sign in sign up
<<
Home , Astra (weapon), Ebrahim Alkazi, Karnabharam

THE THEME OF BETRA YAL IN INDIAN DRAMA IN ENGLISH This chapter tries to evaluate the theme of betrayal in Indian Drama. For this purpose five plays written by Indian dramatists representing five different languages have been undertaken for study. Indian theatre could not promote Indian drama in the English language. The foremost factor responsible to harness the growth of Indian drama in English is the non­ availability of the living theatre. English drama written by Indian playwrights is neither excellent in quality nor greater in quantity. English, being a foreign language, was not intelligible to the masses and the playwrights found it difficult to write crisp, natural, lucid and graceful dialogues in English, which was not the language of their mental make up. Their dialogue was bound to be stilted and artificial. The English language, in India, is confined to the urban elite. R. K. Narayan ( 1999 :22 ) rightly puts it, thus : English has been with us for over a century, but it has remained the language of the intelligentsia, less than ten per cent of the population understands it. Indian dramatists cannot attain mastery to produce eloquent and elegant dialogues in English. At a national seminar on drama Dnyaneshwar Nadkarni (1984:163 ) goes to the extent of saying :

Butcher them ( the Indo-AngUcan playwrights ) castrate them, and force them to write in their native Hindi or Urdu or whatever Indian languages their fathers and mothers used to speak.

260 The linguistic barrier created hurdles in the growth of Indian drama in English. Moreover, there was no English culture in India. India is a multi-lingual nation. Language and culture are inter-related with each other. John Lyons (1997:324 ) in this respect states :

Particular languages are associated historically with particular cultures; the languages provide the key to associated cultures, and especially to their literature; the languages themselves cannot be fully understood otherwise than in the context of the cultures in which they are inextricably embedded ; so language and culture are studied together. In India the theatre is occupied by the plays written in regional languages and has acquired the height of maturity. Indian drama, before the arrival of the English people, existed in the folk forms viz Jatra and Navatanki in Bengal, Bhand Jashan in Kashmir, Rasadari plays in Mathura, Ramlila in Northern India, Bhavi in Gujarath, Lalita Khela, Dashavatara and Tamasha in , Yakshagana, Bayalata Attadata, Doddata and Sannata in Karnataka, Vidhi Natakam, Mohiniattam and Kathakali dance drama in Kerala. It is not only with the English plays in India, but it happens with the plays written in the regional languages also. For example, an Assamese play cannot attract audience in any other state. A translated version of it is required to be performed in another state. A Tamil play requires a Marathi

261 version to be staged in Maharashtra and a Hindi version in North India and vice versa. Mohan Banerji wrote the first English social play, The Persecuted, in 1831. Writers like Rabindranath Tagore, Sir Aurobindo, H. N. Chattopadhya and T. P. Kailasam attempted their hand at theatre. Though their attempt was occasionally brilliant, their plays seemed imitative, halting, inept or an awkward translation of a vernacular rhetoric, mode or idiom. A few Indians prefer to watch English pictures; otherwise most of the people like to see the translated versions. Espesially in the Northern parts of India, the Hindi versions of Jurasic Park and Tetanic are accepted more than the English versions. At present Hindi versions of the famous English movies are highly welcomed in India. After Independence various steps have been taken to make Indian drama flourish. was established under the directorship of Ebrahim Alkazi. The Annual National Drama Festival was started in New Delhi by the Saneet Natak Academi in 1954. New modern drama in English in the hands of , Mahesh Dattani, Manjula Padmanabhan shows a new ray of hope in this field. We must not forget that literary artists like Tagore, Sir Aurbindo, T. P. Kailasam, Asif Currimbhoy and Girish Karnad had studied abroad. The English plays are staged occasionally in the metropolitan cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata and Chennai only.

262 Even though the staging of Indian drama in English is a sporadic activity still a great number of Indian dramatists have handled the theme of betrayal opulently in their plays.

KARNABHARAM

Bhasa can be regarded as the father of Indian drama. It is agreed upon that he must have lived during the period of Chandragupta Maurya in the fourth century B.C. His Karnabharam is a one-act play based on Kama of the . The play depicts the seventeenth day when took over the command of the army after the death of Dronacharya. There was a burden on Karna's mind about the secret of his origin. His mother, revealed him that he was the eldest son amongst the . His sole desire to defeat the great archer, came to dust as he promised his mother that he would not use the serpent-shaft to kill Arjuna. He realised the vitality of the curse. He told Salya, his charioteer, how he was cursed t)y the most dreaded Parasurama. He could not use the Bramhastra whenever he wanted to use it. The great, noble, generous, formidable warrior faced an unresolved burden. The play revolves around the theme of betrayal. Lord knew the generosity of the magnanimous Karna. He knew that only Karna could crush Arjuna. So he came in the guise of a mendicant on the battlefield and cajoled Karna's generosity. Karna felt honoured and offered him a number of cows, horses, elephants, gold, earth and even his head. The

263 brahmin didn't demand directly what he wanted but just tickled Kama's vanity. LxDrd Indra's intention was to betray Karna and the disguise as a brahmin fool suited his evil purpose. Karna was misled by the cunning plot of Lord Indra. Karna unwittingly fell into Lord Indra's trap. When the brahmin was reluctant to accept the gifts, Karna gave the brahmin the most precious kavachakundala. The brahmin who became very happy said : Ha, I have taken these. Now I have done what was formerly decreed by all the gods for the victory ofArjuna. (p.21) It shows that all the gods had conspired against the magnanimous Karna. Salya warned Karna not to part with his kavachakundala. Realising the deception, he pointed out to Karna : O King ofAngas, you have been duped. (p.21) Karna also suspected a foul play. He felt that it might be a trick of wily Krishna who was adept in manifold frauds, but of no use. Karna was offered a boon in exchange of the kavachakundala by the brahmin. But Karna wasn't ready to accept anything in return. Karna unwillingly accepted the unfailing weapon ( astra ) called Vimala when he was informed that it was the brahmin's bidding. Karna was so proud of his generosity that he thought that he had actually betrayed Lord Indra by giving the precious gift to the god. His principle was that everything else (even good learning, firmly rooted trees and fountains of water )

264 vanishes but sacrifices and charities live till the end. In this way Kama's personality has been highlighted by the dramatist. Kama then ascended his chariot and asked Salya to take him to the place where Arjuna was. The play ends with the epilogue (Bharatvakyam ). Lord Indra in disguise of a brahmin betrayed the formidable warrior, Kama. Kama was made unarmed and unprotected. Indra didn't bless him for a long life. On the contrary, he plotted against the noble soul. Lord Indra lied and misrepresented himself as a poor brahmin before Kama and treacherously took away his kavachakundala to protect his son Arjuna. This is the central theme of the play. Bhasa has brightened the protagonist's limitless and self-effacing generosity which proved fatal for Kama. He made some changes in the original source for his dramatic purpose. Indra took away the gift of Kama's kavachakundala much earlier when Kama was offering his daily worship to the Sun. In the original, Kama demanded the Shakti weapon (astra) from Indra in return for the kavachakundala. But in the play he accepted the Vimala ( astra ) reluctantly. The deviation highlights Kama's magnanimous character, Salya, in the original source, was a bitter critic of Kama who discouraged Kama from time to time. But in the play Salya is painted as a true supporter, a sincere companion and a well-wisher who warned against Lord Indra's machinations. The original Kama was not under distress and gloom. In Bhasa's play Kama was under distress, burden and predicament. In spite of his

265 courage, valour and many redeeming qualities Karna in the play was driven towards his doom by his adverse destiny over which he had no control. Of the three important characters, Lord Indra is a deft-intriguer and Karna is the victim. The play is full of pathos. Kama's mind was burdened with many distressing thoughts like Parasurama's curse, the great responsibility of the war, the secret of his origin which he tried to unburden. ^The predicament of killing his own kith and kin is a burden on Kama's mind can be the right interpretation of the title 'Karnabharam.' Some scholars felt that those Kundalas were a burden to Kama's ears. Bhasa has shown that the tendency to betray others is in man's blood. Even the gods cannot achieve their desired end without using treacherous or deceitful means and ways.

SACRIFICE

Rabindranath Tagore, the first Indisin recipient of the most coveted Nobel Prize for literature in 1913, wrote about forty plays which are criticized with varied technical flaws, but at the same time appreciated as plays of ideas. Tagore was honoured with the title 'Knighthood' in 1915, which he returned for the cause of India's freedom movement after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. He wrote the Indian National Anthem 'Jana Gana Mana.' The English translation of Sacrifice ( 1917 ) came from its original Bengali novel Rajarshi or The Saint King (1889). The playwright wrote the play Visarjana in 1894 in

266 Bengali based on the novel. Once in his dream he saw the blood-stained steps of a temple. A little destitute girl was moved by the slaughter of an animal. The dream broke off but it made a great impact on Rabindranath's sensitive mind and Sacrifice is the outcome of the dream. At the age of twenty-one, Tagore performed the role of Raghupati in the play Sacrifice in Kolkata. The play revolves around the deceptive moves of the tragic hero Raghupati and the queen Gunavati. In the novel Rajarshi, King Govindamanikya of Tipperah ( Tripura ), during the seventeenth century banned animal sacrifice in the temple. The King consequently, faced catastrophe for prohibiting an age old tradition. Govindamanikya, his brother Nakshatra Rai and the queen Gunavati lived during the empire of Shahajahan. There is a historical record that Govindamanikya exiled his brother Nakshatra who had tried to dethrone the King. Sacrifice is considered to be the best play by Tagore. His dramatic skill reached its apex during this period. The play brought Tagore success. The playwright wins our admiration by managing its intricacies adroitly. The play shows his dramatic adaptability and economy. Without conflict there cannot be a play. Raghupati, in spite of his priesthood, performs the role of a wicked villain who is the source of conflict in the play. The dramatic conflict in Sacrifice emerges out of the tendency to betray others, irrespective of the status of the

267 characters. The theme of betrayal at the following levels for the greed for power/dominance runs throughout the play.

1) Priest betrays the King 2) Wife betrays the husband 3) Brother betrays brother 4) Self-betrayal

Let us study these types of betrayal in details :

1) PRIEST BETRAYS THE KING Whenever a tradition is opposed, it creates havoc. The followers of the bigotry feel humiliated by the opposition. They become frantic and in the name of religion they lose humanity. Evil manifests itself under the guise of religion. Sacrifice is the best example of this type of bigotry. Raghupati, the royal priest represents religious bigotry, violence, cruelty, wickedness, conspiracy, hatred and treachery. He is a staunch follower of his religion. He is the custodian of the orthodox faith. He is proud, obstinate, revengeful, cunning and machiavellian. Under the guise of a royal priest he tries to fulfil the interest of his class/caste. He plays the role of a villain in the play. Whenever there is an encroachment or opposition to his domain he uses detestable and foul means to destroy the opposition. He feels that he is the prophet of God amd there is a hot-line between him and God. He does not accept any social change easily. He is ready to stoop in order to protect the rights sanctioned to his caste in connection with the temple administration and religious rites. There is a monopoly of old customs that only a Brahmin can

268 worship. He considers himself and his caste superior to God. Even the King is inferior to him according to the four varna hierarchy. In order to continue with the supremacy he can go to any extent and crush any opposition. Superiority in the social hierarchy is an issue of life and death for the high caste Brahmin society. On the contrary, King Govinda is the protector of his subjects and religion is just one branch under his administration. The King feels irrationality and inhumanity in sacrificing animals to propitiate Goddess Kali. Therefore, the King orders prohibition of animal slaughter in the name of religious right. The proclamation irritates Raghupati. He considers it as an encroachment on his authority. He, therefore, considers the King 'atheist and apostate.' The play presents conflict of the two authorities : the royal King and the religious priest. Raghupati shows the superiority of the Scriptures to dominate the King. He tells the King :

/ am a Brahmin. Your caste is lower than mine. (p. 73) It shows that there is no personal, individual selfish end in Raghupati's pleading. But Govinda is the King of the state, therefore it is his moral duty to protect all human beings and animals. But Raghupati does not want to yield. To him sacrificial rite is a noble and pious task and he is an apostle sanctioned by the sacred text. It is beneficial for humanity to sacrifice an animal to propitiate the Goddess Mother Kali,

269 otherwise the Goddess would curse the state. To him the King has no authority to change even a single word in the sacred text. The priest belongs to the higher stratum of society and even the King has no moral, religious and legal right to exercise his power in the old religious customs and traditions. Therefore, in order to crush royal opposition he descends to a base level. Throughout the play, he conspires to finish off the King. Behind his priestly visage lies another diabolic side. He lies many times to instigate other people against the King. He uses them as the pawns in the real life- game of chess to checkmate the King. He masks himself as a pious and noble priest, but he is like the poisonous snake behind the pious hibiscus. Other wicked, treacherous, diabolic side of his character starts working in full swing. Now he takes the actual place of Kali Mata and wishes to drink the fresh royal blood of the King. A priest turns into a blood thirsty draculla. We come across instances of killing children for material prosperity even today. Raghupati's vicious plans begin to work first on Nayan Rai, the General. But Nayan Rai does not want to be a traitor. Failing in his mission to instigate Nayan Rai, Raghupati then turns to Nakshtra, the King's brother. He lies to Nakshtra that he would be King within a week. Thus he instigates a brother against a brother. He urges him :

If your brother is to live, then you must die. (p.47)

270 In order to understand the vicious tendency of human beings it is necessary to know Raghupati's philosophy. Raghupati abets Jaising, his adopted son : Sin has no meaning in reality. To kill is but to kill,—it is neither sin nor anything else...Killing is in the wilderness, in the habitations of man, in birds' nest, in insects'' hole, in the sea, in the sky; there is killing for life, for sport for nothing whatever. The world is ceaselessly killing;...( p.49 ) Actually God is an image of truth, in contrast to the devil who is a liar. Those who cheat, lie, betray and misrepresent become a devil's slave. To the Satan---"there is no harm in telling a lie. ". Raghupati's philosophy of destruction can be analysed on the same level when he advises Jaising in the following manner : To kill is no sin, to kill brother is no sin, to kill king is no sin. (p. 53 ) Raghupati wants to use all the poisonous shafts to protect his orthodox custom. He becomes so insensitive and heartless that he instigates Gunavati, the King's wife, against the King. When every attempt fails he uses the last vital weapon of Jaising to kill the King steEilthily. Therefore, in the temple, Raghupati uses the trick of ventriloquism and orders Jaising to kill the King. He betrays his son, Jaising by using the trick. On Jaising's failure in killing the King, he rebukes him :

Traitor, you have betrayed your Master. (p.59)

111 It shows that he is an ordinary human being who can be a deft- intriguer.

2) WIFE BETRA YS THE HUSBAND

Gunavati is supposed to be an incarnation of all virtues ( Gunas: good qualities ). But in reality, due to superstitious nature she shows wickedness. Though she belongs to the royal family, she does not possess any royal quality. In that sense she is a foil to her husband, King Govinda. It might be that because of her sterility she behaves like a malicious woman. She does not have etiquette even to talk like a royal woman. She rebukes her husband :

Go, and never show your face to me again. (p.33) What an arrogant and indiscipline d wife she is ! She rebels against the King's proclamation. She is an obstinate woman. She tells the King that he has no authority to meddle in the authority of the temple. Against the King's order, she adamantly decides to offer the Goddess three hundred kids and one hundred buffaloes. She is a superstitious lady and wishes a child by sacrificing animals to Mata Kali. Moreover, she is under the impression that the King's ban on sacrifice would bring disaster to the family and the state. Actually the King has adopted a son, Druva. She could have satisfied her motherly instinct by caring for and looking after him. As it happens with a barren woman. But a blind superstition does not allow her to do so. She has the desire like other women to prove her fertility.

272 Therefore, she conspires with the royal priest Raghupati to kill her husband. She jnelds down even to suffer the pangs of a widow. A lifeless goddess Kali is more precious to her than her living husband. It is a shameful thing on her part that she considers her husband a barrier in her way to propitiate the goddess. She has deep and sincere respect for old religious practices. She considers that Druva has robbed off her motherly instinct. Therefore she, like Raghupati, incites Nakshatra to kill Druva and sacrifice him in her name :

Then that boy must die for the King. (p,64 ) Instead of loving the boy she hates him. She is a very cruel and deceitful woman. Raghupati and she are the two pervasive sides of the same blood-thirsty demon. They are the most treacherous creatures in the play. They together instigate others to protest and kill the King.

3) BROTHER BETRA YS BROTHER

In the beginning Nakshatra, the General of the army, shows sincerity and nobility. He is unshaken by Raghupati's ill advice. He does not want to be a usurper. Therefore, he has no intention to supersede his brother, King Govinda. The following assertion shows his royal view : May the king live long, and may I die as I am,—a prince, (p.62) But after all he is a human being. He becomes a victim in the hands of Gunavati, who instigates him to kill Druva. Accordingly, with much hesitation he betrays his

273 brother and the entire state. He falls a victim to the temptation of the crown. He, therefore, brings the child to the temple in order to kill him. But, Druva is very fortunate. The conspiracy is disclosed and the King punishes Nakshatra by sending him into exile for eight years. Nakshatra is courageous enough to accept the punishment. He doesn't disclose the name of the abettor. He accepts his vicious contribution in the conspiracy. Truly speaking Nakshatra is Druva's uncle, but in this world no one can be trusted.

4) SELF-BETRAYAL

People generally live under false impressions, notions and fake concepts. As a priest it is Raghupati's moral duty to protect human beings as well as animals. He must follow a righteous, pious and sincere path at any cost. He must love all living creatures and must behave rationally. Above all, he must be a human being. But it doesn't happen with Raghupati. For the existing illogical and irrational religious rites he becomes ready to kill the King. He wishes to kill the King's foster child, Druva, protecting his son, Jaising. It is a paradox on his part. In spite of his vicious plots to kill the King and Druva, he loses his loving son Jaising, In the flux of destroying others he finds himself destroyed. He pays a penalty for his treacherous doings. He realizes the emptiness of the traditional concepts of religion. He shows affection to the destitute girl, Aparna whom he had scolded once :

274 Leave this place at once. I know you are haunting this temple,... (p.44 ) and

Away, evil omen, (p.78) He realises that his earlier vows are meaningless and so he cries : "Let my VOM'S of priesthood go. " Raghupati earnestly urges : Come, Aparna, come my child,...Call him back to life. (p.80)

Raghupati realizes his faults and he throws away the inanimate statue of Kali Mata. His realization is a touching scene in the play. He realizes the fact that sacrifice is not taking life but giving life to people. He learns that treachery, hatred, greed, killing, conspiracy, falsification are destructive to all human ties. He had cherished altogether wrong notions about his status, position. His ways were also improper and impious, corrupted and deceitful. He realises that Jaising has sacrificed his life in order 'to kill the falsehood,' Gunavati also realises the truth. She finally unites with her lord Govinda. It has already been stated that the means justify the ends. Even though the priest revolts and the wife conspires against the King, no harm is inflicted on him, because King Govinda is a righteous and compassionate person. He loves all equally. His ways are pious, sincere and non-corrupt. Therefore, without any violence from his side he wins the so called battle. His opponents are vicious and treacherous by nature. Truth always survives. Likewise no evil instinct harms the King. Druva is also protected by the law of nature. The play presents the conflict between the loyal and disloyal characters.

275 Krishna Kripalani ( 1991 :9 ) spe aking about the conflict in the play, rightly says : The conflict in this play, which is truly dramatic in its intensity, is many sided; between husband and wife, between temporal power and priestly authority, between the cry of non-violence and claim of violence; between love and duty, between duty and conscience, between the unwritten law of humanity and the prescribed rule of religion.

King Govinda, Nay an, Aparna, Jaising and Druva represent the virtuous side of human life whereas Raghupati, Gunavati and Nakshatra represent the vicious side of life. King Govinda, Druva and Aparna win the battle without shedding a single drop of blood or without making any violence or counter attack. King Govinda is a contrast to Girish Karnad's King Tughlaq who is a deft-intriguer, expert betrayer and cheater. In the flux of betraying others, incessantly, he is betrayed at the end of the play. He loses the battle at all levels and becomes insane. King Govinda stands for non-violence, righteousness, kindness, sincerity and love. As a King he gives justice to all equally. He even pardons his killer, Raghupati. He has compassion for a destitute poor Aparna. Still he is a firm and resolute King in his administration. He challenges old orthodox superstitions. He decides to uproot all killings for religious purpose as King Ashoka did later in his life. He is a selfless and kind King. His virtuous nature is revealed when he prays the Goddess:

276 ...do not set brother against brother, and woman against man. If it is your desire to strike me by the hand of one I love, then let it be fulfilled. For the sin has to ripen to its ugliest limits before it can burst and die a hideous death; and when King's blood is shed by a brother's hand, then lust for blood will disclose its demon face, leaving its disguise as a goddess. If such be your wish I bow my head to it. (p.57) King Govinda values the eternal truth which overruled the blind custom and orthodox tradition. His resolution gives him mioral courage to stand bravely in front of the two strong enemies. Aparana is an incarnation of innocent love. She loves her goat. She feels sorry for the loss of both; her goat and Jaising. She thinks that the idol robs people without granting anything to them. Jaising wins our sympathy. He faces mental conflict; he vacillates his loyalty to the King and his father. He must be a man of royal birth. Therefore, he does not wish the killing of a brother by another brother : If the Goddess must have King's blood, let me bring it to her. I will never allow a brother to kill his brother, (p. 51) He behaves in the same way as he assures his father. He immolates himself to end the treachery. His sacrifice teaches a wise lesson to Raghupati and Gunavati. In order to protect others he sacrifices his life. Rabindranath Tagore attacks the old tradition of animal and other sacrifices for the desire of completion of one's wish or goal. People have been betrayed for centuries in the

277 name of religion, caste and gods. Especially, the intellectual class has abused humanity. Tagore ( 1971: 213 ) has expressed his views, in this regard, in his Personality thus : It is the rampant materialism of the present age which ruthlessly sacrifices individuals to the bloodthirsty idols of organization. When religion was materialistic, when men worshipped their gods for fear or their malevolence, or for greed of wealth and power, then the ceremonies of worship were cruel and sacrifices were claimed without number. This wickedness of human hypocrisy has been shown in Sacrifice. The play has a social significance. Sacrifice means offering one's self willingly. Tagore, through the character of Raghupati, exposes the religious cruelty, hypocrisy, greed, selfishness, deceitfulness and inhuman tendency. Tagore's plays are didactic in tone. The action of his characters is dominated by a single passion. Tagore knew that his plays were full of feelings and not of action. It is observed that his translations lack the flavour and the spirit of the original Bengali works. His own translations are inexact, clumsy and inadequate. While commenting on the lack of ingenuity of Tagore's plays Bhattacharya ( 1977:74 ) says : The plays were not the issue of his original creative impulse—most of them are dramatized versions of Tagore's own stories or novels. It is only likely that they should have lost their freshness as the result of recasting or refurbishing.

278 THE CURSE OR KARNA

T. P. Kailasam is a well-known playwright in Kannada literature. He wrote fourteen social plays and nearly six Puranic plays, some of these are in Kannada and some are in English. He published plays like The Burden ( 1933 ), Fulfilment (1933 ), The Purpose ( 1944 ), Keechaka ( 1947 ). He is considered as 'the great grand-father of Kannada humour,' but at the same time there is an undercurrent of biting satire and a harsh criticism on contemporary society. Kailasam showed a superb knowledge of stage-craft. He called his English 'Kannadanglo.' In Karnataka 'Kailasam Day' is observed in the memory of his literary genius. In India, the two epics: the and the Mahabharata are the perennial sources for the dramatists in various regional languages. T. P. Kailasam was amongst them who used, especially, the Mahabharata for his sources. He considered the Mahabharata more lively and humane than the Ramayana. About using the Mahabharata, as his source, he (1967:87 ) says : You see, the characters in The Mahabharata are all like us, living, rooted to this world They may have their adhyatmic ambitions, but in the way the great sage Vyasa has depicted them, they are all human. But in The Ramayana, sage Valmiki has transgressed humanity. All the characters are on the threshold of divinity. The material dross has never stained their feet. Take any character—

279 The characters of the Mahabharata possess the qualities of common man—love, hate, jealousy, chivalry, selfishness, revenge, treachery etc. Kailasam had fascination for Kama for he was a great warrior, noble man, well-known for his valour, loyalty and generosity but collapsed by an inevitable fate. He wrote an arresting sonnet (1977:100,101) on Kama's unfortunate life. The following lines can be considered for our purpose : Flung adrift by very mother at birth Accurs 'd of anger W tutor in thy youth... Relentless fate swoop'd thee to serve her aim... T. P. Kailasam wrote The Curse or Kama in 1946. Inspired by the performance on Kama by an English company, he drafted his script on Kama as early as 1930. He wanted to make a film on it. The play presents the heart-shattering consequences and the destruction of one noble soul because of the mother's inhuman act of betrayal. How a mother can be heartless and cruel is a well-known fact in the case of Kunti. That everyone is self-centered can be proved again and again through the specimen of mother Kunti. The playwright has ennobled Kama with all the qualities of a virtuous man entrapped by relentless fate. He has made some alterations to suit Kama's personality and for his dramatic purpose.

A WARRIOR BETRA YS AND IS BETRA YEP

In mythology anything mysterious could happen. Kunti, as it is presumed, gave birth to a son before her

280 marriage. She extended her services to the austere rhishi, . Pleased with her services Kunti was blessed with a child from the Sun. The son was gifted with varnakundala. Kunti in order to protect herself from defamation, drifted the son into the river. No other relation is so pious and sincere than the relationship between the mother and her child. But Kunti betrayed her son and protected her name, social prestige and royal status. It also happens today. Therefore, we have homes for the orphan. The future of these destitute children is destined by the inhuman act of human beings. The irresponsible parents should be hanged in the market places. Today people don't respect and are not scared of law. They betray their innocent children for no fault of theirs. They ruin the entire future of their children. Who is responsible for this, the parents or the society ? What is the mistake of these forlorn children ? No one can answer the question. Kama was such a destitute child who suffered humiliation everywhere in spite of his royal blood and godly gift. Due to Kunti's mistake, Kama faced ignoble treatment from the people around him. A royal born man lived with his kith and kin without any blood-relationship. What a strange predicament he faced ! There cannot be a devilish betrayal like this anywhere in the world. The saying; 'the Emperor of the three worlds: the paradise, the earth and the nether is a pauper without the mother' proves correct in Kama's case. In spite of all the virtues and valour he faced destruction as a destitute king. He made

281 some mistakes under the flux of his predicament. He was always in search of his origin. He possessed all the qualities of a kshatriya but was fostered by a 'suta' family. He vacillated between his origin and his breedings. He was deprived of a great number of royal rights. The play presents some of the instances where Kama lied to and betrayed others for one reason or other and got betrayed at the hands of others. The play opens in the Ashrama of the most revered rhishi Parsurama. He had greater respect and love for Kama than his other pupils. He appreciated Kama's selfless love, reverence, loyalty and above all his sincerity and skill in learning. Kama learnt the art of weapons, mace, sword, axe, archery, lance etc. He became an invincible disciple on the earth. Parasurama wanted to exterminate the kshatriya race. Thinking that Kama was a brahmin pupil, he taught him the deadly ( weapon ). Even gods were afraid of the astra. Kama lied to Parasurama that he was a brahmin. But realising his patience, Parasurama recognised Kama's kshatriya origin and was infuriated. Parasurama called him "« poor poor liar" and he rebuked :

With lie of brahmin birth hast thou acqu'd the mastery of arms...(p.9) Kama, an original kshatriya, misrepresented himself as a brahmin disciple before the guru Parsurama. Despite Kama's loyalty, sincerity and skill, Parasurama cursed him that whenever he would require to use the Brahmastra :

282 ...will dull thine eyes and mind, numb and paralyse thy limbs beyond their pow V to help thee make the slightest, smallest use of knowledge that you We learnt of me ! (p.9) Kama's last expectation was sealed by the relentless curse. He wanted to prove his supremacy in the warfare over the Pandavas especially Arjuna. But the most diabolic catastrophe was added to his destitute condition which proved fatal for him. His act of betrayal brought him total destruction. Kama became helpless and hapless. Throughout his life he was obsessed by the curse. It is said that, "III gotten gains seldom prosper. "At every major moment he was paralysed by the curse and could not show his bravery. He faced a great mental agony every time when there was 'Pariksha' or an event of life and death. He could not defeat Arjuna nor react when Bheema had insulted him. This happened because he had betrayed the guru. Kama faced fiasco of his prowess because he had betrayed his guru. He was bitterly humiliated by Draupadi at the time of her swayamvara. She didn't wish to marry a suta prince of the Angaland and announced with irritation : What insult this, ye Gods above ! with me A Daughter of a King, a sootha's son My spouse !... The gods forbid ! (p.35) The term Angaland has a great significance. Anga means 'body' in Sanskrit and Marathi languages. Kama was gifted with varnakundala. Neither weapon nor any astra could pierce his body. Therefore, the king crowned him the king of

283 Angaland. Kama became a true and faithful companion to Duryodhana throughout his life. Truly speaking Duryodhana had full confidence in Kama's valour and only due to his support he started war against his cousins. Kailasam has shown Kama's great quality of chivalry. In Act IV of the play when nobody came forward to protect Draupadi's hum^iliation, Kama stepped forward and threatened Dussaasana. Kama defied and debased the high­ born lords and their passive morality. It is a digression from the original Mahabharata. Kailasam wanted to highlight Kama's virtues. Draupadi who realised Kama's worth says : That thou shouldst be the very one that Fate Elects to use for to defend the honour of The very woman That insulted thee. (p. 60) Regading Kama's pathetic plight T. P. Kailasam speaks through Draupadi, thus : Thou art, In sooth, Some stray ray of Some strange star that hath, By some Mishap, Astrayed into this sinful world ! (p.62)

The theme of betrayal in the play reaches its climax in Act V, The mother Kunti, for her selfish desire, came secretly to betray her eldest son Kama. She hid her identity and presented herself before her son as an aged queen. She wanted to save her son Arjuna at the cost of Kama's life. She knew that only Kama had ability to destroy Arjuna. She had knowledge about Kama's serpent shaft. Therefore, she directly praised his

284 munificent nature. How devilish a mother can be ! The self- centred mother used a subtle machination to satisfy her desired end from her son. She wanted to barter with Kama about the secret of his royal birth. Karna, naturally, accepted every condition put forth by Kuntee. The mother asked her son: To sell the secret of thy Royal Birth ! Now, what of my Price ? (p. 81) No one can be trusted in this world. A mother bargained with her son. We can see the most wicked and treacherous mother who wished the destruction of her eldest son. She transacted with Karna, thus :

May you not spare the use of one, just one, One only shaft in fray of to-morrow ? But just That single shaft I see enshrined there, (p. 81) Karna had preserved the Naga shaft to destroy the only great archer, Arjuna. But his over generous nature proved disastrous for him. He accepted the condition and promised the aged queen that he wouldn't use the shaft. The queen was a cunning creature. She knew that the shaft would miss the mark by Lord Krishna's trickery. On the contrary, Karna had full confidence in his skill. The aged queen asked him to take an oath by milk. Karna did so. Then she disclosed the secret of his life : Thou art own son to Kuntee...elder queen ...Thus, beware of fratricide...brother of Paartha. (p.85)

285 In Rabindranath Tagore's play Kama and Kunti Kama's assurance to mother Kunti made him noble and magnanimous. Still there is a note of melancholy in what Kama states to Kunti : / remain with the desperate and forlorn. On the night of my birth you left me naked and unarmed to disgrace: leave me, once again without pity to the calm expectation of defeat and death. (1995:139) Kama felt emptiness and void in his life. It was his long cherished desire to gain victory over the Pandavas' hero. His plight was undescribable because he was informed of his new relationship with the Pandavas. Actually he was the eldest son and heir to the crown of Hastinapur. But as he was betrayed at the hands of his mother, he was deprived of all the claims. He faced the dire consequences of a common man instead of the royal luxuries, education, power, status and so on. In the original Mahabharata Kama is betrayed by Lord Indra who made him insecure. In the play T. P. Kailasam uses Kuntee, instead. A vicious mother is shown to barter her son and betray him. But Kama assured his foster mother Radha thus: Tomorrow's fray ascaled 'gainst disloyalty And sore betrayal of my lord and friend. (p.93) Radha's estimate about a woman's mind is noteworthy in this regard. She remarked : Kama, my son, there '5 none may read A woman's heart except another of Her kind (pp.95, 96)

286 Therefore we say 'frailty thy name is woman'. The aged dame did the same thing with Kama. Radha immediately realised some crafty scheme behind the queen's barter with Kama. She pathetically cried : My own son Kama turns a traitor to His King ! Oh ! Woe is me ! (p.94) And And mine's already broken with thy sore Betrayal of Thy King ! (p.97) Radha appealed to Kama against treachery of the Pandavas' in the warfare. She told Kama that the Pandavas had used Shikhandi to force to quit the battlefield. The Dharmaraja Yudhistir lied Kripacharya about the death of Aswathaama. The guru was frightened that his son Aswathaama had died. The Dharmaraja told half truth to inert the guru which resulted in his defeat. Radha then told Kama : And now they've sent you some designing dame To lure thee with the secret of thy birth Into betraying your own King... (p. 96 ) In spite of all suggestions and advice of Radha and Maadra, Kama's pride betrayed himself. Maadra knew that Krishna would dip the chariot. He suggested Kama to aim not higher than Arjuna's breast. Kama missed Arjurna's neck as Lord Krishna dipped Arjuna's chariot. The serpent shaft only toppled down Arjuna's crown. Kama realized that it was a destined crafty plot that the shaft would miss the mark. His later realization was futile :

287 / see the meaning of that Old Dame's 'Ifyou miss '! As mother did aver... 'tis all but trickery ! 'Twas naught but Krishna's trickery did save Arjunafrom Ins certain doom ! ( p.l03) Kama realised that it was not fair warfare but only Vile and wily craft'. According to Maadra, Krishna used every low down trick' to destroy the to dust. Even though Krishna was the lord of the universe, he still stabbed Ekalavya stealthily and killed his mother in order to carry out his promise in T. P. Kailasam's play Fulfilment. In Dharmaveer Bharti's , ( Blind Age, 1954 ) Balram aptly described Krishna's craftiness thus :

I know from childhood. You were ever unprincipled and cunning. (1978:63) The final catastrophe in Karna's life is full of pathos and Kailasam has successfully delineated it with awe and terror. At the critical point he lost his vigour, strength and became paralysed. Under such destitute condition Arjuna came before him. He was reluctant to kill unarmed Karna, But Krishna with his eloquent advice motivated Arjuna and literally forced him to kill Karna. Krishna fans up Arjuna's courage : // is the Purpose of the killing, not The Means and Manner of the killing that Decides the Fairness Justness of the killing! (pi 14) Thus Krishna's craftiness saved Arjuna and killed the eldest . Karna's last utterance also shows that they

288 all use trickery, deceptive ways and treachery to kill one another : The craftiness and treachery that overcame (p.! 17). Kama's pathetic end is the result of his betrayal by his mother and his lying to his dreaded guru Parasuram. As the show must go on, Aswatthaama took a vow to kill all the Pandavas and crush them. Karna, consoled and advised Aswatthaama to take back his curse. He feared that his kith and kin would be destroyed by another Brahmin's curse. T. P. Kailasam did not want to recount Kama's dishonest behaviour. On the battlefield when Karna, unarmed, pleaded with Arjuna to follow the righteous path, Krishna reminded Karna the deceitful and treacherous ways that the Kauravas had succumbed to crush the Pandavas. Krishna asked him where was his when Draupadi was humiliated and robbed off her clothes in front of all the lords ? Where was his dharma when was betrayed and poisoned ? Where was his dharma when the wax house was put on fire with the Pandavas sleeping inside ? Where was his dharma when several lords had inhumanly killed lonely Abhimanue ? These instances show the darkest side of Kama's character. He participated in the treacherous, deceptive and diabolic machinations to destroy the Pandavas several times. The play has its own artistic beauty and excellence. While commenting on T. P. Kailasam's dramatic art. Sir C. R. Reddy (1976 :84 ) rightly says :

289 Here is a gem of the first quality and art in the best style. Fortunate is the Kannada country that it has such a jewel to wear. Kailasam gave the protagonist full justice. He idealised the protagonist. The title of the play is significant. It begins with Bhargava's curse and echoes throughout Kama's life in the play. The protagonist remembers and recollects the Brahmin's curse at every juncture.

THE VULTURES

Tendulkar is the most prolific and leading dramatist in Marathi literature. A journalist's fundamental desire is to present the true picture of the society meticulously in w^hich he lives. is , in this sense, a realist every inch. He handles the day-to-day problems of the middle class people. His view about life in general, is uttered by Leela Benare ( Silence ! the Court is in Session ) when she says :

Life is a betrayal. Life is a fraud. (p.ll6) Tendulkar wrote the play during the late fifties (1958-59 ). Sai Paranjape directed the first performance of the play at Tejpal Theatre, Bombay on 29*^ May 1970. The Vultures is one of his widely-acclaimed plays in which Tendulkar deals with the dark world of human mind. The play portrays the devilish selfishness and satanic cruelty amongst the members of a family. Every character tries to betray and crush others for his or her self-interest. They

290 descend to the abyss of ignoble depth where only demons live. Their behaviour even blots the world of satan, ghost and demon. It seems only human beings can be more vicious than vultures. Rajgininath, a commentator, aptly describes : The story of men accursed Or else of vultures cursed To live their lives as men. (p.265 ) The Vultures presents betrayal at different levels that runs through the play and unites the characters and events that finally leads to heart-shattering consequences. Betrayal can be analysed in the following relationships :

1) Brother betrays brother 2) Brothers betray sister and vice versa 3) Father betrays his children and vice versa 4) Betrayal for sensual hunger 5) Self-Betrayal A detailed study of each category will make our understanding better. /; BROTHER BETRAYS BROTHER

The play begins with the words "ungrateful bastard!" (p.206 ) It presents the story of a middle class family, the Pitales. Hari Pitale and his brother Sakharam start a business, "Pitale Plumbers". Both of them work hard, sincerely and flourish in their business. When everything is going on smoothly, Hari in order to satisfy his insatiable greed for money betrays and expels his brother, Sakharam from the business. Umakant rightly points it out :

291 Why didPappa...cheat Uncle? (p.218) Hari manipulates the matter so carefully that Sakharam fails even in the court of law. Hari Pi tale stabs him on his back and forces him to lead a destitute and wretched life thereafter. Hari is an untrustworthy brother who mislead Sakharam and causes him to collect the broken pieces of his heart. Sakharam is thrown into a ditch from where he cannot stand again. He suffers a great blow from Hari. He realises his error in placing trust in his machiavellian brother. As a brother he never thought of such a faithless blow by his eldest brother. His feelings and respect towards Hari are not valued at all. Hari misuses his position as an elder brother. He wishes to enjoy the whole property for his own use. The play portrays the consequences of Hari Pitale's treacherous ways. His means are not sincere and faithful but corrupt and deceitful. Hari is the father of deft intrigue and master mind behind Sakharam's destruction. It is rightly said that "/// gotten gains seldom prosper ". He accumulates property by foul means but cannot enjoy it in the real sense of happiness. His house is constructed on faithless and deceitful foundation. Therefore, it finally collapses. He wants happiness at the cost of his brother's life. In the machination to betray his brother, he becomes a case of self-betrayal. Actually parents earn money for the sake of their children but Hari-pappa's case is different. He does not place trust in his children. Because he considers them as untrustworthy as he is. His limitless greed for money

292 creates havoc in his family. The family suffers from the lack of social mores, altruistic attitude, respect for human values. Everything is valued from monetary point of view. No one tries to understand others. Every one is suspicious about others. Mutual respect and understanding is very essential in a family. The Pitales are full of distrust and dishonesty. The father is a crafty schemer and it is not surprising that his children follow his ways. Ramakant rightly sums up : Pappa, Pappa! As the seed, so the tree ! Did we ever ask to be produced ? (p.211) Initially all the characters are estranged from motherly love, affection and care. They do not know that "charity begins at home ". Hari Pappa's children are brought up under the atmosphere of machinations and dishonesty. Ramakant, Umakant, Manik and Rajaninath are the refined forms of their father's cunning personality. Both the brothers try to supersede each other at every step. They behave as if they are enemies. The words "bloody bastard, bugger" are used frequently at each other. Like their father, each one of them seeks opportunity to betray the other. Each one of them has an eye on the share of the other. Generally, they are drunk. They want to be lavish, so they spend their property to the extent that the ancestral business comes to dust. Particularly, Ramakant becomes bankrupt. He is tortured by the creditors. His furniture is forfeited. He becomes insane and cries as a beggar for money. Thus there is no natural affection and respect for

293 each other. Every minute they look at each other with suspicion and doubt. Instead of protecting and consoling, they quarrel with each other for money. Umakant is shrewd enough to settle his position extracting every share from his estate. We can understand the relation between the two brothers from the conversation. Ramakant rebukes Umakant : You bastard ! Bloody gnat ! Half- cocked bastard, (p.253 ) And Umakant abuses Ramakant : Swindler I I'll see you in the gutter ! (p.255 ) The play is full of such dialogues. In order to insult his brother, Umakant discloses 's impious relations with Rajaninath. Both are cunning, deceitful and wily brothers. They are a perfect match to each other. Their selfish and inhuman tendency destruct them. After all they are the children of a cheater. Rajaninath rightly points out : The seed's diseased. All else is good. But the vital core that takes root, that's rotten. (p.243) Ramakant rightly confe sses : Brother, you bloody thought you were the only bastard. But no! No, brother. I'm a bastard, too. We're all bastards, (p.262) We can say that the family traits are generated in the next generation. Therefore, the children inherit the machiavellian tendency of Hari-pappa. Thus the play presents the latent propensity to betray others. Ramakant betrays even in his financial transactions. He gives a cheque of four thousand rupees to Jaygopal Seth, which has bounced. He supplies the

294 unwarranted worst goods to the Major. Ramakant's blood is contaminated by machination. In his childhood he saw his nurse's illicit relations with a watchman. He is nurtured by her milk. Ramakant is a victim like his uncle, Sakharam and Umakant is a clone of his father, Hari-pappa.

2) BROTHERS BETRAY S/STER AND VICE-VERSA

The Vultures presents a perverted and barbaric relationship between the brothers and sister. Manik leads a stressful life. She feels a constant danger to her life at home. She can't even drink water as it might contain poison. She cannot have sound sleep because there is a danger from her brothers. It seems 'Raksha Bandhan' is meaningless from their point of view. Ramakant and Umakant always humiliate her. Both the brothers call their sister " a whore. " Once they plot to poison her. They have an eye on her share in the property. Manik is pregnant. The brothers even plot to blackmail her lover Raja of Hondur for money. They decide to demand twenty- five thousand rupees from Manik's lover otherwise they would publicly slander Manik and Raja's illicit relationship. They don't respect the sanctity of the tender relationship between a brother and a sister. That a man can go to any extent in order to satisfy his interest, is shown in the relationship of the brothers and the sister. Unfortunately, Raja's death by a heart attack makes them frustrated. They decide to make a public show of her becoming sati sitting on the brat. They decide to make money

295 by selling tickets for the show. Both of them beat and kick her on the belly so that the brat is aborted. She screams, cries before the stony-hearted devil brothers. Her leg is broken. The inhuman beating of Manik is one more awful scene in the play after the treacherous beating of pappa. Even though Manik is helpless still she has her revenge on Ramakant. She uses a mixture of lemon and ash and rubs it on Rama's belly and aborts the child. She reacts in the same barbaric manner as her brothers had treated her inhumanly. She laughs in a frenzied and victorious manner and says ...I've done as I planned...(p.260 )

3) FATHER BETRA YS THE CHILDREN AND VICE VERSA

Rajaninath is the product of the unfair affair of Hari-Pappa. Ramakant and Umakant develop a natural hatred towards their step-brother, Rajaninath. Pappa cannot support him properly. He is thus, betrayed by his father. He stays in a dilapidated garage. The sense of an outsider, naturally grows in him. He is alienated from the family. He also has no respect for his father and step-brothers. Once Ramakant picked up a flower-vase to hit his father. Both the brothers, Ramakant and Umakant, use the words like " crafty old swindler, scoundrel, rascal " for their father. As children become spendthrifts they require more money to squander. Ramakant and Umakant realize that their father has still seven thousand rupees in his account. So the

296 children decide to grab the amount. They arrange a drinking party which turns out to be a deadly party for the father. Ramkant and Umakant along with Manik, accordingly cajole their father. They treacherously search out that the amount is in the Punjab Bank. They drink and beat pappa. It's a shocking scene in the play where the father becomes a prey. He prays helplessly : Please don't kill me! I'm your father, You pimps ! Your father ! (p. 230) A time comes for the creator to pray to the creatures : You've plotted this. You're going to kill me! .. .Murder me ! (p.229) Pappa is forced to sign the cheque. He runs away in order to save his life. The father curses his children that they will end in a mess and worms will rot in their mouths. Beating Pappa is a devilish betrayal by the children. He becomes vicious and decides to destroy them. Actually he has no affection for them from the very beginning. Father stealthily contacts and cajoles his illegitimate son Rajaninath. He changes his colour like a chameleon while talking to Rajaninath. He instigates him against his own children. It is unbelievable that a father behaves in such a diabolic way. He wants to take his revenge but he is insulted and humiliated by Rajaninath. The whole play revolves round such plots and counter-plots between the father and his children.

297 4) BETRA YAL FOR SENSUAL HUNGER

Sexual urge dominates human personality. It is so imperious that in case of repression, crimes are committed in order to satisfy it. Manik, Rama, Rajaninath and the Raja commit the offence of adultery in the play. People break the social taboo in order to satisfy their sexual hunger on the sly and sometimes openly. Manik is as shameless as her brothers are. She is obsessed by physical and material hunger. She is a 'clitorid' type of woman. She had love affairs earlier with a cycle-shop owner, a camera-man and a stall-keeper. When the play begins she is a quite mature woman of thirty-five and has an affair with the Raja of Hondur, a man who had two wives earlier and six children. Raja and Manik fornicate on the sly. Manik doesn't marry him but still carries a brat of Raja. She does not repent at all on her illegal pregnancy. On the contrary, she rebukes her brothers whenever they point out her immoral relations with Raja. As her life is licentious, she pays terribly for it. She is trapped and beaten badly which results in her abortion. She becomes a wretched destitute. It is surprising that scholars and critics show sympathy for Rajaninath and Rama. Truly speaking, they are cold-blooded machiavellian, cunning characters. N. S. Dharan (1993:73 ) says : there is portrayal of tender love between Rama and Rajaninath. It's nothing but physical passion between them. Rajaninath sometimes goes to the

298 brothel. He satisfies his carnal desire with his sister-in-law. An elder sister-in-law is considered as a mother or sister. Rama calls him " Bhaiya." Both of them are aware of their relationship. But here in the folk of vultures they are just two opposite sexes attracted towards each other to satisfy their sexual hunger. Rajaninath contributes one more instance of treachery. He does not show any heroic quality to bring Rama out of her suffocation but stealthily pollutes the pious tie between them and then meekly watches the disintegration of the members of the family. Both commit an offence of adultery. An opportunity brings them together to develop incestuous relationship. The boundaries of social restrictions are crossed and the two sexes remain like stags and hinds of the woods. The social taboo is thrown into the air. Rama prefers to be polluted by another man than to be called a barren woman. She tells Rajaninath : This soil's rich, it's hungry. But the seed won't take root...if it's weak, feeble, lifeless, devoid of virtue—then why blame the soil ? (p. 241) They betray the members of their family ( howsoever dishonest they are ). An illegitimate son becomes an illegitimate father. Rama conceals the fact from Ramakant and lie s to him : We'll live in poverty, if we have to. Really. You, me, our baby. (p. 250) Ramakant becomes very happy to know about her pregnancy. A pitiable fellow ! But his dreams are shattered by his brother Umakant who informs him :

299 It's that bastard Rajaninath's .'...It's your half-brother's !...That son-of-a- whore's !... Your wife used to go to him on the sly...I've seen her. They used to sit inside... With the door shut. (p.255)

It is a brutal and unbearable shock to Ramakant.

5) SELF-BETRA YAL

As per the principle of self-betrayal, particularly father pappa, Ramakant, Manik, Rama are the victims of such betrayal. It has been already stated that self-betrayal in short is a way by which we justify false beliefs to oneself. Psychologists consider it as being the result of self esteem problems. Pappa in the flux of betraying Sakharam hurls down and is disillusioned by his four children. Material prosperity does not bring him happiness, respect and true love from his children. He runs after illusion and betrays himself inadvertently. It has already been stated that father-pappa is himself responsible for this domestic tragedy. The children are the followers of their cunning father. Ramakant ends as a pauper and insane person. He is disillusioned by one bloody torture after another, (p. 261) He becomes destitute having no wife and no kid. Rama follows an impious way to conceive and thus proves her fertility but faces an awful tragedy as Manik suffers. Both the women use illicit, impious, unsocial ways and show us the vitality of the

300 saying : "means justifies the end". Thus these major characters are self-deceived. The Pitales cannot avoid the consequences of their machiavellian actions. Everyone pays for his or her deceitful action terribly. Due to their faithless nature/behaviour every one of them is alienated from the family. A sense of alienation is the bitterest experience in human life. The cases of betrayal take place everywhere and people are aware of the possibility of these incidences. But it is unbearable to be betrayed by one's own father, mother, brother, sister, wife and closely related people. If one is betrayed by one's kith and kin, who can be trusted then ? There is nothing but destruction and frustration as it is presented by Tendulkar. Domestic relationship is questioned in the play. The members of the family are emotionally betrayed by one another. The series of betrayal/deception creates an awful situation that suppress our emotional outlet. C. Coelho ( 1994: 35 ) in this respect, says : In Vultures, perhaps Tendulkar presents a too terrifying, repulsive, almost barbaric representation of life for us to easily swallow. We witness the ferocity, ruthlessness, avarice and wickedness of vultures in the forms of the Pitales. It is proved beyond doubt that immoral, illegal acts, even though committed stealthily, have their consequences. The Vultures is a lively example of the fact. Children feel the burden of their father and uncle. Manik suggests Ramakant to throw their penniless uncle, Sakharam out of the house. They conspire to kill their father as he has still some money. The members of the family

301 are mean, ugly, cruel, indecent, greedy, selfish, and worst than the pet animals. The pet animals are at least faithful to their owners. The Pitales are the worst ignoble creatures. Not a single person is virtuous and honest for whom we may feel sympathy. Actually six vultures live in a hole in a tree in the shapes of men. They are all swindlers. As they are running after one prey to another, they don't get any mental satisfaction at all. They had property but it could not bring them happiness at all. On the contrary, the material prosperity goes back in the same faithless way as it came. Umakant rebukes Ramakant : What've you got left to look after ? Double mortgage on the house. The office has gone already. The bank'II attach the account. The creditorsll fall like jackals on the rest of the property. Pappa's account's cleaned out. Manik's share's all gone, (p.253 )

Not only is property gone but everybody is eliminated in the worst treacherous way. Vrinda Nabar ( 1974:19 ) in this connection rightly observes : Vulture-like, they prey on one another : conventional sentimentalities have no place in their world where fathers deceive children, in a destructive vortex of greed and treachery.

Man is a reactionary creature. If one betrays another, the victim will certainly react. Though Sakharam is betrayed still he is satisfied to see the destruction of the Pitales. Destiny has taken revenge on Hari-Pappa and his children in the most detestable way. The play presents a sense of loss and pervading violence. Tendulkar sincerely believes that violence

302 exists in each of us and it must be presented in all its manifestations. In an interview, in connection with his plays, Sakharam Binder and Vultures, he ( 1983 :5 ) states : Violence comes as a way of life a natural way of life if you consider the background of the characters. It is there as part of the function of a character. Pappa, Ramakant, Umakant, Manik suffer from frustration. Therefore, they resort to betray, violence, barbarity and inhuman treatment to one another. Once Rama advises Ramakant to "stop this murderous deceit". (p.251) The Vultures is packed with deception, inhuman treatment and violence. It is a dramatic necessity also as it sustains suspense, surprise, interest and thrill throughout the play. Tendulkar has presented the basic instincts of human beings without reservation. There is no comic relief at all in the play. This leads Girish Karnad ( 1998 : XII ) to say that : the staging of Gidhade ( Vultures ) could be compared to the blasting of a bomb in an otherwise complacent market place. To conclude the betrayal motif in The Vultures, it is fruitful to quote Arundhati Banerjee ( 1998:XII ) who rightly sums up the play, thus : The play is a ruthless dissection of human nature revealing its inherent tendencies to violence, avarice, selfishness, sensuality and sheer wickedness.

303 The play was much debated during the seventies and it is so today also because of its contemporaneity. The modern men like the Pitales are running after material objects viz. a car, a posh bungalow, a chauffeur, a chef, a watchman at the gate, servants, etc. The play presents complex needs, demands of a modern man and his restless 'hide and seek' race for self gratification. Ramakant himself calls Men aren't what they bloody used to be, are they ? The whole race of 'em's crooked, dammit ! Bloody frauds, the lot! (p. 236)

HALF-WA Y HOUSE

Mohan Rakesh is one of the well-acclaimed modern dramatists in Hindi literature. His family life was disturbed one. Throughout his life he fought with adversity and destiny but could not find mental peace. So we come across bitterness, a note of melancholy and frustration in his writings. The play Half-Way House ( Adhe Adhure, 1969 ) bears the stamp of his marital life up to some extent. His expectations from his two wives were shattered. Half-Way House is one of his best Hindi plays, others being Ashad Ka Ek Din and Laharon Ke Rajhans. The play Half-Way House presents betrayal in conjugal relationship and its destructive consequences on the members of the family. The play is about a disturbed modern middle class family. The fact that a person cannot lead a dual life is at the core of the play. One can not escape from one's own actions and reactions. The play shows the complex relationship of a

304 man and a woman on the background of socio-economic estrangement of a middle class family. The play revolves around the female character Savitri, the wife of Mahindranath. There are other characters but they are very insignificant before this female protagonist. She represents a modern Indian woman who in search of perfection faces inevitable destruction and derangement of her family. Savitri is about forty years old having three children; a son, and two daughters. The whole family depends on her income as her husband Mahindranath is jobless. It is but natural that she develops a sense of ego. Her misunderstanding of the family, her misconception of her individual needs, her incorrect attitude towards interpersonal relationship proves fatal for her family. Very soon she realises emptiness of the married life. She is obsessed with her personal expectations. She always quarrels with her husband and points out his incapacity to fulfil the family requirements. Sometimes the husband beats her. Truly speaking, he loves her sincerely but he is incapable and helpless to provide her mental support and satisfy her physical expectations. Therefore, he is of no use for the family. The family suffers from suffocation in every respect. The members suffer from internal conflict for which no easy solution is seen nearby. Moreover everybody knows that something is wrong somewhere. There is no smooth relation^ with one another in the family. Everybody is naturally forced to lead his/her own life without any restraint. This is a typical domestic phenomenon in the modern family.

305 MOTHER BETRA YS HER FAMIL Y

It is due to Savitri's over-sexual passion that leads her to contact different people outside the domestic wall. The members of the family know her licentious behaviour. As a natural result of her lascivious behaviour, the elder daughter, Binny falls a victim and elopes with her mother's friend, Manoj. Binny is about twenty years old. When the play opens she has come back to stay with the family as Manoj has betrayed and deserted her. Both Mahindranath and Savitri blame each other for Binny's elopement and failure with Manoj. Ashok, a young boy of twenty-two, wanders the whole day in search of a job. He has an affair with one, Varna. He presents Varna the articles which are available in the house. The youngest girl Kinny is about thirteen years old. She develops a natural attraction towards pornography. She doesn't get moral and mental support at home. The members of the family know well about one another's affairs. It is said ' as you sow, so you reap. ' Mother Savitri has a misunderstanding that she is regarded as a machine who produces resources to meet the family needs. Therefore, she develops a natural desire that at least somebody outside will treat her as a human being. Unsatisfied with one person she tries another. In order to satisfy her over passion she changes partners every now and then. Savitri finds her husband passive and incapable of satisfying her. Therefore, she is unhappy and restless all the time. In order to get out of her frustration, restlessness and to fill the inward emptiness, she tries to find

306 out satisfaction outside the home. Sometimes she spends nights outside with other men. She is a ' clitorid ' type of lady. She attracts people and enjoys carnal satisfaction with them. The Fourth man rightly estimates her fickle nature and reprimands : One man alone could never have given them to you, so no matter who you married,you would always have felt as empty and as restlessas you do today ...(p. 16) While enjoying sensual pleasure with them she never bothers about the inevitable impact of her satyr behaviour on her children. As a result she can't prevent the undesirable and inevitable consequences on them. But at the same time she expects that everything at home should be cultured and refined. It is not possible. Children imitate what they see and feel in the family. The play is a nice specimen of this. If children become unsocial, the responsibility ultimately goes to the parents. If parents are irresponsible the children should not be blamed at all. Savitri leads a hellish life but desires a heavenly atmosphere at home. On the suspicious atmosphere in the home, Ashok says : But even if one manages to deceive others, how can one deceive oneself? ( P.IO)

We are informed that Savitri, first of all influences Manoj, and then she casts her spell on Juneja, a friend of her husband. She then has an affair with Shivjit. Though her husband hates , she goes with him to enjoy nightly bliss. Then she has a secret affair with her officer, Singhania.

307 She lies to the members of her family that Singhania is helping to get a job for her son Ashok. But all the members know her secret longings for her boss. Ashok once rebukes her about her illicit relations with these people. She does not care even what her husband Mahindra feels about her extra-marital relations. On her unbridled nature Juneja rebukes her :

Thepoint is that if any one of these men had been a part of your life instead of Mahindra, you 'd still have felt that you 'd married the wrong man. (p.l6)

What a debaucherous lady Savitri is ! She does not care for social taboo. Moreover, there is a big question mark on her fidelity as she is not faithful to her so called lovers. The men who come in Savitri's life have the same passion. They also use her for their satisfaction. No one sincerely gives her mental support and satisfaction. They all betray Savitri under different situations. They have their hunger to share with her. All of them are selfish hounds. While searching sensual pleasure outside, naturally, she is estranged from the members her family. Her children do not love and respect her. There is no natural tie amongst them. Her greedy passion spoils the whole family. The members of the family are alienated from one another. The neighbours do not have good opinion about the members of Savitri's family. Thus the entire family is socially alienated. The members have their secret ways to enjoy life like their mother. Nobody is happy in the family. In spite of her habit of changing persons from time to time, Savitri naturally cultivates a habit of

308 wandering. Her search for completeness is meaningless. When life itself is uncertain and incomplete how can one be perfect ? After all what is perfection ? She is unable to understand real happiness in herself. She unnecessarily wanders endlessly. Her search for completeness is in itself incomplete. It seems that she is in search of a complete and perfect man like Girish Karnad's Padmini of Hayavadana. But the irony is that both the heroines cannot find such a perfect man of their expectation. It is truly said that happiness and perfection lie within and not without. Both these heroines try to find happiness and perfection outside their homely limitations but fail. Both face frustration and disillusionment. As Savitri's search is endless the play also ends without giving any solution. The audience is left to guess what would have happened with such a family under the distressing and tense atmosphere.

The fault lies with Savitri's personality. It won't be incorrect if we say that the family stands for a modern Indian family. While imitating the western culture we Indians are at a loss of our rich heritage. We wish to be as modern as we can. We are running after material comforts. In search of the means to satisfy our thirst for material goods we have lost our mental peace. The institutions of marriage and family are in danger in western countries because of unsatiable greed and thirst for material pleasures. Savitri's family is a specimen of this type of culture. In the pursuit of blind race, family institution has come in severe danger. Savitri earns for the family and therefore,

309 naturally, she develops a tendency to dominate other members of her family. At the same time she wants unobjected freedom. The result is projected in the play. The playwright has posed a serious question before us. Family institution is based on mutual trust, respect, compassion and love. But when mutual trust is betrayed all other components get distorted. The same thing happens with Savitri's family and her family faces destruction. They live under one roof but there is no family life in the family. Only wall and roof do not make a house. The suffocation that Savitri's family suffer, is the outcome of the playwright's own experience at his home. She is a female projection of the playwright's own life. She presents the emptiness, search for home, sensual hunger, bitterness of life, unsuccessful marital life and so on in 's life. Savitri reminds us of the playwright's first wife upto some extent—her earning hand, her expectations to dominate her husband and her desire for freedom. Savitri's family is crushed between financial scarcity and mental alienation. It is just because the protagonist fails to create mutual trust, affection, love and respect. There are a great number of families which lead happy lives even in poverty. Mutual trust, compassion, love and affection do not require financial assistance at all. Very few people can understand this fundamental principle of happy life. Savitri becomes a case of self-betrayal. She doesn't realise the meaninglessness of her incessant quest for absurd completeness. She comes back to her home from where she

310 cannot run away. Her quest is endless. Her concept of happiness is based on wrong notions. Savitri reminds us of the mythological Savitri. In Hindu mythology Sati Savitri is well-known for her fidelity and loyalty towards her husband, Satyavana. She brought back her husband to life from Yamah, the God of death, because she found life useless and meaningless without her husband. Savitri, in the play, finds her life meaningless, void, monotonous with her husband. In all, six persons enter in Savitri's life. Savitri is a contrast to the mythological Savitri. To conclude, we may say that in search of completeness and perfection every character remains imperfect. Therefore, the title Adhe Adhure is very apt. Mahindranath becomes ill as he does not get proper respect in the home. Savitri remains unsatisfied. Her quest for a new bird will go on incessantly. Ashok is just a burden, making empty love with Verna. Binny comes back disillusioned, Kinny has no future. She enjoys pornography and obscene discussions about it. All these characters belong to a half-way house. They are as good as tables, chairs and furniture in the store-room, having no mutual understanding amongst them. They are forced to stay under one roof yet they are crying for 'home.' They are in search of mental peace even though they lead an unbridled life. They are not happy because their trust has been destroyed. They feel insecure and therefore they try to find security outside but finally remain unfulfilled. There are a few people who can successfully manage the complex family relations. Otherwise

311 everywhere we come across Mahindranaths. If the parents are irresponsible the children will surely tread on the same path. Thus the pla5rwright, through one family, has made us aware of emptiness and the uselessness of material pursuits. There are a great number of families like Mahindranath's in this world. Savitri and Mahindranath cannot divorce each other at this juncture. They are cursed to live the same suffocated, estranged and stressful life under the same roof.

312