 |
| A scene from Ningtamningliba Ichel |
On the eve of New Year 2009, Manipuri theatre created a new paradigm with the fresh adaptation and interpretation of Rabindra Nath Tagore’s Muktadhara.
The adaptation, Ningtamningliba Ichel (Longing for Freedom), was presented by Banian Repertory Theatre, Imphal, on the stage of Manipur Dramatic Union during the 26th All Manipur Drama Festival organised by Manipur State Kala Akademi, Imphal, on Wednesday.
Metaphorically, Laimayum Bishwanath Sharma, the translator and adaptor of the play, highlights the socio-political issues of “development” in the context of Manipur.
M.C. Thoiba, the director of the play, gives soul to the adaptation with his unique style. The director represents “dam” as the symbol of “imperial power/the people at the top” and “water” as “the spirit of freedom”.
With high-sounding wor-ds, the play poses big questions like “Whose interest is the development for? Is it for a few individual capitalists?”
The play answers these questions boldly. It delves into the impact of colonialism in our society and also evaluates the quick changes brought about by this impact. For example, the traditional concept of family and the moral principles that once guided collective life have collapsed. The religious ceremonies that defined the value of life have degraded too. The play also reminiscences on Tipaimukh dam, a burning issue in Manipur today. It shows the dominance of military power that brings suffering to innocent villagers. Their resistance and reactions become the tools to express their feelings. The play also exposes social maladies like oppression of women.
At the thematic level, the play shows the lives of the oppressed and the powerless, the poor and the landless, the deprived and the hopeless.
It shows modern civilisation as leading to contradictions within a society. We are living in an era of paradigmatic transition, an era of practical and intellectual project “development” steeped in optimism. Yet, the world is worse off today.
We cannot be blind followers of those who try to baptise people with the assumption that “development is the only way to bring peace in this region”.
It projects that the “development discourse” turns people into objects. It would seem that the model of development, now widely pursued, is part of the problem rather than the solution.
The play adds a new point of view while adapting the original text by adding hypothetical motivation and lending a voice to the silenced and marginalised.
All is well and the play ends well.