā.

Miss Tincowri represented the part to a finish and Provirā (Prince) too, was very ably done by Dani Babu, who was known amongst the people as "Young G. C." for his skilful acting. Mr Mustafi's Vidushaka too was appreciated highly and the remaining cast was as follows :-

Nīladhwaja ... Hari Bhusan Bhattacharyya

Gaigārakṣak ... Pada Babu, Gobordhone Babu

Krṣṇa ... Rānu Babu

Mahādev and Bhīm ... Thakurdās Chatterji

Brṣaketu ... Kristo Lal Chatterji

Madan Maijurī ... Bhusan Kumari

Nāyikā ... Bhaba Tarini

Brāhmonī and Gaigā ... Harimoti (Gulphan Hari).

The character of Vidusaka illustrates the deep philosophy of 'Faith' which alone works salvation and is far above the meaningless rituals and dogmas. Ostensibly the character is a comic one, but there is a deep seriousness inside, and Mr. Mustafi though did well in acting the lighter side, failed however in depth. After he had left for the Emerald Theatre four nights later, Girish Chandra himself appeared in the role and then the proper significance revealed itself to the people. Janā had a continued run for 40 nights, and used to be sportingly called as

129

"The Government Promissory Note" for the management.* Now about Girish's rendering of the part,

thus does the Hindu Patriot observe :

"Janā was repeated last Saturday before an overflowing house. The character of Vidūṣaka was

for the first time sustained by Girish Chandra himself and he gave evident proofs of his abili-

ties as a good comic character. He kept the house in capital humour and contributed largely

to the success of the play."

Actual performance of the part by Girish was,

however, far superior to the comment above.

In the present volume we would rather refrain

from going into the details about farces and operas

staged about the time 1894 (Saptamite Bisarjan,

Budadiner Bokśis, Hirāŕ Phool, Swapner Phool,

Subhyatār Pānḷā or Phonirmoni), but we would

like to mention about another devotional drama

staged on 18th May 1895 and that was Karameti

Bāī about which the great journalist and litterateur

Mr. N. N. Ghose of the Indian Nation observes as

follows in his paper (Vide 15th July 1895) :-

"Karameti Bāi is the latest production of Babu

Girish Chandra Ghose. The interest of the

book lies in that it is pre-eminently a national

drama—a drama embodying the highest reli-

gious instincts and aspirations of the national

drama of light and faith. Babu Girish Chandra

Ghose was the first, we believe, to hit at the

• Ābu Hossain, too, was so called.

17

130

truth that nothing so moves the national mind

as religion, and to work thereupon in construc-

ing all the great plays excepting Profulla and

Hārānidhī which have for their theme domestic

incidents. In Karameti Bāī, he has selected

the highest phase of Vaiṣṇava faith who from

her child-hood felt the rays of a higher and

brighter world flitting around her and became

unmindful of her environments. She was

married; Aloke her husband who was drawn

into the cricle of Tāntriks, bestowed no thought

upon her, till the idea of seducing a woman led

him to make the experiment on his own wife.

He designed himself as a servant and came to

stay in the house of his father-in-law. To his

utter amazement he found his wife unlike any

one that he had seen of her kind. A halo of

purity seemed to play round her which kept him,

vicious as he was, at arm's length. "Shyam"

she cried aloud now and then and

followed up the word with what was quite a

mystery to the gross mind of Aloke. For the

first time he received a check in his evil course.

He became firmly attached to his wife, admired

her as he did no one else and longed to live a

better and purer life. Karameti Bai was not of

this world—she was in search of her spiritual

Lord. With failures, however, came the desire

to use force. He seized her, took her away

and locked her in a room of his own. But she

got through the open window and was miracu-

lously removed. Then the desire to regain her

changed into a desire to please her—the first step

131

to self-dedication, through the influence of some Fakirs whom he happened to meet in the course of his rambles. He will find out "Shyam" and unite her with him. But nowhere was Shyam to be had. A second interview with the Fakirs taught him the great lesson of extinguishing all desires. Karameti Bai after passing through diverse experience had the bliss of being ushered into the presence of Radhakṛṣṇa and having her place in the group of their fair attendants (Golok-Baṣinīs). Aloke was quite unaffected at the scene which he happened to witness. This is an outline of the plot of the play the bare hint of which the writer obtained from a Vaiṣṇava writing Vaktamāl. A number of finely composed songs adds to the charm of the play.

The part of the heroine was taken by Tincowrie, and those of Aloke and Tukra by Dani Babu and Akshoy Chakrabarty respectively and supported by others, as follows :-

Paraśurām (Karameti's father) ... Gobordhan Banerjee

Āgambāgīś

Fakirs ... Nilmoni Ghose,

Pathak & Nibaran Babu

Krṣṇa ... Kusum Kumari

Rājā ... Khagen Sarkar

Mantrī ... Bama Charan Sen

Rādhikā ... Bhusan Kumari

Kirtikā ... Jagat Tarini

Ambicā ... Gulphau Hari

132

In Karameti Bāi the management represented an elaborate scenic device—first, showing Karameti suffering from hunger and exhaustion going on a journey on foot towards Brindaban in search of Shyam, which was next transformed into that of the Kunjaban of Brindaban, with Radha and Sahacharies (Gopinis) singing with her.

Tincowrie got a set back in the representation of this part—she also began to think much of herself as a heroine. After a few nights she absented herself when Karameti was being staged. Tara-sundari, however, came to Girish's help and saved him for the night, from the awkward position he was put into.

VII

After the performance of Karameti Baī, Girish Chandra put in rehearsals his favourite social drama Profulla. It was here that he appeared for the first time in the inimitable role of Jogesh, the hero. The rehearsals at the Minerva incited his disciples, Amrita Lal also, to run Profulla at the Star theatre for the second time.

"Star" had by this time retrieved from its former reverses and was at that time competing with the Minerva with Chandra Sekhar, a play dramatised from Bankim's novel of its name. Now both the theatres strove hard to vie with each other and Profulla was staged on both of them from the

133

13th July 1895 onwards. The following poem appeared in the advertising notices for the Star Theatre :--

'To wake the soul by tender strokes of art,

To raise the genius and to mend the heart,

Thou freely judge the sins that shall ensue;

But as with freedom judge with candour too

We would not lose through prejudice this cause,

Nor would obtain precarious applause

Impartial censure we request from all

Prepared by just decrees to stand or fall,'

Amritalals (Mitter and Bose) further put a couplet from the Bengali Mahābhārata in their notices as an apologiun---"Tomāri Śikșita Vidyā Dekhābo Ṭomāre"---we shall show you the very art, you taught us once. But unlike Drona of the Mahābhārata fame, the Guru (Girish) here came out triumphant...The "Star" played till the 17th August, 1895, after which they had to retire from the list, leaving the Minerva to continue Profulla for a month more with signal success and increased reputation. Girish was Jogesh personified and his pupil, Amrita Mitter, even with his gifted voice, was no match for him.

Besides Amritalal many an actor have appeared as Joges--Probodh Ghosh (City) Ardhendu Shekhar (Minerva), Dani Babu (Unique, Monomohon and Star), Amar Dutta (Star), and others, but none could approach Girish, especially in the expression of highly delicate and complex emotions,

834

as none could approach Garrick in Macbeth or Lear.

The comparative casts are given below :

Star

Character

Minerva

Amrita Mitra

Jogeś - Girish Ghose

Amrita Lal Bose (Original)

Rameś - Chunilal Dev

Kashi Chatterjee

Sureś - Dani Babu

Shibnāth - Nikhilendrakrishna Dev

Jādab - Neḍi (Sorojini)

Akshoy Kali Koer

Vajahari - Binode Behari shome

Jibon Sen

Kāñgāli - Syam Kundo (Original)

Upendra Mittra

Madandādā Gobardhan Banerjee

Mahendra Chou-dhury (Original)

Pitāmbar - Nilmoni Ghosh

Ramtaran Sanyal (Original)

Inspector - Kumud Sarkar

Magistrate Manik Babu

Gangamoni ... Umāsundarī Khetromoni (the most powerful actress)

Promoda ... Jñānādā - Kusumkumari (as Tinkowri left)

Nagendrabaln ... Profula - Bhushankumari (original of the Star)

Tuniāmoni (Original) Jogomoni - Ja:at Tarini (one of the first four actresses in l'cngal).

Nari Sundari ... Mātalinī - Sarat

About the representation of the play in both the theatres we would better quote Indian Mirror, Thursday 1st August, 1895 :-

The concurrent representation of Profula at the Star and the Minerva Theatre during the last three weeks has created quite a stir among the

135

patrons of the Bengali drama, 'The Star company has produced a revival with the advantageous support of the original impersonations of Jogesh, Ramesh, Suresh, Pitambar, Umasundari and Jaga while the Minerva Theatre has presented, so far as this institution is concerned, a new piece with, however, the compensating advantage of having on its staff the heroine and Kangali Charan of the original cast and of getting the author himself to appear in the towering role of Jogesh. Thus situated the performances stand on their trial before the public who occupy the Jury box. Unless they are disposed to return a perverse verdict, we think without risking a prosecution for contempt of the court, the Jurors are likely to deliver their opinion somewhat as follows.— The character of Ramesh received the fullest possible justice at the Star, the subtle mischievousness of the character being worked out in all its details, while the Ramesh of the Minerva comes in dangerous proximity of the common place. Suresh does capitally well in the lighter scenes and is effectingly natural in the court-scene when he takes leave of his friend, but he falls short of what is required of him in the jail. In this last incident he is distinctly distanced by his competitor at the Minerva, not a word of whom misses Fire. The actor who essays the role of Kā̃gālichuran at the Star, may be told that it is not essential to the success of the part that he should imitate the voice of the original who stimulates the

136

tone ' with so much innate ease. Jaga and

Pitambar at the Star appear to better advantage

than their name-sakes at the other place. The

new Umasundari has the advantage of the true

tragic ring in her voice, though her rival does

not yield a whit to her in general intelligence.

The old Profulla lives quite up to her reputa-

tion while the new shows the stuff that is in her

in the penultimate scene of the last act in

which she makes an impassioned appeal to

Madan Ghosh and in which she is considered

as surpassing the original out and away. So far

as regards the old versus the new, barring

Jogesh who is dealt with further down. In

reference to the case of the new versus new,

the Shibnath of the Minerva yields the palm

to him of the Star. The two Madans make tie,

and so do the two Vajaharis. Between the

two Jadavs there is not much to choose, unless

it be that the one at the Minerva draws more

sympathy from the spectators by the fact of his

being able to show the blister plasters in the

abdomens in the excruciatingly torturous scene.

The Jnanda at the Minerva has the advantage

of being blessed with a slim figure which helps

the spectators sensibly in realizing the extent

of her privations prior to her death in the street

though her competitor at the Star gives ample

proof of her experience.

So far, however, the advantages and disadvantages

almost balance each other. Now comes the

question of the claims of the two Jogeshes to

superiority. The character of Jogesh is the

137

pivot on which the whole mechanism of the

play moves and the weight of its correct imper-

sonation is therefore calculated to turn the

scales one way or the other. Here is a case of

Greek meeting Greek. It would however be

no discredit to the original Jogesh, if he owns

his inferiority to the new nor would, we believe,

the latter take it as anything but a matter of

self-gratulation if he is beaten by the former

whom he trained to the part some years ago.

The former has the gift of a clear, incisive

voice and a roundness of delivery while the

latter has the advantage of being the author of

the piece (not necessarily an advantage in the

case of all the authors) and of being possessed

with the intuitive skill of probing into the

depths of human thought and giving it feeling

expression. The former voices the thunder,

while the latter emits the lightning of the

gloomy atmosphere of the character's life. It

would be difficult to pronounce an opinion on

the "on the whole." The infallible practical

test of the box-office as yet affords no help, for

both the houses are crammed to their utmost

capacity and both of them ring with the vocif-

erous plaudits of the enchanted audience.

Whichever way the result may take, after the

first fever of the excitement is over, the com-

petition is calculated to develop the critical

faculties of the play-goers and foster a spirit of

healthy emulation, between two of prominent

Bengali Theatres of Calcutta.

This contest of Girish and Amritalal raminds us

18

138

of that between Garrick and Barry in the middle of

the eighteenth century in London in the representa-

tion of the part of King Lear. Sometime before in

the role of Romeo ‘Barry was as much superior to

Garrick as York Minister is to a Methodist Chapel.’

But now came a time when King Lear was adver-

tised in both the theatres. Being less appreciated

than his disciple in Romeo, Garrick who had some-

time ago trained Barry to the part of Lear, now

conceived this part of Lear in such masterly manner

with depth of pathos with the occasional rise and

fall of his voice, that when he uttered,—

“That she may feel how sharper than a serpent’s

teeth it is to have a thankless child” (Here sharper

was uttered in a mild tone, and in next breath in a

sharp thrilling voice), and also when he charged the

elements—

‘I tax not you, you elements with unkindness, I

never gave you kingdom, called you children, you

owe me no subscription”

The contrast was keenly felt and Garrick carried

off the palm. The following doggerels recorded the

success and superiority of the master-artist in-

comparison with that of his pupil-rival—

“The town has found out different ways

To praise its different Lears

To Barry it gives loud huzzás

To Garrick only tears.

"A King, eye, every inch a king

Such Barry doth appear :

But Garrick's quite another thing

He's every inch King Lear."

The other casts in which Girish appeared at the

Minerva were chiefly in the dual roles of Rām and

Meghnād in the Meghnād Badha specially staged on

the 25th August 1895 and on the following week,

and that of Clive in the Battle of Plassy on the

30th November. In this connection it may be

mentioned that Khetromoni who had come here from

the Emarald Theatre, now in the role of Nṛmundā-

mālinī in the former drama was matched with

advantage to Girish's Rām and to Babu Mahendra

Lal Bose as Lakṣmaṇ. Bose was also at his best.

But alas ! While the sun of Girish Chandra's

dramatic life was at the meridian, and the Bengali

stage grew to be an educational institution, besides

being a mere place of innocent entertainments,

differences, however, began to occur between the

proprietor and the manager. Inspite of the earnest

attempt of Girish Chandra to free the theatre from

its liabilities, he could not make much headway

owing to the spenthrift habits of Nāgendra Babu, and

when the latter used to draw money without Girish's

knowledge and with no account, in the interest of

the theatre itself, Girish was then obliged to take

charge of the cash in his own hands as manager.

140

Feelings became strained and when Girish saw that the proprietor was looking for all opportunity to get rid of him, as a self-respecting gentleman, he had to take leave of the Minerva Theatre. With his resignation the condition of the Minerva was like that of a boat without its helmsan in troubled waters. Girish left about March 1896, and the condition of the Minerva daily grew from bad to worse till it sank into insignificance as a dramatic house. But how years after (during the period 1905—1911), it returned to a greater position again than before under Girish's care and training we shall see in the next volume.

One thing needs mention here Babu Devendra Nath Bose, a cousin of Girish, was the assistant Manager of the Minerva Theatre. He was a highly cultured man and was the author of Bejāya Āwāz.

Later he left for Cossimbazar to act as Private Secretary to Maharaja Sir Manindra Chandra Nandi who was once a class-mate and intimate friend of his before.

Chapter V

AT THE STAR THEATRE. (Again)

No sooner Girish left Minerva Theatre than his disciples - the proprietors of the Star Theatre - greeted him again as the master and the Dramatic director. They were at this time feeling sore want of dramas and secured Girish’s services at a monthly honorarium of Rs. 350. This time, too, Girish was not long in his stay here, but before we deal with his activities for the period, however short it was, we shall digress a little from him in describing how the Star was faring during his absence.

As we mentioned the name of the poet and dramatist Raj Krishna Roy, he presented the following dramas Naramedh Jajña and Lāylā Majnoo in 1891, Bonobīr and Rsyaśr̥nga in 1892 Benejir Badarmoonēy in 1893. Babu Amrita Bose also entertained the audience with his farces Rājā Bāhādur, Kālāpānī and Ekākār and dramas Bejoy Basanta, Chandra Śekhar and Rājsīnga. The last two were merely the dramatised versions of Bankim Chandra’s novels. Rajkrishna Babu’s drama were rather of mediocre merits and Lāylā Majnoo was more or less an imitation of Ābu Hossain with more songs and dancings.

142

Mere comic pieces of Amritalal and commonplace dramas of Rajkrishna could not keep up the Star for a long time, specially at a time when under its very nose Girish was creating a new epoch in the dramatic world in the Minerva Theatre. What with comic farces and mediocre dramas Star company continued with its established reputation no doubt, but dearth of dramas was very deeply felt. In the meantime Rajkrishna Babu too died and the Star Company would have fared very badly had not the dramatised version of Chandra Śekhar come out of the pen of Babu Amritalal Bose to their great luck. Chandra Śekhar was a very popular novel of Bankim Chandra, the literary dictator of Bengal who died five months ago in the meridian of his glory. His sad demise roused popular sympathy and veneration for his great works. This fact contributed greatly to the success and popularity of the drama. Besides, some impressing scenes, good acting specially of Chandra Śekhar and Śaibalini and songs of Dalaní created a sensation.

About the success of the performance, we would better quote the remarks of the Statesman of September 20, 1894—

"The Second performance of Bankim's Chandra-Śekhar on Saturday last was very successful. The perfect mounting, appropriate costumes and the powerful cast, together with the ex-

148

excellence and popularity of the work on which

the play is founded combined to lend special

interest to the performance. The play, though

long, did not for a single moment fail to iuterest

the large audience present, which evinced their

appreciation by loud cheers. Apart from the

good scenery, the correct rendering of the

principal parts contributed chiefly to the

success of the play Chandra Śekhar the type

of the Bengali Pandit of the last century was

quite true to life. In the scene where his

tranquil soul was disturbed by the kidnapping

of his young wife, he1 simply excelled himself,

veteran as he is. Śaibalini2 the central character

of the play could not have found a better per-

sonater. Her ravings in the comic scene had a

powerful eff'ect on the house. Protap3 did very

well in the bed-room scene and in the scene

where he swam in company with Saibalini in

the moon-lit water of the Ganges. The actress

who played Sundari4 elicited warm approval

by her rendering of the part. The Nawab5

Mirkashim maintained himself throughout like

a Nawab. Daloni6 was excellent. Her devotion

to her husband and the scene with her brother

Gurgan who was betraying her long were

effective bits of acting while her songs were

much admired. Gurgan7 who was trying to

kick down the ladder by which he had ascended

1. Amrita Mitra. 2. Tarasundari. 3. Akshoy

Kali Koer. 4. Nagendrabala. 5. Mohendra Choudhury.

6. Narisundari. 7. Suren Mitra.

144

from a very humble position acquitted himself most creditably. The four Englishmen were appropriately dressed according to the fashion in vogue in the latter part of the last century and with one exception they found capable interpreters. Lawrence Foster1 seemed however to be a novice but a little more familiarity with the stage would enable him to do greater justice in the part. The faithful servant2 acted in a manner which left nothing to be desired. Of the new characters into the play Srinath3 and Biswas4 deserve special mention. In conclusion much may be said in praise of the dramatist. The book had hitherto been looked upon as "in-capable of being dramatised," but he has skilfully overcome all difficulties."

Chandra Sekhor could not however be the only dramatic asset to run a theatre, and the com-petition with Girish and his party on the perfor-mances of Profulla about a year after met with what result has been stated before. Besides Rajsina too did not attract a good audience. Thus with all their success, if success realy could there be, after Girish left, they had still reasons for submission to their master and rightly did they now come forward to pay regards due to him.

Girish was at the Star over a year and wrote here two high class dramas Kālā-pāhād and Māyābaśān

1. Ramlal Banerjee. 2. Poran Seal. 3. Upendra Mitra. 4. Ghonosyam Babu.

145

and opera Parasya Prosun (flower of Persia) within

the course of over a year. The dramatic piece Hiral

Jubilee was also composed here. We shall now

give a short description of the two dramas only.

Kālāpāhār though refers to historical incidents,

is a drama of deep religious tone. We have given

before some idea of the doubts and scepticism

which perplexed Girish's mind for over 14 years of

his life in youth and how he regained the equili-

brium of his mind under the benign influence of

Ramkrishna Dev in 1884. In this drama

Chintāmoni represents the Guru, Kālāpāhār those

who are perplexed with doubts, and Leto a devotee

like the dramatist himself, as he turned to be under

Ramkrishna's influence. One can thus look to both

the phases of his life—one of doubt and another of

faith. The Guru and his disciple were represented

in the performance by the father and son—Girish and

Dani Babu to a finish, and Kālāpāhār by Amrita

Mitra. The other characters were thus represented—

Mukunda Deb ... Akshoy Kali Koar

Vireswar ... Upendra Mitra

Salimon ... Surendra Mitra (Fattai)

Dulal ... Ashibhuson Bose

(Mr. Amrita Basu's son)

Jail Dārogā ... Natabar Chowdhury

Farab Khān ... Jivon Krishna Sen

Chaīchālā ... Promoda Sundari

Imām ... Nagendra bala

19

146

Dolenā ... Nari Sundari

Muralā ... Gangamoni.

Although the drama is a highly philosophical one, people appreciated the play very much and

Mr, R. C. Dutt I.C.S., C.I.E., the great novelist highly praised it.

The drama was staged on Dec. 26, 1896.

The next drama Māyābasān, staged on 18th Dec. 1897, describes how bitter litigations provoked

selfish nephews to turn their uncle mad and that nothing is impossible with a class of unscrupulous

lawyers. It also deals with the lofty spiritual culture of self-realisation, and resignation to God

(i.e. Ātma-Jñān). Further it satirised the Congress of that time, when agitation was considered as the only

panacea of all political evils, but at the same time, it advocated a programme of constructive work in the

mouth of Kalikinkar for arbitration, boycott of articles of luxury and, Swadeshi (cloth, salt and

other industries). Thus Girish was far ahead of the political leaders in recommending Swadeshi in

preference to foreign articles. The Managers of the theatre however did not place too much faith on the

teachings and betrayed an indifference which cut Girish to the quick. He used to say :-

"You could not catch the spirit of Māyābasān during my life-time, thus you set back the book for

more than half a century. Every body will here-after interpret the book according to his own ideas".

147

The cast* was brilliant and the performance successful.

Girish now himself attained the position as a religious teacher and all the philosophical expressions in his mouth both from drama as also in personal conversation expressed the highest spiritual truths. He used to say and very rightly—

"To you men and women of the stage—I am come as destined by my Guru, since this is no place for better teachers."

Girish Chandra was here nominally till the 15th May 1898, when the theatre had been suspended for about a month and a half, owing to the out-break of Beubonic plague which scared away the people from the town. But sometime before this, Girish ceased to have any interest. The proprietors were not submissive to him. They used to wrongly criticise the above two dramas in an adverse spirit. Sometimes the carriage was not sent to his house to bring him to the theatre. As a self-respecting man, he sat at his house and thus his connection with the Star Theatre automatically ceased and so it did for good. After this also, the Star proprietors—specially Babu Amrita Mitra—tried to have him there as their

• Kālīkānkar—Girish Ghose, Haladhar—Dani Babu, Ganapati—Akshoy Kali Koer, Annapūrṇā—Tarasundari, Bindu—Nogendrabala, Ragini—Narisundari.

Guru, but never did he set his foot again on

the Star.

What were Girish's activities after this, for the

next few years and how after a considerable period

during the years 1904—1912 till his death,he again

worked for and raised the Minerva Theatre to the

highest pinnacle of success when other theatres were

thrown into shade, will be dealt with in full in our

next volume.

Now the two pieces Kālāpāhār and Māyābasān

have laid down a great truth that now sounds as a

truism that Religious unity is the only strong solder-

ing element of national unity for India.

In Kālāpāhār, "Chintamoni" speaks to "Leto"—

"Poor Leto, you differentiate

Between a God and Allah

There is one God, various people

Call him in various names".

"As water is named in various words.—Jal,

Acquā, Pāni, so is God, even if to some he is God

to others Hari, Allah or Īswara, Jesus or Jehova.

It is the narrow-minded only who try to form parties

but the true worshippers of God entertain no feeling

of difference between their own methods and those

of others."

Girish was preaching this principle of Religious

unity from the stage, that we fight over names, over

149

differences without any distinction, when Swami

Vivekananda was preaching the same thing at the

"Parliament of Religions held at Chicago and both of

them were echoing the lessons given to them and to

all by their common Guru—Ramakrishna Deb—

"As many are ways as

there are views."

"Jata mat tata path."

Now Girish wants to make clear that what is

true in the domain of religion is also true in the

sphere of politics and nationalism. He deprecates

that kind of unity between Hindus and Mohamedans

which consists in shaking each others' hands in

public meetings, but cherishing feelings of enmity in

private life, and in communal interests. Thus in the

Māyābasān Kalikinkar says :-

"Excepting religious unity

no other unity is possible."

What he means is this :

"Hindus, Mohomedans, Christians and even the

Brahmos are divided into various sects. Hindus

again are sub-divided into various sub-sects and

classes. There is an interminable quarrel between

the Śāktas and the Vāiṣṇavas. To one sect the

other is damnable. If, however, we all consider

that God is one and that we—be we Hindus or

Mohomedans, Christians or Jains—are only His

sons, then alone is unity possible, but until that is achieved, there is no hope.

Indeed this only can bring our regeneration and an instance may be quoted in support of Girish's theory of unity.

The Turkish delegation who came to India last year stated in answer to the invitation of a section of the Mohamedan community—“We are Turks first and Mohamedans afterwards.” Similarly, if religious unity is achieved, we Hindus and Mohomedans would then be in a position plainly to say that we are Indians first, and Hindus and Mohomedans afterwards.

This teaching of Girish about religious unity is what India requires most to-day and from this point of view also, Girish has been recognised as a genuine Seer. Truly has the great Deshbandhu C. R. Das honoured the dramatist as Mahākabi Girish.

Of the further activities of Girish Chandra, mostly social and national, we shall deal with in the next volume.

Chapter VI

OTHER THEATRES

(I) THE BEENA THEATRE

Sometime after Gopal Seal's Emerald Theatre opened at the Star pavilion, Babu Raj Krishna Roy, a well-known poet and dramatist whose Prolhad Charitra created a sensation at the Bengal Theatre, opened the Beena Theatre at 38, Mechhua Bazar Street on the 10th December 1887 with his Chandra-Hāss. The innovation he wanted to introduce was to have female parts played by young boys and not by girls. The experiment, however unpractical and chimerical, was all the same applauded by the Indian Mirror, well-known for puritanic views in the following words—

"The most characteristic feature will be the absence of all immoral elements from its constitution. The female parts will be represented by the well-trained youngmen of the eminent grace, loveliness and voice of whom a goodly number has been secured. The whole thing was got up in such a manner as to create a revolution in the theatrical world of Bengal. It is thus entitled to the moral and material support of the people."

152

He then wanted to stage his own drama Prolhād Charitra, but had no suitable artists for the purpose.

At this time a band of youths formed themselves into a company Ārya Nāṭya Samāj with Babu Akshoy Kali Koer as Secretary, their office being at

28, Serpentine Lane. Raj Krishna Babu secured the co-operation and assistance of the party and staged Prolhad Charitra on the 18th December

1887, Raj Krishna Babu and Akshoy Babu appearing in the roles of Hiraṇya Kaśipoo and Śanda respectively and the part of Prolhād was

taken by a boy named Sarat Karmoker. About the play which Mirror calls brilliant success, we quote here a few lines from its columns :-

"The author acted Hiraṇya Kaśipoo and played his part admirably and displayed his power of representation to the greatest advantage. He

carried the house with him without a single break. All the necessary qualifications of a successful actor he appeared to possess in a

great degree. No unnecessary gesture or gesticulation was even seen in his acting. The boy-hero vied with him for the credit of supre-

macy and he carried it off to the delight of the audience. His sweet and melodious voice and devotional postures and attention produced a

charming effect on the audience. He held the whole house breathless over his noble fate throughout. The mother of the hero did con-

tribute not a little to the success of the play. Her piteous solicitude to save the life of her

153

blessed child was most admirably rendered. She

had the entire sympathy of the audience. As

each scene followed the other, the excitement

of the audience increased more and more, and

at last it reached its highest climax and the

audience were enchanted. All credit is due to

Babu Raj Kristo Roy."

The theatre, without female artists could

not however, meet with any general enthusiasm, and

sales did not rise high. Added to this, Raj Krishna

Babu had a fall while playing his part and got a leg

fractured. Ārya Nāṭya Samāj however continued

with some of his dramas,—Haradhanubhanga,

Kumārvikram, Haridās Thākur etc. and obtained

some notoriety by staging a new piece National

Congress from 26th October 1888 when the Bengal

Provincial Conference was held at Calcutta.

Sādhāraṇi and Navabibhākar said about this (vide

16th Aswin 1295 B.S.).

"The audience was much gratified to see the acting.

Some British statesmen are attributed to have

said "You. Hindus, Mussalmans and Parsees,

be separated. How can you be independent if

you are united." Last of all a` well-meaning

Englishman came and united them."

After this the Binā Theatre with boys only

to play female parts, was closed for good. In

December 1888 Mr. U. N. Das (dramatist and

Director) who returned by this time from England,

staged a piece, Dādā O Āmi in this stage under the

20

154

name New National, from 8th December 1888.

This incited the artists of the Emerald stage too to stage a scurrilous piece in retort Gādhā O Tumi You and Ass referring to U. N. Das.

It came from the pen of Atul Kumar Mitra and referred probably to the irregular life Mr. Das led in England.

This piece was followed by Sarat Sarojini on the 16th December and Sadhobār Ekādasī on the 25th,

Upendra Babu appearing as Sarat and Neemchánd.

Babu Srish Chandra Ghose was the manager and dramatic director here.

After this the New National too, was heard of no more.

Raj Krishna Bose at last came to the right decision.

The Ārya Nātya Samāj again joined Mr. Roy in right earnest and wanted to take female artists to represent the female characters.

Raj Krishna Babu's Āśā Bāri, a devotional drama, was being rehearsed when Babu Akshoy Kali Koer with his co-adjutors Haran Chandra Roy and Narain Chandra Banerjee went to Miss Tincowri's house and engaged her for the theatre on a paltry sum of Rs. 30/- a month only.

The songs sung by Tincowri were set into tune by the Prolhād of Binā—Sarat Karmaker.

Previous to Tincowri, Kadambini the then premier actress, was giving rehearsals for the part of Mirā but finding that her voice was not on a par with that of Sarat, she did not like to appear.

Tincowri however got the requisite training, but her voice failed on the night of the play.

155

Her part was however, tolerably fair. Akshoy Babu appeared as Rāṇā Kumbha. This was on the 4th August 1889.

This was followed by a few other insipid pieces. Lakṣa Hīrā staged in Feb. 1891 was the last.

Raj Krishna Babu was not only a good-natured and generous man, but he was also a man of great culture. He was an erudite Sanskrit scholar, a poet and a fairly noted dramatist. He was astonishingly quick in his compositions and had a great presence of mind. But after all, Raj Krishna Babu was not a business-like manager. He could not allot specific duties to different persons and in all things he was behind the time. Besides, there were persons to sow seeds of dissension between his party and the Ārya Nāṭya Samāj. At last, due to a misunderstanding over a very petty matter about the supply of betels, they separated after a few months. The Binā could not revive again, prices of tickets were considerably reduced and Binā unable to proceed further was compelled to close for good.

We ahall however see that after Girish Chandra’s departure from the Star Theatre, Raj Krishna Babu’s services as a dramatist were availed of there at the suggestion of the manager, Mr. Bose.

(II) THE EMERALD THEATRE

We have left the Emerald theatre since Girish

left it for the 'Star' towards the beginning of 1889. As the theatre did not run well with Mati Sur and others, Gopal Lal Seal again took charge of the theatre within a few months securing again the services of Babu Kedar Nath Choudhury as Manager and the dramatist Monomohan Bose as director. There were a number of good artists including Ardhendusekher Mustafi, Mohendra Lal Bose, Matilal Soor, Sukumari Dutta, Haribhuson Bhattacharya, Bishad Kusum, but the theatre continued from bad to worse. A history of the time can be gathered from the contemporaneous observations of the Naba Bibhākar and Sādhārani of 31st May 1889 which we give below :-

"Although advertisements were in glowing terms, for the performence of Kṛṣṇa Kumārī, audience was very small. Many others, again, left owing to bad acting. The result was very unhappy. The reasons of the failure were : 1. Emerald has lost good name and reputation (Sunām). (Probably the critic borrowed the experssion from Profula which was being staged at that time at the 'Star'), 2. No good acting is noticeable, the gestures of the actors and postures are open to exception. 3. Entry and exit not good. 4. Arrangements specially concert and prompting bad, and as the actors are, so the actresses, Jamon Devī, Tamon Devī. Gopal Lal Seal ought to pay greater attention. We do not say that Monomohon Babu and

157

Kedar Babu are unfit, but the co-operation of really talented men is necessary.

The paper further observed :-

"As to the representation, the dramatist himself would have been much grieved at the decline in acting since the time it was first acted at the public theatre although one or two actors were still here... The last Act, however was rendered creditably. Credit was due more to Mr. Mustafi. The first part of Dhonodas was not happily done, but the last part was very appealing. In Bheensing too, he had this defect. The last portion was much better than the beginning. But he should not have acted two leading parts at the same drama. He is no doubt an embodiment of a jestor but immediately to come in the serious dress of the Raja from the comic was not befitting the occasion. The part of Ronendra as played by a distinguished actor Mohendra Bose was not very satisfactory. Jagat Sing was very badly done. This youngman exhibited evil tastes at the love-scenes...Bilāsbati and Madonikā were not bad but Kṛṣṇa Kumāri and Ahalyā were not above the common-place. The song by the two sannyasis was sweet and touching and made some compensation to the dissolving gathering (Bhāṅgā Hāt)."

We may mention here some of the performances of the Emerald :-

158

8th June 1889—Rāsh Lilā by Monomohon Bose. The part of Kālindi was played by Mrs. Sukumari Datta.

13th July—Shorojā (by Radhamadhab Kar).

21st July—Balkesvar (by Atul Krishna Mitra) Mr. Mustafi taking the part of Bakkeswar.

As to the acceptance of these dramas by the public, we shall quote some observations of the Navabibhākar and Sādhāranī of 12.8.89 corresponding to 26th Sraban, 1296. So it writes—

“Kedar sang the parting song shortly after his association with the Emerald, of which he took the helm with great enthusiasm. The tune Girish set to the strings of the Emerald was not brooked by Gopal. Monomohon showed his own Lilā in Rās Lilā of Śrkrṣṇa. In this hopeless dilemma (vaidya sankat), Keder came, but the whirl-wind did not still stop.

“The place of religious fervour formerly produced on the stage has now been replaced by the piteous scenes of tragic-dramas of Saralā, Profulḷa, Sailojā Sorojā and Balkesvar. Kedarnath makes some compensation for many shortcomings but the parts have not been well selected”.

Balkesvar after a few nights' run was, however, stopped by the order of the Government on the representation of Pandit Sivanath Sastri as being

scandalous and defamatory. It made some satirical and caustic remarks about a Brahmo gentleman and the private tutor of his house over certain matters.

On the 19th Oct. 1889 a social drama Kiron-sási was staged but Kedarnath could not continue long. He became invalid and his health broke down. He left in November 1889. Thus drops off one of the earliest and noted managers, and we donot after this hear anything of him till his death in 1891.

After Kedarnath left, Atul Mitra's, Gopí Gosstha was staged on the 13th December 1889 and had in its cast Pandit Haribhuson as Āyān, Kusum (Bishad) Kṛṣṇa, Biḍāl as Rādhikā, Khetromoni Jatilā and Guliphan Hari Kutilā. The X'mas skit Bhāger mā Gōngā pāinā was also amusing.

Then was Ānandu Kumār played for two nights (Jan 1890). It gives the story of Nanda Kumar, but the European names were substituted by Mahomedan names. The Commissioner of Police however, coming to know what it was, stopped the performance.

Poet Rabindranath's famous drama Rājā O Rānī commencing from the 7th June 1890 had a run for about fifteen nights. The part of Kumār Sen was acted by Mohendra Babu. His "Ilā, Ilā, dourde ese fire genu" O Ila ! Ila ! I go back even after reaching your door ; and to Sumitra "Balo Bon pāribe Ki', Tell sister, will you be able ?-still rings in the

ears of persons who have heard it. Babu Matilal

Sur's Vikram Deb was also a master-piece. The

part of Devadatta was taken by Pandit Hari

Bhusan, that of Śankar by Chunilal Mitra, Rāni by

Kironshashi and Ilā by Bishad Kusum.

This drama was a great success.

On the 14th September 1890, another small

piece Shanda or pre-historic fool was staged. It was

a faithful specimen of a new way to pay old debts.

Anupama was staged on the 13th Dec. 1890. It

was a grim tragedy in five acts by Upendra Nath

Mukherjee of Bhowanipore.

After Kedar Babu left, in 1891 January, Babus

Mati Soor, Mohendra Bose, Atul Krishna Mitra

and Purna Ghose became lessees, with Mati Soor

as manager and Atul Mitra as business-manager.

In 1891 when the Manipur war was raging, Dinobon-

dhu Mitra's Kamale Kāminī was staged under the

name Manipur Juddha! Two other pieces Netāi

Līlā and Ilā Golok Chānd deserved better

mention. In 1892 New Year's Day Bidhābā

College was staged, but the above ones were all

worthless pieces.

A theatre cannot continue without good

dramas and the Emerald Theatre sorely felt the

want of dramas. So inspite of the services of a

number of good artists it had on its boards, it

began to decline.

181

In 1892 Mohendra Bose became the sole lessee and put on its boards Biṣbr̥kṣa, Mṛṇālinī, Kapālkundalā, Palāśīr Juddha and similar dramas which he had acted in the old National.

Biṣbr̥kṣa commencing from June 1891 continued for about three months, the parts of Devendra, Nagendra, Surjamukhi, Kundo, Kamal, Hira and Srish being taken respectively by Purna Ghosh, Mohendra Bose, Sukumari, Harisundari (Blackie), Gulphon Hari, Bhabatarini and Pronath Ghose. The drama though old was a success.

Kapālkundalā was staged from Sept. 10. 1892. Kṛṣṇa Kānter Will of Bankim Chandra was staged on the 7th Dec. 1892, with Purna Babu as Krishna Kanta, Mohendra Babu Govindalal, Sib Chandra Chatterjee Brahmanda, Sukumari Rohini and Blackie Hari as Bhramar. Even with so many good artists, it did not however produce half the interest and sensation as Amarendra Nath's performance of the same novel under the caption of Bhramar did seven years after, though here the dramatisation by Mr. Atul Krishna Mitra, or the rendering of the different parts was in no way inferior to those of the subsequent Classic Theatre on the same pavilion.

Towards the close of the year there was further diminution in strength owing to Mr. Mustafi's departure for the Minerva and though he again came in

21

1894 as the lessee, the Emerald could hardly revive one-fourth its former reputation when Girish was at its helm. Babu Mohendra Bose who had taken lease of the Emerald suffered losses and gave up the lease in February 1894 and joined the Bengal Theatre.

Babu Ardhendu Sekhar Mustafi came from the Minerva Theatre in January 1894 and took its management as lessee along with Atul Babu in February 1894. Old plays in which Mr. Mustafi was at his best were now put on boards after which the theatre was suspended for sometime. It however reopened on September 22, 1894, with Atul Krishna Mitra's Mā, a new religious drama based upon Annadāmañgal's Chandī.

Though the adaptation of the poem for the stage was not, as the Statesman remarked, very successful but the play introduced some scenes and situations which were really effective. Of the several characters, Sadhanā and Kālketu deserved special notice and the songs of Sadhanā were conspicuous for their beauty and sweetness.

On the 8th December the same author's Mān or Rādhākrsner's Līlā was played on the 8th December where Sukumari who had come from the Royal Bengal by this time for a short time (only) took the part of Brindā and Bishad Kusum that of Radhikā.

In 1895 Rājā Basanta Roy was played with Purna Babu in the titular role, Kusum as Surama and

163

Sukumari as Bibha. A new play of Phool-Sajjya by Pandit Khirode Prasad was staged on the 31st August 1895. Thus after a few performances the Emerald Theatre had afterwards to be closed about April 1896.

In September 1896 a model Dramatic Association composed of the actors and actresses of the late Emerald Theatre company, gave its last performance with Mādhabi Kankan on the Beena Stage with Purno Babu as Narendranath, after which it was heard no more.

The short career of the theatre is absolutely due to want of good dramatists and capable management. Readers however remember that Girish Chandra's Pūrṇo Chandra alone gave Rs. 20,000 as the Reis and Rayyet hinted

Mr. Mustafi was its last lessee.

We shall here pause a little to give an account of Mr. Mustafi. He was a great comedian and in Minerva Theatre his talents were displayed to their greatest advantage, If twenty years before that, he attained great celebrity in Rājeeblochan, Dhonodās and mostly as Chhātulal and Jaladhar and by wonderfully representing the last part earned the title of Sir John Falstaff. His Ābu Hossain and Barunchand put him now to the climax. Girish too had reasons to be greatful to him, as books which were considered by the autho-

184

rities of the Staras coined from the brain of a maniac,

drew mostly-crowded houses in Minerva, with his

Ābu and Barunchand. Indeed those were the days

of Mustafi's histrionic triumph. But to his mis-

fortune he left the Minerva to become the lessee of

the Emerald. Here he made a wrong choice, he

sustained great loss not only in his histrionic

reputation but also in money. He, not fully

comprehend, that without Girish's superb creations

his talents could not find their full play. We

should, however, quote Girish's words about the

cause of his failure :

"When Nāgan Babu started Minerva Theatre,

myself and Ardhendu were, again, re-united. In

the interval he travelled over different places. In

the four roles he was in Macbeth, his former repu-

tation was revived. Next, Abu in Ābu Hossain

Barunchand in Mulcul Muñjurā and Vidushaka in

Janā began to enchant audience, and their praises

knew no bounds. Next, after two or three nights'

performance as Vidushaka he with a view to become

a proprietor of a theatre took lease of the Emerald

Stage. Some artists too followed him. But this was

a great mistake of his life. He was an actor but

not a business-man. He could train, but how could

all things be managed in time, he did not possess

that idea or have the training. For his anxiety to

minute details, he would very often ignore other

principal or important matters. He realised his own

105

drawback while the theatre failed. He fell into debts

and his residential house was sold for paying his

creditors.

Ardhendu's absence was however greatly felt,

but how did Girish fill up that want ? Did he

suffer ? No, not in the least. Tincowrie was gone,

Ranu Babu was gone and above all, Ardhendu, the

infinite master of gests also left for the Emerald.

What then became of the Minerva? And thus

Girish describes# :-

"Ranu Babu leaves Minerva. Rasa-sāgore

Ardhendu also starts a rival theatre. None dared

appear in the roles of Barunchand and Abu. The

place of dancing master remained still unfilled. At

such a crisis was found Babu Gobordhon Banerjee,

a lover of art. He filled up the place of Ranu Babu

and took up the two inimitable roles of Ardhendu.

Thus was the reputation of Minerva kept up by

Gobordhone Babu with credit. But the void by his

absence on service to the Maharaja of Kassimbazar

still remains the same."

THE CITY THEATRE.

The Name of Babu Nilmadhab Chakerburty is

associated with the City and Aurora Theatres. We

have seen how as a growse against the proprietors

of the Star Theatre for the discourtesy shown to

• Vide Rangālaye Nēpen by Girish Chandra.

their leader Girish Chandra, Nilmadhab broke off

from the 'Star' and after some performances in

private houses he took lease of the Beena Theatre.

From the 16th May 1891 when the Chaitanya Līlā

was staged, it continued for about two years, with

Probodh Ghosh and others.

After some performances at the Beena Stage were

shown it was for some time suspended with the rise

of Minerva where a good number, of its artists had

joined. It re-opened on the 7th October, 1893 with

Sarala, and after having staged old dramas of

Girish Chandra and farces and Tarubālā of

Amritalal Bose, it put on its boards some new

operas, including Ānanda Laharī or Hari Līlā

on the 9th December 1893 and Behadđa Behāyā

on the 24th February 1894.

For some time it was again stopped and another

theatre under the name of Gaity showed some per-

formances of the like—Makare Netai in imitation

of Karamati-bai of Minerva and Proloyonkari in

imitation of Star's Strbuddhi.

Nilmadhab's zeal was not however abated. He

next took lease of the Minerva for a few nights (11th

April to 30th May 1896) as it was then in hope-

lessly miserable plight owing Girish's departure in

March 1896 but was eventually forced to leave.

Nilmadhob Babu then took lease of the Emerald

Theatre for ten months beginning from the 20th June

167

1896. Although in the first few months the City

could not do much,* it attained a name and fame

in the representation of Devī Choudhurānī drama-

tised by Babu Atul Krishna Mitra. Here Nilmadhab

Chakraburty as Bhabānī Pāthok admirably suited

the character, both by appearance as also by his

gravity of voice and serene gestures. Probodh

Ghosh acted the part of Brojeswar, Devi's part was

taken by younger Golap, Haraballav by Chandi

Charan De, Lt. Brenun by Goslho Chockerbuty

and Nishi by Bishad Kushum. The play was very

successful and Chandi Charan truly represented the

character as depicted by Bankim Babu and not a

comic figure as was subsequently shown by some

artists at the Classic.

The career of the party was however cut short

in 1897, when they were evicted in the month of

Chaitra 1303 B.S. by the appearance of Babu

Amarendra Nath Dutt and his Classic Theatre.

Nilmadhab hereafter tried some performances

at the Bengal Stage under the name of "Aurora

Theatre", but of this later.

THE BENGAL THEATRE.

In the second volume of The Indian Stage we

have described how the Bengal Theatre started with

• Mādhohı was staged on 5th September and Saraswat

Kunja on 26th September, 1896.

actresses and associated as it was with the great

name Michael Madhusudon Dutt received liberal

patronage of the theatre-going public from the very

beginning. When however the great National

Theatre was greatly shaken by prosecution and

legislative enactment, it was not touched at all. On

the other hand, it was fortunate to secure some of

the prominent artists of the rival theatre. In 1877,

however, for the first time when Girish arranged

performance of Meghnādhaṭh, he showed the de-

fective way practised by Bengal Theatre in reading

the poet's metre in a prose style. Although popular,

the Bengal Theatre had none of the cultural atmos-

phere of the 'National' and its performances were

more of the old jātrā type, as Durvāsā Pāraṇ,

Rājsuya Jajñā, Bhīṣma Saraśajjyā, Sīlhubadh etc.

Bengal Theatre also rendered a number of Bankim

Chandra's novels into dramas for the stage. Scarcely

was a piece well-rendered or did the acting repre-

sent the spirit of characters truly. But deffiernt

was the case with the performance of Durgāś-

nandinī where all the parts were done to satisfaction

and it was a treat, never to be witnessed any where

to see Sarat Babu on horse-back in the role of

Jagat Sing.

On the other hand the rendering of the some

of the best novels of Bankim Chandra marred the

effect altogther. In Chandra Śekhar staged on the

169

16th March 1878, characters were represented as follows :-

Chandra Sekhar

...

Beharilal

Protap

...

Haridas Das

Foster

...

Sarat Chandra

Dalanī

...

Bonobiharini

Kusum

...

Elokeshi

Mrs. Sukumari Dutt used to a appear as Girijāyā in Mrṇālinī, Kiran Banerji as Pasupati,, Haridas as Hemchandra and Beharilal as Mādhabāchārya.

The Bengal Theatre however obtained a recognition from the Government in 1878 which even Girish's theatre did not. His Excellency Lord Lytton the Viceroy of India and his consort--Her Excellency Lady Lytton--accompanied by Sir Richard Temple, Lieutenant Governor of Bengal visited the Bengal Theatre and were much pleased with the performance of Śakuntalā on the 18th June, 1878, and praised the scenery etc very much.*

• Thus writes Englishman Monday 21st Jan. 1878.

"The Bengal Theatre"—On Friday night, their Excellen-cies Lord and Lady Lytton, with Sir Richard Temple accompanied by their respective suits, visited this Theatre and witnessed the play of Sakuntalā or the Lost Ring. We understood that this is the first occasion on which Viceroy has ever visited a native Theatre. Great pains were unmistakably taken by the management to make every thing pleasant for their Excellencies and the manner in which the piece was put on the stage reflects much credit on the proprietor. The scenery was very good, the dresses of the

22

the occasion of a benefit performance organised for

the aid of the Society for prevention of the

cruelty to animals.

It must however be remembered that the actors

of the Bengal did not lack talents ; some of them

could have turned the best, but what was wanting

was the supply of dramas and proper training

in the art of acting, in both of which they were no

match for Girish's parties.

In 1880 when the Bengal Theatre put on boards

Aśrumoti Nāṭak by Sj Jyotirindra Nath Tagore,

it began to draw crowds. Girish had no drama

at this time and was not connected with any theatre

then. The first drama of Girish Ananda Raho had a

stamp of Aśrumotī in it as we said before. But "the

Bengal" suffered an irreparable loss in the death

of its founder Babu Sarat Chandra Ghose in 1880,

a prince all round. The Bengal Theatre showed

some honour to his memory by staging the same

drama of Aśrumotī on the 11th Dec. 1880. It is

artists were effective and the dialogues good, though with

somewhat of a tendency to drag, specially in the bee scene

in which a young lady and two attendants are concerned

at the extraordinary behavior of a bee of immense dimen-

sions. Lord and Lady Lytton having stayed an hour in the

theatre, left a little before 11 o'clock. The theatre was

crammed and must have contributed materially to the funds

of the society for the prevention of "Cruelty to Animals"

said that on a certain occasion when Grish under-

took to play in the role of Protap Singh he proceed-

ed but after some progress in the play when he saw

that his (Protap's) daughter was in love with the

Mogul prince, he left the theatre in the middle of

the play in disgust, so strong and deep was his love

and regard for national sentiments.

Next attraction for Bengal was the performance

of Prohlād Charitrā as written by the poet Raj

Krishna Roy. It was successful not only in the

theatre but also as a Jātrā performance. Jogindra

Ghatak was good in the role of Hironya Kaśipoo

and the part of Prohlād was so marvellously

rendered by an actress of the name of Kusum, that

she used to be called here-after as Prohlād

Kusum.

Thus did the Bengal Theatre continue in its race

and in 1891 it assumed the dignified title "Royal

Bengal Theatre", in as much as it had the good

fortune of being asked to show a few scenes during

the visit of His Royal Highness Prince Albert

Victor, elder son since deceased, of the then Prince

of Wales (afterwards King Edward VII) and elder

brother of King George V.

In the 189¼, the company received fresh impetus

in its strength. Babu Mohendra Bose, the great

tragedian, who gave up the lease of the Emerald

Theatre joined the Bengal Theatre with Mrs. Suku-

mari Dutt. Babu Probodh Ghose (nephew of Sarat

Babu), left the “City” and came here and Miss

Promoda Sundari too came from the “Star.” The

Bengal Theatre with the added strength began now

to stage the old pieces, Mṛṇālīni Āśrumatī Durgeṣ

Nandinī Pūrobikram and Biṣbṛkṣa specially.

In the last play the cast was as follows:—

Nagendra ... Mohendra Bose.

Debendra ... Mathura Chatterji.

Surjamukhi ... Mrs. Dutt.

Sriṣ ... Hari Das Dass.

Kamalmoni ... Promoda.

Kunda ... Harimoti (Blackie)

About the success of the play Statesman thus

observes—

"...The manner in which Biṣbṛkṣa was played

on Sunday last fully satisfied the anticipation

that had been excited. Most of the parts were

well-filled but special mention may be made of

the actor who represented the character of

Nagendra the husband who falls a victim to

the poison-tree and to the actresses who repre-

sented the characters of wronged-wife and her

innocent rival. The actor who appeared as

Debendra should, however, have been entrusted

with a less important part."

In 1895, on Feb. 2nd, Rajanī a well-known

fiction of Bankim Chandra dramatised by Behari Lal

Chatterji was put on boards. It was a great success

and audience was quite large, Mohendra Bose taking

173

the part of Sachindra, Haridas Babu of Amarnath, Sukumari of Rajani and Nistarini as Labangalota. Of the performance Anuśīlan (Falgun 1301 B. S.) thus writes :-

Sukumari truly represented Rajani in all aspects. Although she was aged but by her acting and poises she remedied that defect. She truly represented what Bankim Chandra writes about Rajani-

"Rajani is blind from birth, but her eyes donot indicate that. No defect is noticeable from the eyes, they are large, bluish in colour with bee-like black pupil. O, how beautiful are they."

Mrs. Sukumari wonderfully succeeded in imitating the visionless eyes of the blind girl.

Towards the middleof the 1895, Babu Mohendra Lal Bose left for the Minerva Theatre and probably some time before, Miss Promoda too left. This reduced the strength of the party and we have not much to note except that it staged Rājsiñha on the 8th Jan. 1896 in competition with Star, and on the 5th Sep. 1896, a benifit performance was given for the assistance of the widow of Sarat Babu the founder of the theatre and on 30th Dec., some of the congress leaders including Pandit Ananda Charlu, the then leader of Madras were invited at the performance of Śakuntalā and Mohaśel.

In 1897 in competition with City on the Emerald Stage it showed some activity in staging

`Devi Choudhurani' from Feb. 27, when Krsna Kanter Will was staged from June 2, 1897 and the Anusilan 1304 Ashar writes eulogistically

about the performance.

In 1898, (Feb. 19) Daraf Khan was played with Sukumari as Maimuni and on the 24th September, Promode Rainjan another enchanting opera of Kshirode Prasad (of Alibaba fame) was staged in which Nripendra Bose the dancing expert of Abdala fame appeared as Chanchal Kumar. This had a good run and was followed by Kumari a melo-drama in 1899 (staged on 26th August).

Next Protimā—a play by Behari Babu—was staged on 8th Dec, 1900,

Thus the Theatre continued but after the performance of a social piece Nihār on the 16th March 1901, a serious tragedy befell the Bengal Theatre.

Babu Behari Lal Chatterji the life and soul of the 'Bengal Theatre' who by versatile compositions, able management and self-less devotion kept up its reputation even in the teeth of hard competition, breathed his last on the 24th April 1901 and with his death the Bengal Theatre closed its doors.

It commenced with death, it was shaken by death, and now it ends with death.

Girish Chandra Ghose wrote a short biography of his and Babu Amrita Lal Bose also paid high encomiums on Beharilal.

Chapter VII

THEATRE AT GUJRAT

In our first volume of the Indian Stage we have spoken of the Sanskrit dramas and also described how a Bengali dramatist Madana composed Pārijāt Moñjurī Nāṭikā for a prince of Gujrat which has been preserved in a slab of black stone. Sanskrit was the court language of Gujrat and the Rāmāyana, Mahābharata, Purāṇas and Smritis as also the classical works of Bhasa and Kalidasa influenced the culture of Gujrat as much as it did that of Bengal. In reality also, Gujrat made considerable improvement in Sanskrit, drama and stage.

Of the Sanskrit dramatists at Gujrat the most noteworthy was Ram Chandra (1093-1174) whose Nala Vilāsa deserves great mention. He also composed ten more dramas of different varieties—Nātaka, Prakarana, Nāṭikā, Vyayaga and also wrote a treatise—Natyadarpaṇa which contains valuable quotations from lost plays and is a store-house of literary and historical material.

Ram Chandra tried to introduce realism into the drama by eliminating some of its miraculous incidents like the news sent through swan in Nalo Vilāsa.

176

About the time Rāma Chandra flourished, drama made great progress and plays were as a rule performed in temples with some kind of scenic display, on festive or religious occasions. Ram Chandra for the first time stressed on the fact that an actor must always feel and the most realistic actor is he who is the most natural. What Ram Chandra maintained about thousand years ago must also be the guiding factor with actors of India to-day. Attempts to display art with arms and legs and raising voice to an unnecessary length are to be always deprecated. None should forget the saying “Best art is to conceal art.”

Ram Chandra however was practically alone and there were few to take up his work. In the next period although drama was scanty, Rasa formed the chief amusement for the people. It is a sort of dance accompanied by songs when men and women used to take part. Generally legends of Krishna were resorted to and there was abundance of such things during the Holi festival (spring time). Rasa also formed the basis of Yātrā—akin to Yātrās at Bengal which used to be performed also. by amateurs at fairs and religious festivals.

The next stage of dramatic history in Gujrat introduces us to a versatile writer Premananda (1636-1734) who in his Ākhyāns taken from Mahā-bharata and Ramayana generally wanted to make

177

Gujrati language as rich and beautiful as Sanskrit.

He was a great reformer in literature and although

the dramas Rashadarshika, Satyabhama Akshyan

and Panchali Prasannakshyan ascribed to him may

be of doubtful authenticity, it is to be undeniable

that the change he brought upon the Gujrati literature exercised a great influence on dramas of Gujrat

in its own language. Gujrati drama owes, indeed,

a great debt to him. After this, Gujrat from 14th

to 18th century had no stage and nor any dramatic

literature worth the name. The Gujrati Bhabais were

only improved forms of Rasas and up to the 19th

century the Bhabais performed often by wandering

players in villages in the nature of farces were the

only drama liked by the people, rather by the people

of the low classes. Episodes mostly from Krṣna's

life were generally taken and crudely staged in melās

(fairs) or in Vaiṣṇava temples uder the name of

Raslila. Here a large number of Garabi were also

used. Garabi dances began however to be disliked

with the spread of education and the Bhabai farces,

exhibiting much of vulgarity began also to give

shock to cultured minds. At this stage a Katha

Samaj was formed and Ranchhodbhai Udayaram

a leader of the same (1838-1923) aspiring to rise

above the low dramas took a bold step and proceeded

in his efforts with something like missionary zeal.

He first translated some Sanskrit pieces and as time

went on, wrote a good book Jayakumar as also the

23

178

mythological drama Harish Chandra. But what

spread his fame was his social tragedy—the first

tragedy in Gujrat—Lalita Duksaharan Darshaka.

Nataka, Here the heroine, a cultured girl, was

married to a common man Nandan and the trials

and tribulations and the ill treatment of the husband

formed the main theme ending with the death of the

girl which she was driven to seek. It was staged at

Bombay by the Parsi Theatrical Companies as also

elsewhere by amateurs and created such a sensation

with the audiences that the name Nandan came to be

hereafter regarded as a name of disrepute—a syno-

nym for a heartless rake. Its chief merit was novelty.

Indeed Ranchhodbhai's attempts met with remark-

able success and with the dramas as staged, theatre

became a popular and respectable resort for middle

classes—a centre not only of entertainments but

also of instruction and social reform.

Ranchhodbhai was however practically alone

in the last century and his attempts were not

followed up. None took up the matter in right

earnest. Drama fell down and Novel took its

place in the popular imagination.

Dramas not being taken by Gujrati authors, the

Parsi authors in search of pure artistic expressions

for their dramas began to use Parsi-Gujrati as dis-

tinguished from pure Gujrati and the Gujrati

language thus received a set-back although the

179

pure Gujrati was now and again resorted to in amateur theatres in Gujrat.

The Parsees are very advanced in matters of theatre. They have the adaptability of correctly imitating English manners. They also have some claims to both Sanskrit and Persian culture. From the beginning they took to theatre and made considerable improvement in stage-craft. They produced plays in Gujrati, Mahrati and Urdu and took stories from Hindu legends. Of them and their contributions we shall narrate in the next volume but this is certain that pure Gujrati drama took a long time to flourish again, although Gujrat is indebted to a certain extent to the Parsis for their modern stage.

The Parsi shows again differed a great deal from the tradition of the Gujrati stage. Their gaudy and dazzling scenery and the vehement acting did not suit the tastes of the Gujrati people. Fortunately "The Gujrati Company" as a business concern was started in 1878 which was again followed by "the Morbi" of Baghaji Ozen and Vankaner Nataka Samajas which revived the stage suited to the tradition of the people. Of the traditions for the new move the name of a teacher Mr. Narottam deserves special mention. The growth from amateur to professional is practically contemporaneous with the National Theatre of Bengal started in 1872.

The Garabi dance which was very much in use in

180

Gujrat, as we saw, declines but the above theatrical companies with a tradition of Kathiavadā gave Garabi again a place on the stage. Garabi got a fresh impetus and found now favour with Gujrati women. Poet Nanalal furnished the literary accompaniment. He collected about 200 Garabis and the progressive women and boys have made of the Garabi an artistic dance.

Although the Morbi and Vankaner Nataka Samajas followed the lines laid down by Ranchhodbhai and generally staged plays based on the Purāna, art was rather miserable and the introduction of farces made the exhibition rather disgusting.

Dahyabhai Dholshaji (1867-1906) made great improvement on the stage. He founded the Deshi Nataka Samaja and staged Āśrumati, Udayabhānи and Vinaveli and other dramas which created a great sensation at Gujrat. The songs introduced were entertaining and much improvement on Garabi dance was effected. The technique and literary tone of the dramas were much improved and plots were taken not only from Purana but also from history and contemporary life. With the spread of Garabi, Dholshaji's stage influenced the social life and literature of Gujrat very much.

After Dholshaji's death, there was again a setback in Gujrati theatre. At this time Babu Amrita Krishna Nayak, a player and a composer became a

prominent figure. He was once associated with

Parsi Theatre and was skilled in histrionic arts.

The Urdu play Zeri Sappa or the Venomous Serpent

(1904) was partly composed by him and as a play of

passion, it took Bombay by storm. For years it

was a great liking with people to see it enacted as

some play slike Kinnari and similar operas were seen

in Bengal. Gujrati stage was very much influenced

by such plays for the worse and realism was practi-

cally driven out.

We have said before of Nanalal as a composer

of Garabi songs. He was also a dramatist of merit.

His dramas Indulukumāra (1909) Jayjoyanta (1914)

Rājarsi Bharata (Sakuntala’s son) (1922) Jahangir-

Nurjahan, Akbar and Shajahan deserve mention. No

doubt he contributed greatly to the growth of Gujrati

drama and stage but his plays are a poet's plays

meant more for the study than for the stage. Dialogue

rather than situation, poetry rather than drama,

idealism rather than realism, types rather than

characters are some of the characteristics of his

plays.

Ramanbhai Nilkant's Raino Parvat composed

in 1914 is also a good play.

Srijut Kanaiyalal Maneklal Munshi, another

dramatist of merit has also written a number of dramas

based on Pouranic and social subjects. His Pouranic

dramas Purandarparājaya (1922) Abhivaktama

(1931) Tarpana, Lopamudra are good and the social dramas Be Kharabi Jana, Kahani Shashi, Brahma-

charyasrama are racy and sparkling productions.

The Gujrati people are by nature businessmen

and they have shown generally an apathy in theatri-

cal entertainment. Consequently growth of the stage

has not been rapid as has been in Bengal or even in

Maharastra. The popularity of the film also for the

last 30 years has been a cause of the paucity of the

dramas. Still the attempts of a few patriotic

gentlemen to revive the theatre of the Hindus at

Gujrat deserve praise. At Gujrat female artists have

just begun to take part in theatrical representations.

It is also seen that plays with female artists are

much more popular than plays however well render-

ed by boys in the roles of female characters. Indeed

if a professional company shows performances in any

town in Gujrat, audience generally becomes large,

showing that a good film is no substitute for a good

play.

Although mixed acting has not yet been

universally accepted by the social conscience,

and wiseacres still hold that ‘no play’ is rather prefer-

able to plays with women, amateur circles, however,

in Bombay and sometimes in Ahmedabad and even

in some of the colleges now after a great deal of

struggle have taken to mixed acting. Of those

whose efforts in this connection have been made in

right direction, Prof. B. K. Thakore and a noted young

playwright Chandravadan Mehta (B. 1901) deserve

special mention. The latter is a poet (of Ila Kabya

and Visarjan, etc.) and teacher and has written many

plays. Not only he rendered foreign plays into

Gujarati but also wrote some realistic plays like Ag Godi (The Iron Road,) Naya Bava, the naked Fakirs

and Santa Ko:lili (Hide and Seek) &c. Boys and

girls played together in his plays and Mr. Thakore

is to be congratulated on the vigorous efforts he

has made for the improvement of the Gujrati Stage.

There are also budding writers like Yashbant

Pandya, Batubhai Umarvadia, Umasankar Joshi,

Indulal Gandhi and others but there is still much

needed for actable plays and better productions.

Attempts are in progress and it will take yet a

fairly long period to make Stage and Theatre tho-

roughly nationalistic.

Gujrat ought to bear in mind that without a

developed and regulated stage national education

does not get full scope as has been fully illustrated

through the nationalistic dramas of Girish

Chandra Ghosh on the Bengali stage. Without

females also, a stage is not full and no

matter what class* they belong to, they must

however be thoroughly disciplined and no kind of

• In Bengal Srijukta.s Binodini, Khetrmoni, Tincowrie,

Tarasundari, Sukumari, Sushila are glaring examples of

most disciplined and cultured artists though most of them

come of unreputed origin for which, of course, they are

not responsible.

indulgence or weakness is to be tolerated by the managers in any way. The latter too should be high in principles and maintain dignity of the position they are supposed to hold. If such a state occurs, as occured under Girish Ghosh, even with people mostly illiterate and persons taken from unholy surroundings, the stage of today with new recruits of artists from educated society, will assuredly play a very great and important part in the evolution in our social and national life. Mere degrees of a university are not the criterion of the real improvement but a disciplined and national stage is what India needs very badly today.

There is also another danger. The film has grown in popularity and the so-called dramas of today are either lacking in life or have engrafted in them much of matters from the western ideas which do not suit our people in our society. All provinces must be feeling this. Much display is also shown by many of our artists at the cost of natural acting. For a number of years Stage has rather a growth to the opposite direction. It is, however, a happy sign of the times that in Calcutta an association with some men of lead and light (viz: Mr. Kiran Chandra Dutt, M.R.A.S., Pandit Asoke Nath Sastri, M.A.,P.R.S., Professor, University college, Mr. Kshitish Chandra Chakraborty, M. A., B. L., Advocate High Court, Mr. Dhirendra Nath Mukherjee, poet, and Mr. Kshetramohan Mitra, the distinguished actor

since Girish Chandra's time of Balidān's Mohit and Serajaddula's Clive fame, has been formed

under the name of Girish Parishad the object of which is to play in the most natural way the soul-

stirring and tragic dramas of Girish Chandra, and others of similar type. As an experimental measure

the Parishad staged Balidān the great social tragedy of Girish Chandra, on the 13th of December 1943,

at the board of the Minerva Theatre. The acting under the direction of Mr. Mitra, the last-named

gentleman produced so great an effect on the audience -all possessed of culture, that the house in a voice

declared its superiority over other kinds of acting with declamations and shows, as are generally resorted to

today in the stages both Indian and foreign. It is a red-

letter day for the Indian Stage which has given rise to this new school of acting and proved to demons-

tration that the performances of the tragedies of Girish Chandra are possible only with artists who feel most

in the light of the characters drawn. The author wel-

comes the enterprise of Girish Parishad and wishes that if the Indian Stage in all provinces do seriously

go on with its mission of introducing natural acting once more, it will make the greatest contribu-

tion to the general upheaval of the country in all its phases—national, social and religious.

Gujrat is very lucky in producing one of the greatest men of the world in Mahatma Gandhi, as

Bengal has done in the case of Deshbandhu C. R.

24

186

Das whose colossal sacrifice due to the love of his country is unparalleled in the history of the world.

Maharashtra has also produced amongst others the great Bal Gangadhar Tilok. These eminent perso-

nages will also, I am sure, furnish enough materials for the National Stage of India.*

To the rising dramatists I should convey the caution as given by our savants—Bankim Chandra

and Vivekanonda, Girish Chandra and Chittaranjan that India has abundant treasures of her own and we

need not imitate any foreign ideals and thereby lower our national culture.

• For this chapter I am particularly grateful to Prof.

Hiralal Godiwala, B.A. (Oxon) for his article "The Guzrati Theatre" (Modern Review, p. 599, 1938) and to Shri K. M.

Munshi for his valuable book "Guzrat and its Literature".

"The Indian Theatre" of my esteemed friend Dr. R. K.

Yajnik has also been of great help to me.—Author.

Chapter VIII

THE MARATHI THEATRE.

The present volume is styled as the centenary

edition not only because it commemorates the hun-

dredth birth-day of the actor-dramatist Girish

Chandra Ghose, but also for the reason that the

centenary of the Marhatti Theatre was celebrated

only a couple months ago at Sangli (Maharastra).

The first Marathi drama was staged at-Sangli in

the year 1843. This is really surprising. The

Marathas ruled over their own province and also

over a major portion of the other provinces for over

150 years. Art and Industry develop with Royal

aid, but the Maratha rulers had never a peaceful

time. They were always at war with either the

Mohamedans, the English, The French, the Portu-

guese or other European powers who were trying to

establish rule in India. They had, therefore, little

or no time to enjoy the pleasures of a ruler and

consequently the stage was neglected.

Man, however, always requires some sort of

entertainment. Till the end of the 18th century

Harilatha was the most popular and civilised type of

recreation. Briefly, Harikatha is one man's perfor-

mance. It is a sort of speech delivered in two parts.

188

The man delivering the speech must be thoroughly educated, and well-read. The speaker is known as ‘Haridas’. He selects a good phrase either from the Vedas, Rāmāyan, Mahābhārat, Bhāgvat Gītā and explains the underlying idea to the audience. This is in the first part ; and in the latter part he relates a story embodying the moral of the first part. Music, Wits and Humours are resorted to for additional entertainment. This Harikatha is still very popular all over Maharashtra amongst all classes of men and women.

Harikatha is akin to Kathakatā in Bengal.

Since the beginning of the 19th Century other types of entertainments came into existence e. y., Lalit, Gondhal, Bahurupee and Dashavatar. The idea for these seems to have been derived from the stage performances current in other provinces on the borders of Maharashtra. There is, however, no definite proof for this.

Lalit means variety. So this performance can be well explained by calling it “Variety performance” Here too as in Harikatha only religious items were depicted. In Harikatha only one man carries the show whereas in the Lalit many actors take part. The originator of Lalit was one Dasopanta Kshatriya by caste. He trained three other men, Savaji Mallappa of Poona, Waghoji of Baroda and Patil Bua of Bombay. Unfortunately, there were

189

dissensions amongst these people and they separated

and went to their respective places. Even to-day we

see that no sooner either a Dramatic or Film pro-

ducing Company comes into prominence it breaks

down due to dissensions amongst founders, and Art

suffers most. The Prabhat Film Company of Poona

is a striking example. When the four founders of this

Company were united the pictures produced at the

Prabhat Studio successively won distinction at the

International Exhibition at Geneva and public all

over India used to eagerly await the release of

Prabhat Pictures. To-day Prabhat is not even

heard of.

Patilbua of Bombay referred to above coached

some other men for this Lalit and the performances

of Lalit by Patilbua and his men were excellent

and popular and there was always tremendous rush of

audience. Even to-day performance of Lalit takes

place in villages. But this performance is quite

different from that of olden days. Gondhal is also

similar to Lalit. Bahurupee means those who can

imitate anybody. This really is an art and in those

days there were people who used to imitate anybody

quite perfectly, speak any language fluently. There

arose so many folk-tales about these Bahurupee from

which it may be said that they existed since very old

days. It is said that a Bahurupee once went to

the Court of Aurangazeb. He was ordered to imi-

tate a tiger. This man who wanted to revenge a

relative of the king killed him while acting as a

tiger. The King then is said to have asked him to

imitate a Sati and burned him alive. Another story

current about the Bahurupee is that there was a

Bahurupee at the time of Nana Phadnis. He could

speak any Indian language fluently; it was really

difficult to tell his nationality. He went to Poona

and challenged Nana Phadnis to tell him his Nation-

ality. This man was asked to come to the court the

next day. In the meantime Nana instructed one of

his servants to sprinkle cold water over the face of

this man when asleep. When this was done he

woke up muttering some words in Gujrati. From

this Nana could tell that the fellow was a Gujrati.

Dashavatār was another type of entertainment.

In this all the ten incranations of Lord Viṣṇu used

to be depicted. Gods and Demons were the chief

features. The Sword play by the Demon actors in

this was the best and it is said that even Europeans

at times used to see the Dashavatars only because of

the sword play.

Tamasha was one more type of amusement.

Mostly low class people used to perform these

Tamashas and hence they were a bit vulgar. It is

difficult to find out the name of the person who

originated the Tamasha, but Bahiru, Malhari, Tatya

Punekar, Dhondi Bapu, Sagan Bhan, Honaji Bal

and Rama Gondhali are the people who developed

the Tamasha into a good art. To perform a

191

Tamasha was not an easy task. The performers used to compose songs on the stage and the rival had to compose songs in reply. At times only one man had to sing for hours together which is certainly a feat. It is doubtful if our present-day 'Stars' can perform such feats. Both Girish Chandra and Ardhendusekhar of Bengal, specially the latter, could do this.

A Brahmin lad, Ramjoshi, was very much attracted towards these Tamashas. His relatives tried their best to persuade him away from the Tamasha because anybody connected with the Tamashas was looked down in the society. But Ramjoshi's love for Tamasha was considerable. He composed songs known as Lavani for these Tamashas and raised the status of the Tamashas. Even to-day Ramjoshi's compositions are recognised as standard. In the Tamashas an actor in female robes was first introduced on the Stage. Although Ramjoshi improved the Tamasha his brother did not appreciate it and when he found that the lad was not at all improving he was driven out of the house. In favour of Ramjoshi's brother it must be said that he was not totally to be blamed. Ramjoshi's family was well-known for its knowledge of Sanskrit and the society could not have tolerated a man from such a high family indulging in Tamasha which for years together, was considered as a low type of entertainment. Ramjoshi himself was a talented man and had

certain original ideas. Unfortunately for Maharashtra Stage and drama had not developed to any extent otherwise in Ramjoshi Maharashtra could have found a very good actor, and a very good dramatist. When driven out of the house, Ramjoshi really repented over his past behavior. He immediately went to Pandharpur and spent several years in learning Sanskrit under the guidance of one Padhye Shashtri. Being already a talented man Ramjoshi soon acquired proficiency in Sanskrit and after some years came back to his native place. He was acknowledged there to be the authority on Sanskrit. Afterwards he took up the profession of Haridas and here also attained a very high place.

Even to-day Tamashas are performed in some theatres in Maharashtra but the vulgarity in it is perhaps many times more than in early days. Civilised and respectable people do not visit these theatres and as stage has developed to a considerable extent now, nobody feels the necessity of patronising a Tamasha.

The Maratha Empire was lost in the year 1818. This is not a place to discuss whether the Britishers defeated the Marathas by virtue of their superiority in Arms or whether it was the fifth column activities that helped them to victory, the fact remains that the Maratha Empire was lost. With the exit of

193

the Marathas out of the picture there was no power

in the whole of India to oppose the Britishers,

Consequently there were no wars and peace prevailed

in Maharashtra after quite a long time. Now the

people of Maharashtra had time to pay attention to

things other than politics. So a need was soon felt for

some sort of public entertainment. The Tamashas

could only serve the purpose partially. Respectable

people and ladies could not attend the Tamashas.

So there was a search for some other type of amuse-

ment.

In the year 1843 Shreemant Appasaheb

Patwardhan was the ruler of Sangli State.

This ruler was himself a well-read man and had

maintained in his court not only Shastrees, Pandits,

Musicians but also those who could show some

special art. Further this ruler had the opportunity

of seeing Kanarese dramas which were staged in

cities around his state. It was his great desire that

there must be Marathi dramas. Drama is not a new

thing to Indians and so it was not to the Marathas.

They had all read the world-renowned Sanskrit

dramas of Bhasa, Kalidasa and other writers. The

only thing was there was no peace of mind for the

Marathas to pay attention to things like drama

which, as compared with politics was certainly quite

a negligible thing. Some how it was the fortune of

Shreemant Appasaheb to be known as the first man

to stage a Marathi drama. As aforesaid he was

25

keen about staging a Marathi drama and fortunately for him a man from his own State could fulfil his desire.

Vishnu Amrit Bhave holds the credit of staging the first Marathi drama. His father Amritrao was a Military Officer in the Sangli State. Vishnu Amrit Bhave, known as Vishnudas Bhave, had cultivated in him a number of arts when he was only 10.

At the age of 12 he had made out of clay a small model of the Sangli town. He had made some toys, and like the Micky Mouse of today he could make these toys act in whatever way he desired. He was also well up in carpentry and structural engineering.

He could also make decent carpets. In short there was nothing which Vishnudas did not know. It is but natural that a genius like him should win the credit of staging the first Marathi drama.

Vishnudas Bhave decided to fulfil the desire of his master and concentrated all his faculties on this theme. He soon succeeded in writing a drama and staging same. His first drama is "Sitaswayamwarm".

It must be mentioned here that Sitaswayamwarm is not the first Marathi drama although it is the first Marathi drama as staged. According to the late Mr. Rajawade, a drama by name Lakshmi Narayan Kalyan was written in the year 1662 by Shahu, ruler of Tanjore.

The Marathi rule existed in Tanjore since the days of Chhatrapati

195

Shivaji and the State was abolished in 1848 by Lord Wm. Bentinck as there was no direct descendant. The Marathi rulers in Tanjore were content with the small State they had and did not bother about the activities the Marathas at Poona and Satara were carrying. The Tanjore rulers, therefore, paid attention to learning.

Although Lakshmi Narayan Kalyan is the first Marathi drama there is no record of the same being staged anywhere and the drama itself is known to very few people of Maharashtra. So without contradiction it can be said that Sitaswayamvaram—is the first Marathi drama staged.

All the dramas written by Vishnudas Bhave were mythological. Dramas other than mythological could not have been popular in those days, Even today we find that dramas and talkies depicting mythological themes become popular very soon. The Hindu mind is made like that. When things are so even in the 20th century, no wonder mythological dramas only could be popular in 1843.

This was the beginning of the Marathi stage. There were no theatres and dramas were staged in public temples or in the big houses of rich men. When there were no theatres, scenes, sceneries were things which were never thought of, Curtain there used to be only one. If today a drama with only one curtain, no scenes and sceneries is staged, it is .

doubtful whether it can draw any audience. But

in the beginning nothing more should be expected.

Marathi stage has attained its present position only

because Vishnudas Bhave was there.

Most of the dramas of Vishnudas Bhave were

staged in the following manner. Sutradhar or the

stage controller comes first. He was literally so in

those days. Nearly from the beginning to the end he

had to stay on the stage. The Sutradhar first used

to sing in praise of the God, after which the Joker

or Vidushaka or the fool used to enter. Discussion

between these two then used to take place in the

course of which they both used to have themselves

introduced to each other. The Sutradhar then used

to explain to the public the drama to be performed

and so that the performance should end without any

trouble, the Elephant-headed God Ganapati was

exhorted. His blessing used to be obtained and on

his advice the goddess of learning Saraswati was

worshipped and her blessings obtained which

assured that all actors would talk and act perfectly.

Most of the singing was done by the Sutradhar

and it was his duty to introduce to the public in

some way or other the actor who first entered the

stage. There being only one curtain the necessary

changes on the stage were carried out by the Joker.

Judging with the standard of the present-day stage

the above types of dramas will not be considered

worth-staging and seeing. But this can be said in

1913 exactly 100 years after the first drama was staged. It has taken 100 years for the stage to develop to the present state. The Marathi public rightly holds Vishnudas Bhave in high esteem because it is to him that they owe too much for the stage.

Even to-day the Marathi stage, as compared with other provincial stages, particularly that of Bengal, is very poor in respect of Scenes and scenic representations. Marathi actors have therefore to depend upon a very high type of acting for the success of their performance.

From the year 1843 to 1851 Vishnudas Bhave used to stage his dramas, which as stated above were all mythological. In 1851 Shreemant Appasaheb Patwardhan the Ruler of Sangli died. Vishnudas Bhave thereafter decided to visit some other places in Maharashtra with his dramatic company. He first went to Kolhapur, the capital town of another small state, and then to Poona.

In 1851 the condition in Poona, the capital town of the Maratha kings, was rather different from that of previous years. The empire was lost in 1818. There being no wars, everybody had a peaceful time. Fortunately for the Britishers, the first Governor of that province was Mr. Elphistone who was a very shrewd man. He knew how to keep the people whose kingdom was taken over by the British, quiet.

198

He introduced many good measures, showed respect

to Sardars and other big people of the olden days,

and introduced new reforms for education. Thus the

intelligent and learned people of Poona who were

feeling that their kingdom had been lost, found in

the beginning that the new rule was not altogether

bad. The people, therefore, turned their attention

towards various activities such as establishing

schools for English education, publishing papers,

opening new hospitals, establishing libraries and

reading rooms, starting lectures and to add to

all these activities the Municipality was brought into

existence. Thus the people of Poona were busy

with so many activities and had not to worry about

wars. They were now in search for some sort of

entertainment. They had heard of the dramas staged

by Vishnudas Bhave and when he visited Poona

with his Company he was well received.

Maharashtra is comparatively a poor province,

but the Marathi people rank amongst the best

people of India. Estates and Zemindaries as are

seen in other provinces do not exist in Maharashtra.

The province itself is not too fertile and conse-

quently lawyers, medical practitioners etc., do not

enjoy such large and lucrative practices as in other

provinces. Further today the population of Mahara-

shtra (Marathi speaking people) is nearly 2 crores,

nearly 1/4 that of Bengal. Besides the Marathi

speaking districts are divided under three Govern-

199

ments—some in the Bombay Province, some in

the Central Provinces and some in the Nizam’s domi-

nions. So all these things together are a great

handicap for the success of any activity. Where

most of the languages of India have a University,

the “Marathi” language is without a University of

its own. From the above it can be judged that a

dramatic company cannot earn very large amounts

in Maharashtra. Firstly due to the comparatively

less earning capacity of the people the entertainment-

fees must not be too high. Secondly the Marathi

people being only two crores in number, a drama-

tic company cannot visit a number of places and

earn money. Still with all these odds against them

the Marathi stage is certainly developed to a

considerable extent.

In his first trip to Poona, Vishnudas Bhave did

not earn much money; but he gave to the Poona

people a new idea. Ever since the beginning of the

Maratha rule, Poona was in prominence and even

after the kingdom was lost, the Poona people have

maintained their high tradition All activities of

Maharashtra have their origin in Poona. So when

the Poona people saw that this new thing they started

was making useful improvements, they extended

its activities to other towns. Bombay also played

equally good part in gradually improving the

stage. From Poona Bhave went to Bombay where

he could get a good theatre for his dramas. Thus

200

the Marathi public in Poona and Bombay got the

new idea of entertainment and in both these towns

the Marathi stage was developed.

By 1851 there were many people who had taken

English education and this education was gradually

spreading. People, therefore, were in a position to

understand something of the foreign dramas and

their ideas about drama were taking a good shape.

Till 1875 the mythological dramas of Vishnudas

could give sufficient entertainment to the Marathi

public, but thereafter, as aforesaid, the ideas of people

had changed and so the tastes. The then educated

people had read not only the Sanskrit dramas of

Kalidas and other authors but had also read dram-

as of Shakespeare. They had naturally better

ideas about the stage which they used to bring into

action by staging in schools and colleges Sanskrit

and English dramas. In 1872 the students of a

certain school in Poona had staged Shakespeare's

'Merchant of Venice' the directions regarding the per-

formance were given by a European expert. Thus

the tastes of the Marathi public had changed for the

better and new dramas on new and upto date

lines were eagerly awaited. The task of writing high

class and nice dramas was taken up by great and

cultured people like Parashurampant Godbole,

Krishnshastri Rajawade, Lele, Palande, Kolhatkar,

Kirtane and others. Below is given a list of dram-

201

as showing the names of the respective authors

and the year in which they were published.

Uttar Ram Charitra 1859 Parashurampant Godbole.

Parvati Parinaya 1872 do

Mrichhakatik 1881 do

Shakuntala 1881 do

Venisamhar 1881 do

Viratparva 1884 do

Mudra Rakshas 1867 Krishna Shastri Rajawade

Malati Madhava 1861 do

Vikramorshivaya 1874 do

Malavikagnimitra 1867 Ganesh Shastri Lele

Vidhhasalbhanjika 1869 do

Prasanna Raghava 1859 Shivaramshastri Palande,

From the names of the dramas mentioned

above it is obvious that they were translated from

Sanskrit into Marathi. None of the above dramas

however was a success on the stagealthough literally

they are of great value. The following dramas,

some of which are translated from English, were

really well received by the public when staged and

the reason for this is that these dramas could

cater to the taste of the people.

Othello, 1857—Mahadeo Shashtri Kolhatkar.

Thorale Madhorao 1861—Vinayak Janardan Kirtane’

Jayapal, 1863— Do

Manorama, 1871—Bapusaheb Bhajekar.

Vijaysingh, 1872—Kashinath Govind Natu.

Meghavati, 1863—Lukshman Gopal Dixit.

Himat Bahadur, 1868—Anand Sakharam Barve.

26

202

Leaving aside the mythological dramas of Vishnudas Bhave, Othello appears to be the first drama published and staged. This drama, however, is only a translation. The drama Madhaorao Peshave written by Mr. Kirtane in 1861 can be said to be the first independent Marathi drama. This drama portrays the well known Peshawa Madhaorao.

He was a very able Peshawa who when only 17 succeeded to the Gadi immediately after the disaster of Panipat. He came over all difficulties and in 1871 wiped out the disgrace of Panipat by defeating all the Mohamedan powers in the North. This drama is certainly a master-piece and it achieved great success on the stage.

So far we have said about the dramas. Now a word about dramatic companies. The first company was that of Vishnudas Bhave. The idea was picked up by many and shortly afterwards new companies were floated in towns around Sangli.

As these companies toured in some parts of Maharashtra this new idea spread and soon a number of dramatic companies were formed in Poona, Bombay and other places. All these companies used to stage only mythological dramas and the nature of the performances was also similar.

Later on, in addition to the main dramas some companies used to stage a small comedy. As said above, all these companies used to have only one curtain. In 1875 a Company from Kolhapur visited the Deccan

203

Hyderabad. There the proprietor had an opportunity

of seeing drama staged by some Parsee Companies.

Here he picked up the idea about curtains and got

about 6 curtains made for his company, Thus

curtains were introduced on the Marathi stage.

Ever since the beginning the Marathi writers

wrote in poetry form. Literature which could not

be easily understood was considered to be the best.

Most of the early books in Marathi are written in

poetry. Even saints like Ramdas and Tukaram

could not go against this tradition, but fortunately

the works of both them are written in simple

language and can be understood even by an

ordinary literate man. Such being the case the

dramas written by Vishnudas Bhave and a few

others published later had a number of poems. It

was after the British rule that writers in Maha-

rashtra realised the importance of literature in prose

form. This naturally had its effects on the dramas

also. It was Mr. Kirtane who first published a

drama on the new lines. "Madhaoao Peshawe"

is the name of this drama. As has been already

stated this drama was well received on the stage,

but this drama is also known as one which raised

the standard of the dramas and consequently of

the stage. Immediately afterwards Mr. Kirtane

wrote another independant drama "Jaypal". This

was also as good as the previous one. These

dramas were staged by a Company known as

204

Ichalkaranjikar Natak Madali. Following Mr.

Kirtane some more dramas, list of which is given

below, were written by various authors. These

dramas were a marked improvement on the pre-

vious mythological dramas of Vishnudas Bhave

and others. These dramas naturally helped in

improving the stage.

Bhrantikrit Chamatkar by Mr. Padhan,

Tara by Mr. Bishnu Moreshwar Mahajani,

Taruni Shikshan by Mr.Narayan Bapuji Kuitkar,

Mor LL B., by Mr. Narayan Hari Bhagwat,

Manorama by Mr. Bapusaheb Bhajekar,

Vijaysingh by Mr Kashinath Govind Natu,

Gunotkarsh by Mr. Vasudeo Women Khare,

Durga by Mr. Govind Ballal Deval,

Tratika by Mr. Wasudeo Balkrishna Kelkar,

Raua Bhimdeo by Mr. Shikhalkar & Modak

Manipatcha Durdaiwi Mohara by Mr. Mirat,

Of the above dramas special reference should

be made of Tara, by Mr. Mahajani. This drama

is a translation of Cymbeline. but it was very nicely

written. The author had taken special care to see

that the drama becomes a success not only as a

literary piece but also is successful on the stage.

The writer was crowned with success. This drama

was staged by the same Company, Ichalkaranjikar

Natak Mandali and the proprietors of this company

requested Mr. Mahajani to write some more dramas

on similar lines and consequently Mr. Mahajani

wrote two more dramas “Mohwilasit and Wallā-

bhanunaya”. Both these were successful. After

Mr. Kirtane's drama, dramas by Mr. Mahajani

proved to be transitional as they made a change

for the better.

By about the year 1880 the stage attracted the

attention of educated and learned people, and people

who felt the necessity of developing the stage started

taking active part in this and new dramatic

companies were established for this purpose.

“Aryodharak Mandali” was floated some time

in 1879/80 by three students of the Poona Engineer-

ing College, Mr. Deval, Mr. Patkar and Mr.

Vamanrao Bhave, purely for the purpose of improv-

ing the Marathi stage. This was not a commercial

concern. The aim of this institution was to develop

the stage by introducing new ideas and whatever

money was earned by the performances was utilised

for the public welfare. This institution also published

for sometime a periodical “Natyakatharnava”

devoted to the cause drama and stage. “Othello”

“King Lear” and “Tara” were the dramas these

people used to stage and it is recorded that the per-

formances were of the best type. The founders of

this institution never used to take anything as

remuneration and this was most unfortunate for

Maharashtra, because these people had to earn

money for livelihood and one by one all the three

originators left the institution and with their exit the

institution was also closed down. But an important

206

part was played by this institution. Mr. Bhave

discovered the stage and the Ichalkaranjikar Natak

Mandal with the help of men like Kirtane, Mahajani

and others gave the Marathi stage a turn for the

better and the Aryodharak Mandali made distinct

improvements which were copied by others. The

Shahunagarwasi Natak Mandali carried forward

the work of the Aryodharak Mandali.

Shahunagarwasi Natak Mandali was in exis-

tence for about 25 years and during this long term

it staged very fine dramas. The peculiarity of

this Company was that it had a very good set of

actors or rather the management was keen about

first rate acting and this is why all the dramas

staged by this Company were a success. The

following are some of the dramas staged by this

Companies ;

Commedies “Tratika” “Falgunrao” “Pranaya

Vivah” and the like.

Historicals like “Panipatcha Mukabala” “Raha

Bhimdeo” “Baji Deshapande” Tragedies like

“Zunzarrao” “Hamlet” “Manajirao” and others like

“Sant Tukaram” “Ramdas” etc.

As already mentioned all the dramas were a

success but the drama “Tratika” as performed by

this Company is still in the memory of the public.

“Tratika” has been written by Prof. Kelkar on the

lines of the “Taming of the Shrew” by Shakespeare.

207

Here mention must be made of some very good actors of this Company. Ganpatrao Joshi, Givindrao Supekar and Balwantrao Jog. Ganpatrao Joshi is still in the memory of the public. He was perhaps a genius and it is difficult to mention whether the success achieved by the Shahunagarwasi Natak Mandali was due to the type of dramas they were staging or whether it was due to the high class acting by its actors particularly by the three mentioned above and still more that of Mr. Joshi. As a matter of fact the drama Tratīkā is literally not of a very high standard. It is an ordinary comedy. Still it achieved great popularity. Perhaps the conditions then prevailing in Maharastra gave this drama the popularity. Firstly the drama is a social one, then although this drama was of a social type it did not try to preach any type of social reforms nor was there anything in it which would injure the feelings ef the Sanatanists. The subject of the drama was beyond party politics. Then again the theme of the drama is very interesting. The heroine of the drama was like Tratika ; the hero purposely marries her and gradually tames her. Added to all these facts was the superb acting and that is why this drama was very popular.

The year 1880-81 is of great importance to the Marathi people. The late Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak started the publication of his well-known papers the Kesari and the Maratha. And in this

year a great change was brought about on the

Marathi stage by the introduction of Music. Here

again Poona scored a singular victory, because it

was at Poona that tne first sangit-drama was staged

by the well-known Annasaheb Kirloskar. Mention

has already been made that the dramas by Vishnu-

das Bhave and few other writers of that time were

mostly in of poetry but proper music was

not there and that is why the public welcomed prose

dramas written by Mr. Kirtane, Mahajani and

others. But now that educated people had turned

their attention towards the stage, there is no

wonder that new reforms were introduced.

Annasaheb Kirloskar himself wrote the drama

Shakuntal and its first performance took place on

31st October 1880 in the ‘Anandodbhava Natak

Griha’ at Poona. Music, Acting, Singing and every-

thing else was of high standard in this drama. The

acting of Annasaheb himself was marvellous and

the fame of Annasaheb and his drama soon reached

every town in Maharashtra.

From his boyhood Annasaheb had inclination

towards the stage. In his early days on the occasion

of religious functions Mr. Kirloskar used to stage

dramas with the help of his friends. In the first

years of his life Mr. Kirloskar was staying in Bel-

gaum and had an opportunity of seeing Kanarese

dramas. For service he had to go to Bombay and

there he saw dramatic performance by Parsee Com-

209

panies. His natural inclination was towards drama.

It is said that Mr. Kirloskar was a school teacher

in Belgaum. Belgaum being a comparatively big

town some dramatic company used to be there and

Mr. Kirloskar was always to be found there. He

did not care for service also. At times he used to

entrust the class to a brilliant student and himself

sleep in the office room. At times he did not care

to attend the school also. He later joined the Police

department but soon realised that the Police depart-

ment was not suitable for an honest man and he left

that job too. Fortunately a very high officer of the

revenue department was at that time in Belgaum.

He offered Mr. Kirloskar a good job in his depart-

ment and took him to Bombay. This was fortunate

for the people of Maharashtra, because in that town

there were ample opportunities for his ideas ragard-

ing the stage to develop. Thus when in service Mr.

Kirloskar started a dramatic Company. The first

performance of this Company took place at Poona.

So many things put together have contributed to

the success of the dramas of Mr. Kirloskar.

Firstly he introduced scientific music on the

stage which was a new thing. Secondly, before this,

whatever songs there were in the dramas, these were

sung only by the Sutradhar. But in Mr. Kirloskar's

dramas every actor had to sing his song and at the

appropriate time. Then Mr.Kirloskar introduced some

reforms on the stage. He was himself a writer,

27

actor and good singer. He used to choose his own

actors, and when writing the dramas he had in his

mind his actors and wrote the dramas in such a way

as would suit the respective actors. His first drama is

Shakuntala, and amongst his first set of actors were

Morobo Waghulikar, Muzumdar, and Natekr. The

second named person, Mr. Muzumdar was a female

actor (about him we will write later) but he could not

sing and therefore at first Mr. Kirloskar did not have

any songs for the heroine of his drama Shakuntala.

As every actor got job suitable to him it added con-

siderably to the success of the drama. Immediately

afterwards Mr. Kirlosker got Mr. Bhaurav Kolhatkar

for the female role, and this added considerably to

the success of his dramas. Bhaurav was a good singer

and had sweet voice. He was beautiful looking and

was quite suitable for the female role. He was the

Shakuntala of Mr. Kirloskar. He is still in the

memory of the Marathi people. Mr. Kirloskar

started his dramatic activities seriously in 1880 and

died in the year 1885. In this five years' time he

wrote two complete dramas and one incomplete

drama. Shakuntala was his first drama, Subhadra

was second and Ramrajyaviyog the unfinished and

last drama.* But in the small period of five years

with the aid of his actors and particularly that of

• Besides these dramas, his Sankara-Digbijaya (1873)

deserves mention. Another drama on Allauddin is said to

have been staged by Samgham Dramatic Company.

211

Bhaurao Kolhatkar Mr. Kirloskar brought about a number of changes on the Marathi stage and the improvements made by him developed the Marathi stage considerably. In those five years and years afterwards, Mr. Kirloskar, his dramas and his actors, particularly Mr. Bhaurao Kolhatkar were on everybody's tongue. Uufortunately for Maharashtra Mr. Karloskar died too early. But it is perhaps a sort of curse to Maharashtra that first rate people in every sphere are cut off rather early. Out of the seven Peshawas, six died too early, before they reached the age of 40. All were able rulers. Had they lived to rule for some more years, perhaps Indian history would have been different. When Kirloskar died in 1885 of Diabetes, the whole of Maharastra lamented his death.

Mr. Trilokekar ( 1835-1908 ) wrote two dramas Harischandra (1880) and Damayanti in 1879 and had them staged by one Hindusanmargbodhak Natak Mandali. The dramas were certainly of reformed type and were a marked improvement on the previous dramas but they did not however achieve the fame that Mr. Kirloskar, his dramas, his actors and his dramatic performances achieved. Whilst Mr. Kirloskar is still known to everybody in Maharasthtra, Mr. Trilokekar and his dramas are in the memory of comparatively few people. His Sangit Sabitri Natak was written after Kirloskar's Sakuntala.

Mr. Kirloskar died in 1885. He introduced new

types of dramas, new techniqne and created a turn-

ing point in the history of the Marathi stage. With

him really the modern history of the Marathi stage

commences. Here a review of the stages through

which the Marathi Stage passed will not be out of

place. We have seen that in 1843 the first Marathi

drama was staged. At that time there used to be

only one curtain. Scenes and sceneries were not

conceived of. After a few years there was an

increase in the number of curtains. The nature

of the dramas itself had also undergone various

changes. The earliest dramas were mythological and

there were in them a number of poems but no real

music. Later prose-dramas came into prominence

when Mr. Kirloskar gave quite a new but a very good

turn. He not only introduced perfect music on the

stage and made every actor sing his songs, but also

introduced on the stage scenes and sceneries and

although with his death the Marathi stage got a

temporary set back, the people had got the idea

which only required to be developed and this task

was done by several persons and the present Marathi

stage is only an improved and up-to-date form of

stage as introduced by Mr. Kirloskar.

Although due to the dramas of Mr. Kirloskar

the Marathi public developed a taste for Sangit drama,

prose dramas also were gaining popularity. To

Mr. Dewal Maharashtra is highly indebted because

somebody was required to fill the vacaney caused by

the death of Mr. Kirloskar, and Mr. Dewal not only

carried forward the task of Mr. Kirloskar in respect

of Sangit Dramas but gave an impetus to the prose

dramas as well. We have already made mention of

the Shahunagarwasi Natak Mandali which dramatic

company used to stage only prose dramas. Mr. Dewal

wrote a very good drama Durga which this company

took up for staging. The Drama Durga was highly

appreciated by the public. There was another drama

Gunothkarsh written by Mr. Khare which also was

staged by this Company. The credit for bringing out

these dramas goes to Mr. Candy. Mr. Candy was an

educated man and was the principal of the Rajaram

College of Kolhapur. He had great regard for his

institution, his staff and his students and every year

he used to have a good drama staged by his students.

In the year 1885 he advertised through papers a

prize of Rs. 150 for a good Marathi drama. For

this purpose Mr. Khare wrote Gunothkarsa, and Mr.

Dewal wrote Durga. Although on the historical

merit of the subject of the drama, Mr. Khare won

the first prize, Durga ( 1886 ) got public notoriety

and the second prize.

By this time some more dramatic companies

were floated in Maharashtra, e.g. Dongre* Natak

Mandali, Waikar Natak Mandali, Natyanand Natak

• Dongre was writer of some dramas Sangit Sakuntal

(1880), Sangit Ratnobali, Santgi Mrcchakatik etc.

Mandali. All these companies were staging the drammas staged by the Kirloskar Natak. Mandali,

Kirloskar Natak Mandali was also in existence but it had not that popularity which it enjoyed during

the life time of Mr. Kirloskar. All the above companies had compartively short life. We have

seen that at the time of Mr. Kirloskar there were in the Kirloskar Natak Mandali very good actors like

Mr. Natekar, Mr. Waghulikar and Mr. Kolhatkar, but the first two left the company after the death

of Mr. Kirloskar and Mr. Kolhatkar was managing the show singly. Mr. Kolhatkar got some actors

from some of the above named companies but the Company was always in need of a man

who was a good actor, good director and good writer and Mr. Dewal fulfilled this want.

With the co-operation and help of Mr. Dewal the Kirloskar Natak Mandali again came to the fore-

front. For this Company Mr. Dewal wrote several sangit dramas. His first two dramas were tran-

slated from Sanskrit dramas of the same name, viz, the Mrichhakatik 1887 and Vikramorshiyam 1889.

He, however, put suitable and good songs in these dramas. Of these two, Vikramorshiyam was not so

popular but Mrichhakatik was and is still very popular. Some dramatic companies still stage this drama

and people even now highly appreciate it. His third drama is Shapsambhram 1893. This drama is based

on the well-known Sanskrit writer Bana's "Kadamb

bari”, Mr. Dewal's last drama is “Sharada” 1899. This drama has lèft and will continue to keep Mr. Dewal in memory of all and for ever. The story of this drama is very simple. It shows how for love of money a father makes up his mind to give his daughter aged about 14 to a rich man above 70. How for the sake of money brokers try and find out young brides for aged men. This drama also shows how young and sincere men can frustrate the efforts of persons with evil designs. The songs in this drama are even today muttered by all old and young, and some of the figures in this drama have become proverbial. How far it is true no body can say, but it is said that Mr. Dewal got the idea of this drama from the efforts made by a very old chief of a small state in Maharashtra for marrying a young girl because he had no issue. With Mr, Dewal the Kirloskar Natak Mandali served the Marathi public for some time and made considerable improvements in the stage but after Mr. Dewal and Mr. Bhaurao Kolhatkar this company did not live long. Again there was the need of a person who would not only serve the Marathi public but will also make improvements on the Marathi stage, but fortunately Maharashtra had not had to wait long.

In the meantime the drama and the stage had become so popular in Maharashtra that people in almost eyery big town wished that there should be a

216

dramatic performance in their town. For this demand there was ample supply also, because by this time, many new dramatic companies came into existence, and in each there was an outstanding actor whose name is still in the memory of the Marathi public “Natyakalaprasarak” “Natyakala Pravartak” “Lalitkala darsh” “Balwant Sangit” “Yeshwant Sangit” “Rangbodhechhu” “Aanand Vilas” “Nutan Sangit” “Mahatashtra Natak Mandali” But none of these companies had the fortune of carrying forward the task of the Kirloskar Natak Mandali.

But soon a Company was floated by some of the ex-actors of the Kirloskar Co., Mr. Rajhansa (known as Bal Gandharva) Mr. Tambe and Mr. Bodas and a few others formed a company known as Gandharva Natak Mandali.

This Company had a very good set of actors and had fortunately the backing of well known writers of Maharashtra. This Company became popular very soon because of its best acting and settings.

Ample money was spent by this company for scene and scenery and special efforts were made to see that acting and music were of the highest type.

Bal Gandharva was the chief person in this Company and he used to do the female part.

His acting in the female role was perfect. Public was mad after him and for some time his dress on the stage was copied by the ladies of Maharashtra.

His Highness Sayajirao Gaikwar of Baroda was very much fond

217

of the dramas of this Company and particularly the acting of Gandharva and for ever this company had every support from this prince. Besides the dramas staged by the Kirloskar Natak Mandali, this Company till lately used to stage the dramas of well known writers like the late Mr. Kolhatkar, the late Mr. Gadkari, Mr. Khadilkar and others. Particular mention is made of these three writers because it was on account of the dramas of these three writers that the Gandharva Natak Mandali could gain popularity. As mentioned above, Gandharva Natak Mandali made considerable improvements in the Marathi stage and brought it to the level of noted Stages of other provinces. It is enough to mention that for the settings, scenes, dresses etc, for one drama only, this company spent about one lac of rupees. Although Mr. Rajhansa alias Bal Gandharva is still living, he is too old to take female parts now, and therefore the company is not enjoying its previous popularity, but it cannot be denied that it is Bal Gandharva and his company that has raised the standard of the Marathi stage very high.

With the advent of the talkies, the Marathi Stage is fading away. The reasons for this are obvious. Comparatively Cinema is less expensive for the public. Further, Cinema can show each and everything. It can show running trains, steamers, flying aeroplanes, actual scenes of places of historical importance to the public. If a particular scene is

38

that of a market-place, busy road, moving train

or ship, the public have to take it for granted

that the road, market place, train or the ship is there.

The Cinema actually shows these things. In

short cinema is more realistic than drama. As

a business also cinema proves less costly. Once the

producers bring out a picture, they can take out so

many copies and run them simultaneously at so

many places. Such is not the case with drama.

One dramatic Company can have only one or at

the most two shows a day. Dramatic companies

are at the mercy of their good and popular actors.

These men have to be kept satisfied and for this, they

must pay them handsomely. Such is not the case with

the film-producers. Once the pictures are out they

need not bother about the actors in it. Comparative-

ly Cinema shows are short time entertainments and

the public do not feel tired. With this in view, some

companies have been started of late in Maharashtra

with new type of dramas which could be performed

in 2 or 2½ hours. "Natya Manwantar Limited" is

one of such companies, but these efforts were also

not successful and it must be admitted that for the

present at least, the Cinema has almost wiped out

the Stage in Maharashtra.

We have thus seen that Mr. Vishnudas Bhave

founded the Stage in Maharashtra, and it was gradu-

ally developed by Mr. Kirloskar and Bal Gandharva.

But for one or two exceptions, ladies never

219

appeared on the stage in Maharashtra. Young and

beautiful-looking men had to do the female parts.

The main reason for this is that in Maharashtra

the actor is rather looked down. Boys from high

families were never allowed to join a dramatic

company. The dramatic companies had there-

fore to include in their staff illiterate people and such

boys as would run away from their homes. Although

the Marathi public appreciated and patronised the

dramas, the dramatic companies were considered

a vicious circle. To a considerable extent this view

is correct. The environment in a dramatic com-

pany is such that a new-comer, howsoever sober he

may be, he soon gets bad habits. Smoking is

the first step. Others follow soon. Because

generally illiterate people are in the dramatic com-

panies, the environment is bad, and because the

environment is bad, good people hesitate to go there.

Such being the case, educated boys and boys from

high families could not be allowed to join the

dramatic companies and the question of ladies join-

ing the stage was not at all conceived of. In some

provinces, particularly in Bengal, women from

quartes of ill fame are admitted on the stage but in

Maharashtra, the proprietors of the dramatic com-

panies never encouraged this and hence males had

to take the female part as well. In Bengal of course

this experiment has been very successful not only

from cultural but also from social point of view.

220

Now we will turn to writers of Marathi drama.

The first Marathi drama writer is Vyankoji (Shahu) the Marathi ruler of Tanjore.

He wrote in 1682 the first Marathi drama Takshmi Narayan Kalyan.

Then till 1843 no effort was made for writing or staging a drama and Vishudas Bhave wrote some mythological dramas.

Mr. Kirtane changed the tradition and wrote two good independent dramas Madhaorao Peshawe and Jayapal.

Mention has already been made of other writers like Mr. Godbole, Mr. Rajwade Mr. Lele and others but of all these the dramas of Mr. Kirtane are of high standard.

Mr. Mahajani wrote three good dramas like TARA, MOHAVILASIT and VALIABHAYUNAYA.

Mr. Kirloskar wrote three dramas about this time Mr. Khare wrote Gnotkarsl and Mr. Dewal wrote some four dramas mention of which has already been made.

From 1843 till about the year 1890, about two hundred dramas were written in Marathi.

The list will be too lengthy to be published here.

Mention of important dramas and writers has already been made above.

Some of the dramas were translated from Sanskrit and English dramas, some were historical, some were mythological, some social and some independent.

We will now deal with the writers after the periods of 1890 :

Well-known modern Marathi dramatists are Mr. N. C. Kelkar, Mr. Kolhatkar, Mr. Khadilkar,

Mr. Gadkari, Mr. Madhaorao Joshi, Mr. Varerkar,

Mr. Tipnis, Mr. Atre, Vir Vinayakrao Savarkar,

Mrs. Girijabai Kelkar, and few others. Mr. N. C.

Kelkar is the well known leader of Maharashtra.

After the late Lokamanya Tilak he became the

leader of Maharashtra. There is not a single

sphere of literature which Mr. Kelkar has not

explored. In Maharashtra he is the best essayist,

best Novelist, best writer on political and economical

subjects, Mr. Kelkar has published books on

every subject and all these books are considered as

standard. Dramas he wrote very few, but the

few dramas he has written are considered to be the

best pieces of literature.

The late Mr. Kolhatkar is known as the best

writer of Maharashtra. Although he is so acknow-

ledged, his dramas have not earned very much

popularity. Mr. Khadilkar has earned the fame

as Natyacharya and rightly deserves to be so called.

He started writing dramas ever since the beginning

of this century and it is only recently that due to

age he has given this up. He has written quite a

number of dramas most of which are staged by the

Gandarva Natak Mandali. His prose dramas are

staged by the Maharashtra Natak Mandali. Most

of his dramas are mythological, one or two social

one or two historical. His drama Manapaman

earned for him great name. His drama Kichak

Vadh was written sometime in 1907 just about the

222

time when political movement was at full swing in Maharashtra. Sedition was suspected at that time by the Government everywhere. Lord Curzon had just then left India, public feeling was against him and in this drama Kichak Vadh, Government suspected that Lord Curzon has been portrayed. The drama was therefore immediately proscribed. This drama although prose, became very popular all over Maharashtra. The story is about the Pandavas residing in Viratnagari in disguise during the last year of their Vanvas (exile). Kichak the Commander-in-Chief, was virtually the ruler and molested Draupadi who was then known as Sairandhri. Ultimately Kichak was killed by Bhim. The following extract from the "Times of India" commenting on the drama is self-explanatory.

"Although his name is no-where uttered on the stage or mentioned in the printed play, every one in the theatre knows that Kichak is really intended to be Lord Curzon, that Draupadi is India and that Yudbishtir is the Moderate, and Bhim the Extremist party. Every now and again unmistakable clues are provided. The question indeed admits no doubt, for since the play first appeared in 1907 the whole of Deccan has been blazoning for the identity of the characters. Once they have been recognised, the inner meaning of the play becomes clear. A weak Government at Home represented by King Virat has given the Viceroy a free hand. He has made use of it to insult and humiliate

223

India. Of the two champions, the moderates advocate gentle that is constitutional measures.

The extremists out of the deference to the older party agree, although satisfied of the ineffectiveness.

Waiting until this has been demonstrated, they then adopt violent methods and everything becomes easy.

The oppressor is disposed of without difficulty."

Next may be mentioned the name of Mr. Ram Ganes Gadkari (1885-1919) whose death Maharash-tra mourns even to-day.

He wrote six dramas, out of which five are ever-green.

Every literate person in Maharashtra must have several times read the dramas by Mr. Gadkari and feels like reading them again.

All his dramas are successful on the stage and the subject matter of his dramas is suitable for any time.

His social dramas are very touching. One drama advocates widow-marriage.*

Another drama tells the importance of chastity of the ladies† in Aryavarta (India).

In one of his dramas he shows how a man starts taking wine with only one glass ‡ and loses not only his career but everything.

This drama is staged by the Gandharva Natak Mandali and the audience actually sheds tears when seeing the performance.

In his drama Rajasannyās which is a historical one, he has advocated the principle "that a King is a trustee of the kingdom.

He should

• Premasannyas (renunciation of love).

† Punya Prabhāv

‡ Ekac pyālā( only a single glass).

224

not spend the public money for personal enjoyments".

The drama pictures the last days of Sambhaji, son

of Shivaji. Sambhaji was a worthless ruler, full

of vices and he had nearly lost the kingdom es-

tablished by his father Shivaji. He was captured

by Aurangjeb. In prison he repents for his past deeds

and decides to die by refusing to embrace Islam

which was offered to him along with a big kingdom

within the Moghul Empire. He sent a word to his

brother, that he has decided to die which would create

inspiration amongst the Marahtas and it really so

hapened. Mr. G. C. Bhate in his Modern Mara-

thi Literature says in p. 413: "This drama is

incomplete but if completed would have been a

tragedy, emulating Shakespeare's Antony and

Cleopatra." Although Sambhaji was killed, Auranga-

be could not destroy the Marathi Empire. Unfortu-

nately for Maharashtra, Mr. Gadkari so gifted a poet

and dramatist died when only 33. Had he lived a

few years more, Maharashtra would have got a

number of other good dramas. Even to-day there is

no body to fill in the gap created by Mr. Gadkari's

death. Vir Savarkar the well-known president

of the Hindu Mahasabha, wrote about 3 or 4 dramas.

One of his dramas is Sanyast Khady. It portrays

conditions prevailing at the time of Lord Budha

and shows how Ahimsa practised to the very word

of it is absurd. All his dramas are written in

beautiful language. Unfortunately Mr. Savarkar

225

had to spend the best part of his life in Andamans and that is why India had so long lost a good leader and Maharastra a good and powerful writer.

Mr. Madhaorao Joshi wrote some dramas but his drama Sthanik Svarajya has obtained wide popularity. It shows how powers given to Municipal Councillors are misused. Although this drama is written in Marathi, it is applicable to all parts of India. Mr. Atre in the beginning wrote good dramas. His early dramas were parodies and they were received well by the public but the success of his first two dramas instead of leading the writer to a higher stage has taken him down and his later dramas may simply be called farces. Mr. Varerkar properly known as Mama Varerkar has written good dramas. He wrote a drama Hach Mula-cha Bap in 1917 criticising the dowry system. Some time ago Snehalata, a girl from Bengal, committed suicide, because her father was not in a position to give her away in marriage because he could not give dowry. In Maharastra deep sympathy was felt for Snehalata and the drama is an out-come of Maharastra's feeling for Bengal.* Satteche Gulam is one of the darmas by this writer. In this is shown how rich families are reduced to nothing when they approach the courts of law for justice.

*In Bengal Girish Chandra's Balidan, the grim social tragedy on dowry-system has created a great sensation since 1905.

20

226

The legal profession has here been rightly criticised as was done by Giris Chandra in Mayabashan in 1897.

Mr. Tipnis is known for writing Historical dramas.

Mrs. Girijabai Kelkar's writings are realistic. Young boys and girls can learn much from her writings. In reply to a drama Bayakanch Band ( Revolt of the ladies ) Mrs. Kelkar has written Purushanche Band 1913 ( Revolt of the males) which is a very fitting reply. Her Ayesā Natak (1921) is also worthy of mention.

Prof. Phadake also has written about 3 or 4 dramas. There are various other dramatists as Mr. Yeshawantrao Joshi, Mr. Bhole, Mr. Vartak, Mr. Phatak, Mr. Karkhanis, Mr. Gurjar, Mr. Bedekar, Vir Vamanrao Joshi and others. Full figures are not to hand but by the year 1917 there were about 900 dramas in Marathi and from 1924 to 1934 a period of ten years about 300 dramas were written. Of late comparatively less dramas are being written but this is due to the fact that owing to the popularity of Cinema-shows, the stage is not so popular today ; and because there is no demand from the stage, writers also do not feel inclined to write dramas.

Efforts are being made to compete the Cinema with Natikas. Natika means small drama. The time required to perform these on the stage is not

more than 2 and 1/2 to 3 hours. These Natikas have

kept the Marathi stage alive. A company known as

"Natyamanwantar Limited" used to stage only 2 or 3

Natikas like "Andhalyanchi Shala" and "Lapandava"

written by Mr. Vartak. Both Mr. and Mrs. Vartak

used to act on the stage, assisted by well-known

actors and actresses like Mr. Keshaorao Date and

Mr. Jyotsna Bhole. These Natikas were very

popular for some time. The Natikas have however

not been able to successfully compete the Cinema.

In the preceding pages mention has already been

made of well-known actors like Mr. Ganpatrao

Joshi, Mr. Bhaurao Kolhatkar, Mr. Kirloskar, Mr.

Natekar, Mr. Dewal Mr. Gurao, Mr. Gore, Mr,

Rajhansa alias Bal Gandharva, Mr. Bodas and others.

Besides these there have been some more good

actors like Mr. Keshaorao Bhosale who had a

dramatic company by name Lalit Kaladarsha. In

his early days he was the best female actor and

later he used to take male part. Unfortunately

there was never a team work of actors. Whenever

an actor thought that he was successful and had

earned sufficient fame he used to form his own

company. This really deprived the Marathi public

of the pleasure of seeing dramas performed jointly

by good actors. In their own interest if the good

actors came together, they would have not only

earned fame but also money. In the year 1921 a

drama was performed in Bombay in aid of the

Tilak Swrajya fund. In this all good actors took part. Particular mention must be made of Mr.

Bhosale and Mr. Rajhansa ( Bal Gandharva ). As a performance the drama was no doubt a success

but many thousands of rupees were collected. After Mr. Bhosale, Mr. Pendharkar was owner of the Lalit-

kaladarsh Natak Mandali. He was a very good actor and his singing also was very good. Mr. Govindrao

Tembe was successful on the stage. He used to act with Bal Gandharva. His songs were highly

appreciated by the public. Mr. Tembe became equally successful on the screen. Another actor

who is successful both on the stage and on the screen is Mr. Keshaorao Date. Mr. Bhate owner

of the Natyakala Pravartak Mandali proved to be successful both as a female and male actor. There

are some good actors still remaining unnoticed owing to our insufficient knowledge for which we

regret very much. We will do so in our next edition if in the meantime we know about them.

Till the advent of ‘talkies’ the stage was very popular and as in other parts of India, so in Maha-

rashtra, the talkies have given a set back to the stage. A word about the film industry in Maharashtra

will, therefore, be not out of place here.

We have seen that till 1843 there were no dramas in Maharashtra. Reasons for this are

various which have been explained early in this

chapter.

But

Maharashtra

is

proud

to

be

the

pioneer

of

Film

industry

in

India.

Mr.

Phalake

produced

some

time

in

1913

the

first

film

in

India

and

while

writing

the

history

of

Indian

Film

Industry

Mr.

Phalake

deserves

to

be

referred

to

with

respect.

Mr.

Phalake

not

only

introduced

the

film

industry

in

India

but

developed

it

considerably.

In

the

beginning,

for

scenes

he

used

painted

curtains

but

later

made

surprisng

improvements.

His

pictures

were

well

known

all

over

India

and

were

released

mostly

by

the

Kohinoor

Film

Co.

It

is

creditable

to

the

Marathi

people

that

they

have

maintained

the

tradition

of

Mr.

Phalake.

It

was

the

Prabhat

Film

Company

of

Poona

that

brought

out

the

first

successful

talkie

Harischandra.

Prior

to

this

some

two

or

three

talkies

were

produced

but

they

proved

a

failure

because

sound

and

acting

were

not

clear.

Prabhat

Film

Company

kept

its

glorious

tradition

for

a

long

time

and

till

1940

produced

pictures

which

not

only

were

highly

popular

all

over

India

but

their

pictures

successively

won

for

them

the

first

prize

at

the

International

Exhibition.

With

due

respect

to

other

producers

in

India

it

must

be

said

that

Bombay

still

leads

in

the

film

Industry.

Due

to

the

comparatively

small

number

of

Marathi

speaking

people

all

companies

in

Maharashtra

produce

pictures

in

Hindi

and

a

few

only

in

Marathi.

Commercially

Marathi

pictures

do

not

prove

a

success.

In

Calcutta

there

are

so

many

230

theatres that screen only Bengali talkies# whereas in

Bombay there are only one or two first rate theatres

that screen Marathi pictures. Now for commercial

gain even producers in Bengal have to produce

Hindi pictures. The success of Hindi picture is due

to the fact that more than 12 crores of people in

India have Hindi as their mother tongue. Besides

a majority of people of other provinces can

understand Hindi, and that is why Hindi pictures

prove profitable. Yet Marathi people should keep con-

tent with the fact that at least some Marathi talkies

are produced every year but Gujrati talkies are still

very scanty. The Gujratis and Parsis (whose mother

tongue is Gujrati) are commercially to the forefront

but except for one or two there are no talkies in

Gujrati. There are so many Gujrati producers in

Bombay, but they produce pictures in Hindi only.

The success of a film depends upon the ability

of the director. Artists no doubt deserve some

credit but only actors and actresses however good they

are cannot bring out first class films. A good director,

however, with any type of 'star' can produce a good

picture. Here also Maharashtra stands first. Director

Shantaram is the acknowledged best director in India.

He has proved. that he can pick up a man in the

street and make him a star overnight. Mr. Chandra

• About Bengali talkies we shall give some idea in our

next volume.

Mohan, Miss Shanta Apte, and Mrs. Khote owe their fame to Shantaram. Before Shantaram included her in his cast for Amrit Manthan,Shanta Apte was not a success but her acting in that picture as also in subsequent ones like Amar Jyoti, Rajput Ramni, Duniya-na-mane directed by Shantaram proved much better than the previous one. Her acting in these pictures as compared with her acting in her recent picture Dohai will prove that without a proper director an actor or an actress can not be successful. Master Vinayak, Baburao Pendharkar, Damuanna Malvankar, Keshaorao Date, Jog Salvi, Shahu Modak, are some of the well known Marathi film actors and Mrs. Durgabai Khote, Miss Shanta Apte, Meenaxi, Mrs Leela Chitnis, Mrs. Vanmala, Mrs Shobhana Samartha, Miss Deshapande are some of the noted actresses of Maharashtra. Mention must separately be made of Mr. K. Narayan Kale, who is not only a good actor, but a good Director and writer too.

Whether respectable ladies should join the film industry or not, is still a controversial issue in Maharashtra. As a matter of fact undue importance has been given to this issue. Amongst those who advocate that respectable ladies should act in films are mostly irresponsible people who are not credited with a clear vision. Ladies joining the film industry think at first that they are going there for improving the art but really speaking most of them

join the film either for money or for pleasures.

In this respect Miss Shanta Apte deserves to be

paid a high tribute for her independent views and

thoughtful writings. She has written in Marathi

a few books on the film industry and in one

of these books she has in unambiguous terms stated

that respectable ladies should not join the film in-

dustry. In support of her statement she has given

ample reasons and men of contrary views and

girls desirous of joining the film, are requested

to read this book by Miss Shanta Apte, first, before

making their choice. It has been brought to

our notice that some ladies from high and respectable

families joined the film not for money but "for the

cultivation of art" but later started signing contracts

with any company who could offer them more

money. Besides often times they forget themselves,

and 'art' proves only an excuse.

We have given in the foregoing pages a short

history of the rise, growth and development of the

Marathi stage. Efforts were made to secure the

best and most accurate informations both as to dramas

as well as artists, and if there be any corrections or ad-

ditions suggested, they will be considered when pub-

lishing the next edition of this book.*

• In the preparation of this chapter, I have been

considerably assisted by Mr. V. B. Chitale of the Metal Box

Company, Calcutta, who has taken Herculean pains to

collect and solder facts for this history. He was since cor-

rected the date of the first drama as 1682 and not 1662

( vide page 194.)

Chapter IX

SANSKRIT DRAMAS.

We have spoken of Bhāsa, Kālidāsa, Rupa Goswami and others in our First Volume. We propose to deal with the Sanskrit Stage and the efforts of the “Sanskrit Sahitya Parishad” in the next volume. Let us mention incidentally some dramas of the last century here.

In the years 1889—1899, the following Sanskrit dramas composed by Kaviraj Nritya Gopal Kabi-ratna and others were staged :

1. Shānabhāshān, 2. Rāmābhyudayān, 3. Darpa-shātan (those being composed by him), 4. Koumadi Sulhakar, 5. Veni Samhar, 6. Mrichhkatik 7. Chandralakoushik.

In 1895, Professors and Students of the Harihar Sanskrit College, Kotalipara ( Faridpur ) staged Shakuntalā very succesfully, so much so that Mr. K. C. De, м.A., I.c.s., District Magistrate invited the troupe during the Mela at Faridpur and about 5000 people were enchanted to see the performance. Pandit Gopal Chandra Kabyatirtha represented Sakuntala, Baman Choudhry Raja, Radharaman Vidyabhuson Kanwa, Ananga Mohan Kabyatirtha Vidushaka. Pandit Ambica Charan Sahityacharyya ( Head Pandit Arya Vidyalaya) had also a part. Details will follow in the next volume.*

• Pandit Ashokenath Sastri, M.A., P.R.s. Vedāntatirtha has supplied the author with these facts.

30

Chapter X

THE CLASSIC THEATRE

About the time Girish Chandra left the Minerva Theatre in March 1896, a new star was in the ascendant who dominated the Bengali stage for some time. He was born of a wealthy family of Calcutta distinguished alike for social status as well as culture. He was young and handsome and possessed a stage-suiting appearance. He was energetic and his manners were captivating. Thus when he started the Theatre while only 20, he got a good start.

A few years ago before he had to come to the public theatre, Dani Babu, and Chuni Babu wtth a few friends formed the Indian Dramatic Club,* and Amarendranath joined them in 1893-94. A performance was soon organised in the Corinthian Stage where in the play of Battle of Plassy, Dani Babu took the part of Clive, Chuni Babu of Mohonlal and Jagat Shettle and Amarendra Babu as Seraj with Tarasundari as Britannia. This was repeated on the Minerva Stage also within a few months.

• As early as 1888, they showed the performance of Lakṣman Barjan with Gangadhar Babu, afterwards Swami Akhandanand of Belur Math, as Brahmā.

235

Amarendranath's love of literature brought him into contact with Girish Chandra very soon. In 1895 he started a monthly magazine of “Sourabba.” At his insistence Girish lent his name as editor and published some poems of the actresses Binodini and Tarasundari with this prefatory remark—“Destined to build and improve the Stage, I dont know what my position in society is. Artists, however, are my children. Their merits should not therefore go unrecognised, and thus for their encouragement, I am publishing these two poems”. It is the same time when Mr. Dutt lent him the services of Tara Sundari for a day to play the part of Karameti Bai during Tincowrie's absence, (vide page 132).

At the time when Amarendra played the part of Seraj at the Minerva, the poet Nabin Chandra himself was present at the performance with Girish by his side. The poet warmly praised Amarendra's talents and gave encouragement to the young artist.

Towards the close of 1896, Chuni Babu suggested the name of Amarendra as an artist for the Minerva, but the idea was not approved of by others. His zeal for Theatre however remained unabated. In 1897, when the City Theatre was showing the performance of Devi Choudhurani before an enthusiastic audience, Amarendranath look lease of the Emerald Stage and started his “The Classic Theatre”. The monthly rent was fixed at Rs. 250, but an

advance of Rs, 1200. was to be paid. It is said, that

Babu Gopal Lal Seal, a friend to the brother

of Amarendra, did not like so young a man to come

within the theatre-atmosphere, but through the

persuasion of Mr. Shyamadob Roy, Police Magis-

trate, Sealdah, he yielded to the proposal at last.

On the Good Friday evening of 1897,

Amarendranath opened the Classic (16th April),

with Girish's Nala Damoyanti and Bellick Bazar.

Amarendranath took the parts of Nala and Dukari

Sen, Tara Sundari of Damayanti and Aghore Pathok

that of Kali.

On the 17th April Battle of Plassy was staged

with Laksman Barjan and on 18th, Daksha Jajna

and Bellick Bazar with Mr. Dutt as Shiva, Tara

Sundari as Sati and Mr. Pathok as Daksha. Chuni

Babu and Nikhil Babu were here for two days only.

Daksha Jajna and Tarubala were staged on the

next week and on the third Girish Chandra's Hāridra-

nidhi was put on boards with Babu Mohendra Bose

(who lately joined) as Harish and Amar Babu as

Aghore in which the latter did his part well and was

considered the next best to Bel Babu. Mahendra

Babu as Harish also got better of his rival at the

Star. Yet the sales were bad.

Amarendranath then commenced Devi Choudhu-

rani and although he did very well as Brojeswar

237

especially in the love-scenes, Bhabani Pathok* was

no match for the original—Nilmadhab Babu—of

City, nor Haraballav for Chandi Babu (the original).

Although the above pieces could not create any

impression, Hari Raj however did. It was written

by Nagen Choudhry and staged on the 21st June

1897 in this theatre on the date of Golden Jubilee

of Her Majesty, Queen Victoria. The drama was

acted well and audience how began to come and we

have from the authority of the opera-master Mr.

Purno Chandra Ghose who said “Here we first saw

the face of a Shaw (a hundred),” The cast was as

follows :-

Amarendra ... Hariraj

Chhotorani ... Sreelckha

Tara Sundari ... Aruna

Montu Babu ... Joyakar

It may be worthy of mention that before

Amarendra Nath commenced performing Hariraj, it

was being shown in private houses on contract basis

by the Victoria Dramatic Club of which Kabiri

Chandra Kumar Sen was the head. As the club fell

into adversity, the Kabiraj helped Amar Babu with

dresses and artists of his company. Thus was

Montu Babu made to play the part, although it was

selected before for Hari Bhusan Babu.

Besides the above, Bilwamangal, Buddha, Raja

• Pandit Hari Bhusan and Mr. Akshoy Chakraborty

respectively.

238

O Ram etc. were also staged, but with all attempts the theatre could not thrive. Added to this, Tara Sundari also left for the Star.*

But at last came a chance when fortune began to smile upon Amar Babu, with the opera of Alibaba put on the boards.

When this piece was selected, both Amar Babu and its writer Babu Kshirode Prasad Vidyabinode saw Girish Chandra who was then working for the Star. Alibaba was now put into his hands with request to make it attractive and fit for the stage. Girish Chandra, too, made some changes and introduced necessary songs in it. It was staged on the 20th November 1897 and unexpected success was achieved in the performance. People began to flock and sales shortly rose up from Rs. 200 to Rs. 1,500. Amarendra felt confident of success now, and confidence gave him strength.

Condition of the Bengali Stage was now below normal. Girish was practically not working any where, Minerva was on the verge of collapse, the Emerald had already been closed, the Bengal was approaching its decline, ephemeral Beena and City had already been wiped out of existence and the Star under the stoic rule of the disciplinarians Amrita Bose and Amrita Mitra was turned into

• She played there as Annapurna (Mayabashan) and Saibya in Harish Chandra.

239

a school of good boys only. For fops and dandies there was little joy. No smoking, no ejaculation of delight, no throwing of wreaths on artists was allowed here, and a general craving for a change of something new was now felt by some and when the new came, it was enthusiastically welcomed by the audience.

Now about Alibaba—the duets of Abdala and Marjina as represented by Nripen Bose and Kusum Kumari were very enjoyable but the charming songs and captivating dances from the stage, the encores, and roars of praises from the auditorium established for a time unity between the two. Within a short time the theatre grew to be a place of wild Bacchanalia, latitude being given to the audience for free expressions of any kind of observations. Discipline was thrown to the wind and the atmosphere became foul. Theatre that was raised by Girish into an institution of public instructions and innocent pleasure now became the rendezvous of pleasure-loving people and brought light-heartedness to the students’ community. Alibaba was greatly responsible for this and the condition became so disheartening to real lovers of art that Babu Amritalal Bose wrote a long letter to Girish to help his Stage from coming to this stage, but it was too late. Girish did not like farces as Tajjab Byapar and Babu as well and traced the origin of the deterioration of tastes from there.

240

We may tell the non-Bengali readers that as the great Bankim Chandra always tried to preserve a dignified atmosphere of sublimity and purity in the domain of Bengali literature, avoiding anything vulgar or low, so did Girish work for the same ideal for the Indian stage. Neither did Bankim nor Girish indulge in any personalities, and their writings are absolutely free from all personal spite. It is for this reason Bankim Chandra asked his friend Dinobondhu Mitter to stop publishing Sadhabar Ekadashi & Bie Pāglā Budo, although both were priceless from other points of view; and it is for this reason, Girish's farces and operas contain no personal attacks, and himself also did not like the attacks on personalities, in the farces of his disciple Amritalal, inspite of the fact those too have done great good to the Hindu Society. But neither of the two, Bankim or Girish, was listened to. So Girish on receipt of Amritalal's lettter, instead of giving a sympathetic reply referred now to his bitter experiences. Amarendranath thus carried on his programme and became the observed of all observers now. But as to what changes were brought about on the Stage, we can not better describe than quote the observations of Babu Aparesh Chandra Mukherjee who was both an efficient manager and a successful dramatist of his time. Thus he wrote in Rangaloye T'reesh Batshar—page 30–32 :

241

"The ever-bold Amarendra now broke the fetters

of Star's discipline. People coming to see

the performance of Alibaba or pieces of

the like sighed a sigh of relief by freely

remarking, whistling and uttering unseemly

jokes. Amarendranath made theatre demo-

cratic—an amusement-hall for all classes.

Theatre's Bureaucracy was shaken and school-

discipline here was a thing of the past,

Handbills too exhibited expressions of an

exciting nature. Star's strictness and sobriety,

thrift and reserve got a metamorphosis at

Amar's hands. Attempts now began to be made

to draw artists by holding out better prospects

and those who used to get Rs. 50 or 60 a

month, were now paid double or treble, and the

system of bonuses was enlarged, placards and

handbills too were improved. Great sensation

began to prevail in this theatre and Amarendra

attained the celebrity of a popular actor. The

atmosphere he created has still not been re-

moved."

We can not say whether good or bad came

with this revolutionary step, but as to Mr. Dutt,

whatever happened, only brought into lime-light.

Stage too was ere-long brought to its normal condi-

tion. After all Mr. Amarendra Dutta was only a

product of Girish's school and Girish loved him as

his son. We shall see that Amarendra hereafter too

sought Girish's help who came there as director and

master and very soon increased the dignity of

31

242

this democratic Classic again by his Pandava Gourava, Bhrānti and Moner Matan and Satnām.

Besides, Amarendranath was a gifted artist and there was scarcely one on the Bengali Stage so charitable and open-handed as Mr. Dutt.

In spite of his freaks now and again, he had the highest regards for Girish and often used to pay him proper respects as a disciple and we shall see, how even at the fag end of the present century, the same Classic that was converted into a place of hilarity, now under the eyes of Girish again assumed an atmosphere of divine purity, in the peformance of another Pouranik-religious drama Pandava Gourava from Girish's pen staged on Feb. 17, 1900.

The dramatist marvellously draws the characters of Bhima, Subhadra, Krishna and Konchuki.

The last character is an incarnation of devotion or Bhakti.

It is an elaboration of the Vidushaka of Jana ; while the latter has marvellous faith pure and simple, Konchuki's Bhakti proceeds from Jnan or knowledge and he points out the path how to attain unquestioning faith.

One has Bhakti and gets Krishna, another shows the path for Krishna, to one if he has Bhakti.

Konchuki appeared to be devotional ardour personified and the part used to be represented by Girish Chandra himself.

Bhima is the central figure in the play and

243

Indian Mirror (April 12, 1900) aptly remarks about this creation in the following way—

"Bhima is utterly unlike the Bhima of tradition. He is not a Brobdingnargian proportion and does not make a reckless expenditure of lung-power. Calm yet firm, devoted to Krishna and yet dutiful towards Dandi who songt his protection, stands Bhima, the centre of interest and the admiration of friend and foe alike,"

Girish's Konchuki was superb as he was Bhakti pesrsonified and so was Amarendranath a great success in the role of Bhima. His fitting appearence, sonorous voice and impressive delivery elicited praise from all persons.

Subhadra was an improvement of the character of Jana—high-souled and helpful, calm and devotional, and the part was very ably acted by Tincowri, espicially as her appearance was quite in keeping with her representation.

The drama fetched large sums of money to the Classic and nay more—with Girish's presence and personality, the vulgar atmosphere disappeared day by day. As to the actual effects we would fittingly quote here the observations of Babu Upendranath Vidyabhusan, a biographer of Amarendranath—

"As soon as Girish Chandra joined the Classic, it attained the reputation of being the best theatre in Calcutta. Every night the audience for even this religious drama was so large that many had to go back disappointed for want of seats."

244

Thus was the position of the Classic restored again under Girish's care and supervision—

The cast in Pandava Gourava was as follows.

Konchuki — Giris Chandra

Bhisma — Mohendra Lal Bose

Bhima — Amarendranath Dutt

Arjuna — Nilmoni Ghose

Kansa & Sātyaki — Ahindra

Ghesera — Nripendra Nath Bose

Judhistira — Natabar Choudhury

Srikrishna — Miss Promoda Sundari

Kunti — Gulphan Hari

Droupadi — Golap Sundari

Subhadra — Tincowrie

Uttarā — Thakmoni

Rukmini — Bhuson Kumari

Joyā — Ranimoni

Urbashi — Kusum Kumari

All the parts were well-rendered, and the play as a whole was a grand success. Pandav Gourava henceforth became so great an attraction, that amateur parties in villages and towns henceforth considered it a fit drama for staging and from hundreds of stages of Bengal from now Bhima's devotional sayings began to be repeated every night.

The old century passes and we just fall to the Twentieth Century. It is high time for us now to stop here and we shall next trace the novelty and character of the present century-dramas in our next volume, which will immediately follow.

INDEX-( Persons )

A

Abdul Gani (Nawab) 16

Abinash Kar 11, 14, 16

Aghore Pathak 24, 27, 33, 40,

49, 44, 61, 70, 73, 75, 83,

91, 113, 121, 125, 131 236

Akshay Chakravarty 131, 237

Akshay Ch. Sarkar 9, 33, 77

Akshay Kali Koar 134. 143,

145, 147, 152, 154, 155

Amarendra N. Dutta 88, 133,

161, 167,234-244

Amrita Krishna Nayek (g), 180

Amritalal Bose 3, 13, 16, 25-25,

28, 35, 38. 43-44, 75. 77,

87, 89, 91, 105, 133, 141,

142, 194, 230, 239

Amritalal Mitra 5, 8. 13, 16,

19-24, 27, 28, 35, 38, 40,

42, 43, 67, 70, 73: 87. 89-

91, 90 105, 125, 133, 134,

143, 149, 237-240

A. Kirloskar (m) 208—216

Anukul Batabyal 114

Aparesh Ch. Mukherji 30, 240

Ardhandu Sekhar Mustafi 3,

36, 81, 115, 121, 123, 128,

133, 156, 157, 158, 161-

165

Arnold (Sir) Edwyn 68-70

Asoke Sastri 184, 233

Atul Krisna Ghose 11

Atul Krisna Mitra 4, 8, 13, 16,

25, 154, 158-162, 167

B

B. K. Thakoor (g) 182

Bal Gangadhar Tilak (m) 207

Bankim Ch, Chatterji 11, 25,

29, 32, 35, 59, 91, 132,

142, 161-168, 172,240

Beharilal Chatterji 12, 169,

172, 174

Bel Babu (Amrita Mukherji) 5.

8, 13, 16, 23, 24. 27, 28,

35, 61, 65, 70, 73-75 88,

89. 91, 99-102, 165

Benode Shome (Pada Babu)

114, 121, 125, 128, 134

Bhabatarini 81, 128, 161

Bhubon Mohon Neogi 3, 4, 18,

80-81

Bhusan Kumari 25, 42; 44, 65,

91, 128, 131, 134

Binodini 3, 5, 9, 12-14, 19, 20,

22-25, 27, 28, 35, 37, 40,

42, 44, 45, 60, 61, 68, 70,

73, 125

Bonobiharini (Bhuni) 12, 21,

22, 25, 35, 36, 65,70, 73,75,169

Brojolal Mitra 90

C

C.R. Das (Deshabandhu) 15,150

Chitale V. B. (m) 232

Chandra vadan Mehta (g) 167

Chuni Lal Dev 114, 117, 121,

134

Chotorani 35, 80, 81, 84,85,237

D

Dahyabhai Dhoeshaji (g) 180

Dani Babu (Surendra N. Ghose)

76, 105, 111, 113, 117, 121,

125, 128, 131, 133, 134, 147,

234

e—indicates English, m—Marathi, g—Gujrati

[ ii ]

Dasapanta (m) 188 Hem Chandra Banerji 15, 29,

Devendra N. Bose 140 31,32

Dewal (m) 205, 213-216 Hiralal Godiwala (g) 186

Dharmadas Sur 19, 35, 80, 87 Hugo, Victor 40

Dinabandhu Mitra 11,12 37, Hume 39

160, 240 Dwijendra N. Tagore 23, 33

E I

Enson (miss) Fanny (e) 21, 22 Indra N. Banerji 9

Elokeshi 23, 91, 169 Indulal Gandhi (g) 183

Irving, (Sir) Henry (e) 114

Iswar Chandra Gupta 32

G J

Gadkari (m) 223 Jadu Nath Bhattacharyya 8

Ganes Shastri Lele (m) 200,201 Jogadananda Mukherji 61

Gangamoni 27, 40, 44, 65, 70, Jagat Tarini 99, 131, 134

73, 75, 89, 91, 99, 146 Jiban Sen 35, 154, 143

Garrick (e) 10, 114, 134, 138 Jogendra N. Mitra 16, 17, 20,

Girish Chandra Ghose 2-150, 87

155, 162-166, 170, 171, 174, Jyotirindra N. Tagore 170

235-240

Govindarao Supckar (m) 207 K

Gopichand Sethi 14, 17

Gopal Chandra Mukherji 14 Kadambini 5, 9, 12, 13, 22-25,

Gopal Lal Seal 76, 77, 82, 86, 27, 35, 40, 88, 154

89, 151, 156, 158, 236 Kalikrishna Tagore 121

Gulphan Hari 85 Kaliprasanna Ghose 16

Gurumukh Ray 37, 43, 125 Kaliprasanna Sinha 33

Kanaiylal Munshi (g) 181

H Kashinath Chatterji 16, 61,

Haran Chandra Ray 154 73, 75, 91, 99, 134

Hari Bhusan Bhattacharyya Keau (e) 114, 115

80, 84, 90, 113, 121, 128, Kedar Chowdhury 5, 6, 8,

131, 156, 159, 160, 237 11-13, 27, 35, 80, 81, 156,

Haridas Das 12, 13, 169, 172, 158-160

173 Kemble (e) 114, 115

Harigopal Bose 38, 43 Kelkar (m) 206, 220

Harinath De 32 Khadilkar (m) 221

Harimoti 81, 88, 121, 123, Kiran Bala 75, 89, 91, 99,

131, 159, 161 102-105

Hari Sundari (Blackie) 161,172 Kiran Banerji 12, 168

[ iii ]

Kiran Chandra Dutta 184

Kolhatkar (m) 213-227

Kirti Mitra 38, 76

Krishnalal Chakravarty 114, 128

Krishnanda Swami 59

Krishna Sashtri Rajawade (m) 200, 201

Ksetramoni Devi 5, 8, 22, 24,

28, 35, 40, 42, 61, 65, 70,

73, 84, 85, 139, 159

Kshetramohon Mitra 184-185

Ksirode Prosad Vidyabinode 174, 238

Kumud nath Sarkar 113, 121

Kusumkumari 9, 25, 28, 73,

75, 84, 114, 121, 131,

134, 156, 159, 160, 162,

167, 239, 244

L

Lakshimoni Dasi 9, 13, 81

Lakshiswar Sing (Maharaja Bahadur of Darbhanga) 17

Laxman Gopal Dixit (m) 201

M

Mahatma Gandhi 185

Michael Modhusudan Dutta 6-8, 11, 29, 31, 32, 168

Mill, John Stuart (e) 39

Milton, John (e) 13, 31, 39

Mohendralal Bose 5, 8, 12,

13, 16, 19, 22-24 27, 28,

35, 36, 81, 84, 139, 156,

157, 159, 161, 162

170, 172, 173, 224

Mohini Mohan Das 16

Manindra Ch. Nandi

Maharaja 140, 165

Monomohan Bose 158, 158

Motilal Sur 5, 8, 13, 16, 23,

35, 36, 76, 81, 84, 90,

156, 160

N

N. N. Ghose 119, 129

Nabin Chandra Sen 10, 29,

32, 33

Nagedra Bala 99, 105, 134,

143, 146, 147

Nanalal (g) 180

Nari Sundari 134,143, 146, 147

Narottam (g) 179

Narayani 12, 24

Nikhilendra Krishna Dev 113, 121, 134, 236

Nilmadhab Chakravarti 16,

20, 24, 27, 35, 42, 44,

61, 75, 81, 89, 91, 99,

105, 107, 165-167. 237

Nilmoni Ghose 121, 131, 134

Nivedita (Sister) 72

Nripendra Bose 174, 939

O

Olcott, (Colonal) H.S. 49, 58

P

P. K. Roy 16

Padmabati 44

Paran Seal 73, 89, 99

Pareshnath Ghose 79

Pasupati Nath Bose 107

Patel Bua (m) 188

Parker (e) 18, 19

Parashurampanth Godbole (m) 200, 201

Pratap Jahuri 18, 29, 35, 80, 81

Premananda (g) 176

Preonath Ghose 161

Probodh Ghose 35, 40, 61, 70,

73, 75, 91, 105, 133,

166, 167, 172

Promoda Sundari 70, 73, 89,

91, 114, 116, 118, 134,

145, 172, 173

Prasanna Kr. Guha 79

Prasanna Kumar Tagore 111

Purna Ch. Ghose 80, 81, 85

90 161-163, 237

R

Rabindra Nath Tagore 81,159

Radha Madhab Kar 35,81,158

Rajhans (Bal Gandarva)

216, 217

Raj Krishna Ray 60,61,167,

124,141,151–155,170

Rajnarayan Bose 21

Ramanbhai Nilkant (g) 181

Ramendra Krishna Dev 86

Ramesh Ch. Dutta 22,146

Ramjoshi (m) 191

Ram Chandra (g) 171,176

Ram Chhoobhai (g) 177

Ram Krishna Paramhamsa

Deva 57,72,74,88,110,

145,149

Ramtaran Sanyal 5,6,9,12,14,

16,19–22,73,91,134

Rangalal Banerji 32

Ranu Babu 123,128,165

S

Sambhu Chandra Mukherji

21,49,63

Sara Barnardt (e) 117, 118

Sarat Karmakar 152,154,168

Sarat Ch. Ghose 12,18,

168–170

Saraji Mallappa (m) 188

Savarkar (Veer) 224-25

Shakespeare 3,14,90,109

Shib Ch. Chatterji 84, 85, 161

Shivram Shastri Palande (m) 201

Shrimart Appa Saheb Patwar-

dhan (m) 195,199

Siddons (Mrs) (e) 117,113

Sivanath Shastri 158

Skrine, F.H. (e) 118

Spencer, Harberte (e) 39

Sukumari Dutta 3, 80, 84, 108,

156, 158, 161-163, I69,

170, 172, 174

Surabala Ghose (Girish

Chandra's wife) 85

Surendra Mitra 143,45

Syam Kundu 73,75,91,99,134

T

Tara Sundari 91, 99, 105, 132.

143, 147, 234

Terry, Ellen (e) 117, 118

Tincowri Dassi 114,116,118,

121,123,125,128,131,134,234,

244, 154, 165

Tunamoni 106,134,143

U

Umashankar Joshi (g) 183

Upendra Nath Mukherji 160

Upendra Nath Dass 3,153,154

Upendra Mitra 24,28,35.42,

44,46,64,70,73,75,81,98,99,

105,134,143,145

V

Valmiki 29,31

Varerker (m) 225

Vibekananda 71,149

Vijaykrishna Goswami 58,80,

Vinayak Janardar Kirtane (m)

201–206,208

Virgil 31

Vishnu Amrit Bhabe (m)

194–200,202–204,208

Vishnu M. Mahajani (m) 204,

206, 208

Vyasa 31

W

Waghoji (m) 188

Y

Yajnik R. K. (m) 186

Yashobant Pandya (g) 183