|
|
|
The theatrical side of life
Trying to write about theatre in Pakistan, I decided to go on the Internet and look for some background information. Although, as expected, there was little to be found on theatre itself, there were three or four sites that contained the words “Pakistan” and “theatre”. Ironically, what two of these sites had to offer is interesting and incisive, and worth sharing with the readers:
DoD news briefing: “We take the view that the theater ballistic missile threat is entirely different from a strategic missile threat, which are longer range missiles designed to be used against our homeland, against the continental United States; whereas the main threat we face from theater ballistic missiles is that they would be used against our troops stationed abroad or the bases from which they operate.”—Kenneth H. Bacon, ASD (PA),Tuesday, March 25, 1997 - 1:45pm. Space Policy Project — Special Weapons Monitor, State Deptt
The second site read as follows:
“Pakistani paramilitary troopers with their Indian counterparts lower down their respective national flags at the Joint Check Post (JCP) at the Wagah border crossing between Pakistan and India.”—(Theater of War Every Evening at the Pakistan-India Border, By AFP/Jean-Herve Deiller).
While bordering on the humorous, the above search results carry some important pointers to the plight of theatre, or rather, of culture in general, in Pakistan. Continued military rule for most of our history, our identity as an antithesis to India along with the insistence on doing away with every remnant of a shared cultural heritage, and the newly renewed American client status with its attendant compulsions of conforming to the culture of globalization, are all key factors in the study of theatre in the last decade and in surmising what could lie ahead.
Theatre has the potential of being a very subversive medium. It can be adopted by ordinary people in villages and poor neighbourhoods and can provide an opportunity for expression to those who have been rendered silent through years of repression. It is far less controllable by the powers that be than, for instance, television, radio or the press. After all, all it takes to do theatre is a piece of land, at least one performer and an audience of at least one. It is extremely adaptable to meagre resources and local conditions and is well within the reach of the ordinary people.
Of course, here, we are talking about the kind of theatre that questions, disturbs and shakes up existing patterns of thought and behaviour and not the kind that works as an opium and helps to put people to sleep. All dictatorial regimes and occupying forces throughout history have viewed this art form with suspicion. It is not surprising that the British in the late 19th century imposed draconian restrictions upon theatre, restrictions that in Pakistan continue even till this day.
The state of Pakistan, right from its inception, has shown a dislike not only for theatre but for all cultural activities. While it has tolerated the performing arts at a harmless level within small pockets of affluence, it has actively discouraged theatre from becoming a wider movement and from taking root within larger sections of society.
There are two main reasons for the anti-culture stance of the Pakistani ruling elite. One, it has mainly been a dictatorship, mostly of the military variety, and secondly because it had the need to build an identity totally different to that of India. The performing arts have been considered un-Islamic and having that despicable Indian (read Hindu) odour. The characteristic disdain of the Muslim middle class of the subcontinent (with the happy exception of East Bengal) towards those who indulge in dance, music and theatre did not help either. This animosity towards the performing arts came to a climax in the Zia years when religious orthodoxy combined with military power to crush all vestiges of liberal thinking that this society had inherited from the pre-independence days.
However, despite the political and cultural repression of the Zia years, or perhaps because of it, there took place what a writer has termed “the irresistible rise of Pakistan’s political theatre.” Starting with Tehrik-e-Niswan in Karachi and Ajoka in Lahore, several theatre groups came into being which were politically and ideologically oriented. Thus a theatre of resistance came into existence with other groups joining in such as Dastak from Karachi, Lok Rehas and Sanjh from Lahore and Yasmin Ismail’s theatre for children, once again in Karachi.
Tehrik-e-Niswan, which came into being in response to the anti-women laws passed by the government, developed from organizing seminars to cultural sessions that included reading of poetry and short stories. In 1981, it presented its first theatre play for an all women audience. Tehrik has largely used classics and masterpieces and adapted them to depict the reality of women in Pakistan today.
Ajoka was founded in 1984 producing plays ranging from Badal Sircar’s Juloos to Brecht and finally to the plays written by in-house playwright Shahid Nadeem. Like Tehrik-e-Niswan, Ajoka performed both for the middle class as well as the working class audiences in neighbourhoods and streets. Dastak, headed by Aslam Azhar, was another group that came into existence in Karachi and concentrated mainly on translations of Brecht. Then there was the ultra radical Punjab Lok Rehas, a group interested in taking plays written in the Punjabi vernacular to the masses. This was perhaps the most overtly political of all these groups. Sanjh, like Lok Rehas, was an offshoot of Ajoka, and was closely affiliated with a political party.
While very different in their performance styles, production standards and approach to drama, these groups had one thing in common — the desire to challenge the military-led anti-people status quo and to rid Pakistani society of narrow mindedness and orthodoxy. With the support of the Goethe Institut, Yasmin Ismail started her theatre for children, which exclusively consisted of Gripps plays adapted for Pakistan by Imran Aslam who had a great facility for lacing his scripts with humorous comments on current politics. Rahat Kazmi started the Theatre Wallahs, which mostly produced contemporary Broadway and western fare, ranging from Neil Simon to David Hare and depoliticized Dario Fo. Wanting to make itself commercially viable the group hired television stars for its productions.
Meanwhile, sporadic performances of western drawing room comedies both in English and Urdu kept taking place from time to time. Prominent among these was Sohail Malik’s Karachi Theatre Group. With time, however, most of these groups dwindled, their activities becoming either sporadic or non-existent. To their credit, Tehrik-e-Niswan and Ajoka have been the two groups that not only have persisted till now but have also worked on keeping abreast with current developments in theatre and taking their productions towards maturity.
The mid-nineties saw another spurt of theatrical activity in Karachi. A large number of groups from the less affluent and, in some cases, violence-ridden areas of the city began to sprout. While the artistic standards left much to be desired, here was a great chance for theatre to take root within the huge Urdu medium middle class where it had so far been non-existent. But with the absence of any support, training or exposure, these also faded away as quickly as they had emerged.
Certain other groups and individuals in their own capacity are trying to boost theatre activity in the country and popularize it at a wider level. The Peerzada brothers, for instance, have continued the Herculean task of organizing the International Theatre Festival, single-handedly, with hardly any government support. Unfortunately, there have not been enough theatre practitioners in this country to take advantage of the immense opportunity for interaction and exposure that the presence of so many foreign theatre groups brings every alternate year.
Similarly, Kishwar Naheed, the famous poet, did try to bring about state acceptance for theatre and held national festivals annually during her short lived tenure as the head of the National Council of the Arts. However, as could be expected, with her exit from the post in the Nawaz years the practice was hastily abandoned. Four years of Kishwar’s presence was too short a period to give this an institutional form.
Another interesting thing that happened during the last ten years was the adoption of theatre as a tool by the “development world.” A great number of NGOs have started encouraging the use of theatre as a means of self expression and communication at the community level. ‘Theatre for Development’ has become a whole new discipline and many universities are offering courses in it. These groups comprise either NGO workers and social activists or community members themselves. The plays are invariably about issues of common concern. Hundreds of such groups have sprung up and can be seen performing in villages and small towns on a regular basis.
Even though most of this kind of theatre has fallen into the trap of delivering pre-packaged messages and using theatre just the way the advertising industry uses various tools of art, there has been some good work too. Just the volume of the work being produced and the fact that communities are increasingly adopting theatre for self-reflection and as a means of being heard, seems to hold some promise.
|
|
|
|
