The first war of independence (1857), I believe, is the first significant event which made us meaningfully aware of the British presence and the consequences of colonial rule. One may logically construe that a new age followed in Indian history. When I use the phrase "Modern Kannada Drama and Theatre" it is this period, 1857-1980, that I have in mind. This paper, however, does not present a complete survey of Modern Kannada Drama and Theatre of this period. It is only an attempt to hint at a few significant developments. I only hope that these notes offer some kind of introduction to Modern Kannada Drama and Theatre to non-kannada speakers.

Karnataka has had a deep-rooted Theatre Tradition. It can easily be dated back to the seventh century. Yakshagana of the Coastal districts, Doddata, Sannata, Krishna Parijatha of the northern districts and the Moodalapaya of the old Mysore area are some living examples of this great tradition. It is significant to note that whereas the Kathakkali of Kerala is predominantly a dance form, Yakshagana, Doddata and Sannata are essentially theatre forms. These Pre-Modern forms have been very mature in their concepts and are popular even today. That a Yakshagana troupe performed in Maharashtras during 1842 and inspired the birth of Modern Marathi Theatre is also a significant event worth recording. Later, however, Kannada, Telugu and Tamil Theatres came into a very strong influence of the Modern Marathi Theatre.

The colonial rule made a deep impact on our life style. The traditional and the folk forms slowly receded into the rural corners as the Parsey companies invaded the towns. Mysore witnessed many such Parsey performances during 1875-80. The palace which was hitherto supporting a Yakshagana troupe witnessed the birth of a new troupe called "Aramane Nataka Company". The famous "Gubbi Company" which celebrated its centenary only two years ago came into being in 1884.

One may, thus, logically conclude that the Modern Kannada theatre was the offshoot of the new professional Parsey companies. This demanded two important things: (i) the need of the proscenium theatre (building) (ii) the need of evolving a system to sell the tickets. These mobile professional troupes ruled the Kannada theatre till 1950's. They enjoyed the patronage of the 'elite' middle class.

Modern Kannada theatre resisted the bonds of Traditional forms and gave itself to the new forms from the west. Modern Kannada Drama, however, did not encounter such a situation because there was no such thing as 'Drama' in the pre modern Kannada literature. 'Mithravinda Govinda' (1696) may be the sole exception. "Mithravinda Govinda" is only a crude translation of "Ratnavali" by the famous Sanskrit poet Harsha. Though the names of the characters are altered it follows the original line by line. Still, it failed to reflect the essence of the original.

There is more than one reason for the absence of this new form-Drama- in Pre Modern Kannada literature. (a) The traditional and folk theatres used small or parts of epics. The prose-conversations were improvised. Thus these theatres did not demand a new literary form (b) The main stream of Pre-Modern Kannada literature is dominated by epics. As a literary form, the epic has been the most complete and inclusive. Since the early masters set a solid ground for the epic tradition the need for other forms was not very much felt.

Modern Drama came into being with the translations from Sanskrit Drama during 1870-80. The first Modern Kannada Drama was published from Bombay in 1887. It is curious to note that a play like "Iggappa Hegde Vivaha Prahasana" was published as early as that. It deals with a social issue pertaining to the subcaste of a village. The subcaste, here, is comprised of a small community of rural, agriculturist Brahmins. An old Brahmin from this subcaste mortgages his land to marry a young girl paying 'Kanya Shulka'. The marriage brings the downfall of both. It is very interesting to observe that the playwright has used the dialect of this subcaste. Other characters, drawn from other communities, speak their dialects. Thus "Iggappa Hegde Vivaha Prahasana" was not only an experiment in form but also in language. It was a successful replica of a European social realist dramatic form. The playwright belonged to the same subcaste and was a Sanskrit scholar. But he was a liberal and a reformist too. He opened a printing press and was responsible for the publication of many Kannada books. During the same time, another rural immigrant to Bombay published a similar reformist play.

Today, these plays may appear very crude devoid of any literary merit. But the attitude they represent is very significant: They have roots in their immediate environment but are open to new influences. There is a conscious attempt to blend and digest both.

These short plays were meaningfully followed by "Sangya Balya". A village teacher educated in the English system wrote this. He knew the folk forms of his area. "Sangya Balya" is a musical play which follows the style of "Parijatha". The actors had to improvise the dialogues. But, though "Sangya Balya" is a 'folk' play it is wrought in an essentially modern spirit. The playwright was brave enough to compose his play on an incident of Adultery and Murder. The theme was so contemporary that it invited a legal ban on its performance and has to be performed cheating the police. The real life incident provoked the concerned people to sue the playwright in the court of law. The popularity and the literary merits of this play, however, are still the wonders of modern Kannada Drama.

The next two important names are T.P.Kailasam and SriRanga. Kailasam was the illustrious son of a highly placed executive. He was a student of geology in a British University. Kailasam, however, was more interested in the contemporary British Drama and music than geology and brought with him new things to Kannada drama. He published his first play in 1920. The life of contemporary urban Brahmin middle class revealed itself in Kailasam's plays. Kailasam often attacked these men for their hypocrisy; exposed their emptiness and ridiculed their meanness. Farce was thus Kailasam's main form but he experimented with different forms of comedy and wrote a few serious plays in English as well. His Kannada plays are replete with a characteristic wit, humour and an occasional Pun. Kailasam's plays are also famous for their use of collegial language. He uses words from other languages without any hesitation. He consciously broke the assumed seriousness and brought ease and enthusiasm on the stage. Kailasam's plays attracted the educated audience and paved the way for the birth of amateur theatre in Karnataka. They made their entry into schools and colleges too.

In many ways Kailasam was a Bohemian. His unconventional and carefree mannerisms have become myths. But his potential was not completely realized in his plays. One may debate the literary merits of Kailasam's plays but Kannada theatre was certainly inspired by them. Kailasam's attitude to contemporary company theatre was two fold: he ridiculed and cajoled the histrionics of the company theatre. However he did not reject the company theatre as a whole. He tried to explore new possibilities and extend the scope of company theatre.

SriRanga published his first play in 1930. SriRanga was a Sanskrit scholar. He was familiar with Indian theatre traditions. His understanding of the Sanskrit plays and the Natya Shastra was unequalled. He studied philology in the London University. Like Kailasam he too was greatly influenced by European theatre. SriRanga was a born rebel and naturally attached the evils of middle class Brahmin society. Like Kailasam he too was a social realist. But SriRanga's experiments took the Kannada Drama to new heights. He virtually wrote hundreds of plays and experimented with the form but not always successfully. The literary merits of most of his plays are debatable but one cannot be blind to SriRanga's contributions to amateur theatre. He not only promoted the interests of amateur theatre but brought a new discipline as well. While Kailasam had a career of 25 years, SriRanga spent more than 50 years in Kannada theatre.

Shivarama Karanth did not restrict himself to realist drama. His interests ranged from traditional Yakshagana to company theatre. His experiments include opera, burlesque and farce also. He was interested both in the professional and amateur theatre. His experiments in Yakshagana brought international recognition and paved new ways of understanding the form.

Kailasam wrote his first play in 1920. The very next year, in 1921, Samsa published his first historical play. He is said to have written 23 plays of which only five or six plays are available.

Samsa's was a uniquely strange personality. Though he did not have a sound academic qualification he went abroad to earn money as a worker. His bitter experiences abroad made him develop persecution mania and later he committed suicide. But his career as a dramatist is very interesting. He was drenched in the horrifying experiences of an unpleasant contemporary life but tried to recreate the most significant historical developments in the Mysore dynasty. The complex world of his unique characters reminds, sometimes, one, of Shakespeare, who with his demonic power was an ideal to Samsa. But one cannot say that Samsa copied Shakespeare. He only seems to have drawn his strength from Shakespeare and has invested it with his own creative potential.

Let me clarify this point a little further: Shakespeare was an ideal to D.L.Roy also. Though D.L.Roy closely followed Shakespeare he was unable to get the essence of Shakespeare and ended up with melodrama. But Samsa's plays are of a high literary order. They are certainly greater than Tendulkar's Ghasiram Kotwal.

Kannada Drama received yet another boost with B.M.Srikantiah bringing the Greek forms to look at our own ancient classics with a new perspective. B.M.Sri was the father of Renaissance movement in Karnataka. He was a professor of English. Incidentally, he was our first Kannada professor too. He remodelled the story of Aswathaman on the footing of the Greek tragedy 'Ajax'. He also translated a Greek play into Kannada. The Greek sensibility added a new dimension to our own drama and Kannada drama proved that it could take influences, keeping, however, its own uniqueness intact. B.M.Sri's experiments achieved a little more too. He could draw his strength from ancient mythology, classical Kannada literature and the Greek classics simultaneously. He could also use old Kannada - which is a bit alien today - powerfully. The range of these experiments broadened the perspectives of Kannada drama.

With the development of Indian cinema, company theatre began to lose its charm and wonder. The new medium, in a way broke the class character of the company theatre and reached even the lower classes.

Till the 60's Kannada amateur theatre had not developed any character of its own. It is true there were good actors here and there. But theatre had almost meant a truthful recitation of the literary work. But in 60's Kannada theatre witnessed two major developments. SriRanga had already attracted the attention of the educated class. With the arrival of B.V.Karanth from the National School of Drama Kannada theatre obtained a new colour. Karanth was a trained man. He created a fresh awareness with regard to the uniqueness of the theatre medium and proved how theatre, as a medium, had its own special features. He made the theatre more flexible but brought to it a new sophistication as well.

Girish Karnad's 'Tughalaq' (1964) is the culmination of modern trends in Kannada Theatre. Girish is one of our most creative personalities. He is familiar with both the Indian and European theatre traditions. He is influenced not only by Albert Camus but also with our own company theatre. He has digested both and has created, perhaps, the greatest work in Modern Indian Drama. I am familiar with the plays of Tagore, Mohan Rakesh, Badal Sircar, Vijay Tendulkar and a few other Indian writers and it is my belief that 'Tughlaq' excels each of the other one. 'Tughlaq' is a rare creation in more than one way. It is an essentially modern work which has also used the techniques of company theatre meaningfully. It probes into a very important stage of Indian history thus acquiring an all India appeal. At the same time it is a very contemporary play interpreting the failures of the Nehru era. The playwright has found a powerful objective correlative interpreting history and the contemporary life thus giving new perspectives to understand both.

"Sankranthi" (P.Lankesh) is the most important Kannada play in the post Tughlaq period. Here too an attempt has been made to understand contemporary realities in a historical setting. At the outset it probes into the conflict of Bijjala (The king) and Basava (The reformist) but one can very well sense that Lankesh has suggestively the ways of Nehru and Gandhi in conflict with each other in the independent India.

Chandrashekhara Kambar is another important Kannada playwright. He has a rich background of the folk tradition. Though Kambar uses folk material he attempts to interpret them in the modern context. He also brings the modern sensibility face to face with the conserved folk values and tries to eke out a third dimension. His success is not uniform but one can still expect something very significant from Kambar. The impact of his dramas on Kannada theatre is also outstanding.

Inspite of these achievements, one has to note, that the achievements of Kannada Drama do not equal the achievements of Kannada poetry and fiction. That the Kannada Drama has also to depend upon Kannada Theatre may be a reason for this. Kannada Drama has consolidated itself even in the Indian context. But Kannada theatre is far behind some of its regional counterparts. Bengal's experimentation, Maharastra's consolidation and Kerala's political out look - are some of the aspects Kannada theatre is yet to achieve. But it is hopeful to note that amateur groups in Karnataka are getting more and more professionally competent. Theatre activities are getting more and more decentralized. This is a very significant development as the process of give and take is set to bring out a new concept of nature and scope of the theatre medium in Karnataka.

Let me conclude with an observation of the developments in Modern Kannada Drama and Theatre in the general context of Indian culture. Kannada culture is very different from other regional cultures. The Bengali culture very easily gives itself to other cultures; it is some sort of 'Abandon' culture. The cultures of Manipur and Kerala are 'conservation' cultures. In Maharashtra one can observe the 'Resistance' culture. But Kannada culture is open both to its tradition and external influence. It certainly has taken new things keeping its own roots very firm. It neither rejects, nor accepts anything completely. Even geographically Karnataka divides the North from South and may be it is inevitable for Karnataka to develop this sort of 'tolerance' culture. But I am also aware that this 'liberal' culture has also developed, may be as a by-product, an element of lethargy.

-The above essay has written by K.V. Subanna, founder of 'Ninasam' and has been translated from Kannada into English by Jaswanth Jadhav.