1

EDIRIWEERA SARACHCHANDRA’S THEATRE:

A RE-STRUCTURING OF SINHALA FOLK DRAMA

A research paper on Sinhala Theatre

By

Ravindra Ranasinha

2

Ediriweera Sarachchandra’s ‘Stylized Theatre” gained popularity1 as the ‘modern indigenous

theatre’ of Ceylon, at a time the theatergoers were in need of an ‘intellectual theatre’. It

emerged as the pioneer of an ‘indigenous theatre tradition’ encompassing the ‘totality’2 of

drama. Sarachchandra was influenced by a variety of folk theatre devices in forming his stylized

theatre. He was chiefly indebted to the folk drama of Ceylon, India, Japan and China. His study

into folk drama was a result of his dissatisfaction over the theatrical productions3 in the

University College. As the then prevalent theatre4 in Ceylon failed to attract the English

educated bourgeoisie, Sarachchandra and his milieu at the University College endeavored to

change the theatre to a ‘sophisticated art from’ by adapting plays of Gogol, Moliere and

Chekhov. With Prof. E.F.C.Ludowyk’s directions, such plays transformed into hilarious comedies

and since no other theatrical value was visible from them, the modern bourgeoisie gradually

detached themselves from the theatre. Martin Wickramasinghe (1954) who observed this

downfall of theatre said that, “Sinhala drama cannot be revived by laughter alone”. The

emphasis of Wickramsinghe would have caused a great impact on Sarachchandra to effect an

extensive study into folk drama, which could have been the only source in ascertaining the path

to a modern indigenous theatre.

Sarachchandra’s deep research into folk drama was an enormous collection of data, which saw

the publication under the title ‘Sinhalese Folk Play’ (1952). His research had been carried out in

the remote villages, where the folk theatre was extant and pure. According to Sarachchandra

(1995), “the rural folk theatre lacks aestheticism and drama in the modern sense”. It operates

with primitive rituals of exorcism, where an exorcist performs the role of a speaker, who

develops a discourse with the ‘unseen spirits’ to get the sick person relieved under the spell

befell on him or her. The conversation that ensues with the ‘spirits’ is accompanied by dancing,

singing, drumming and ‘horana’5 blowing. He noted in his text (1952) that, ‘Thovil’, ‘Kankariya’

1 In 1956 with the production of the play ‘Maname’. 2 Music, dance, song and acting creates a ‘total theatre’. 3 During the period 1933 to 1954.

4 Jayamanne drama or the Negombo Minerva drama was a kind of social drama that followed Nadagam and Nurthi

traditions in their crude forms. 5 A local flute.

3

and ‘Gam Madu” are the folk rituals that were deeply rooted in the Sinhala rural society. It is to

bring good health and good life that such rituals were practiced by the rural folk, traditionally.

Apart from the folk rituals, Sarachchandra noted some theatricals that could be really

considered as ‘folk drama’. The variety included ‘Sokari’, ‘Nadagam’ and ‘Kolam’ which differ

from each other in the manner of their idiom and presentation. The many theatrical devices

that created the ‘form’ of folk drama drew Sarachchandra’s attention due to their popular

application in attracting audiences. In his text ‘Sinhala Gami Natakaya’, Sarachchandra (1968)

stated that “in Kolam, the vital characteristic was the use of colourful masks by the characters

when dancing. ‘Kavi’ (poetry) and impromptu dialogues were used to relate the story. The

mimetic action of the drama was to ridicule and laugh at the characters portrayed. The mask

and dance which were specifically designed to suit each character enhanced the comic element

as action developed…. In ‘Sokari’, miming was used to tell the story. The leader of the troupe

described a situation through ‘kavi’ and the actors engaged in a mimetic dance to suit the

leader’s description. Sokari was filled with comic incidents that made the audience laugh…. The

style of acting in ‘Kavi Nadagam’ was similar to ‘Kolam’ though the actors in it did not wear

masks. The actors in ‘Kavi Nadagam’ presented their characters when ‘Pothe Gurunnanse’ (the

narrator) finished his introduction to the play through a ‘kaviya’. The story was revealed

through the poetic conversation between characters and should the audience needed

explanation to a particular situation, the narrator intervened. When describing the story,

‘Nadagam’ also made use of some of the Kolam ‘kavi’. It could be that the Kolam performers

had contributed to the evolution of Nadagam by performing without masks and using

dialogues”.

According to Sarachchandra (1958), “there were certain theatrical conventions common to

Sokari, Kolam and Nadagam. The plays were acted in an open arena and scenic changes were

done through the actor’s shifting of the position or by making a reference to a particular place.

The plays were viewed by the spectators, who sat in a semi-circular or a circular, so that the

actors were fully visible. The audience could see the actor acting a particular role and his skill in

performance was what enthralled the spectator. The use of mask, mask-like make-up or

4

stylized costumes and symbolic properties were what the actors had in control, in order to

cause enjoyment among the audience. The thoughts of the characters were expressed through

songs and chants in addition to the words spoken by the actors. When spoken word or the song

did not suffice for the actor to articulate the emotions, he could break into gesticulation or

dance”.

Consequent to this extensive research on folk theatre in Ceylon, Sarachchandra was awarded

with a scholarship6 to study folk drama in foreign lands. “I firstly selected to visit India. That was

at a time my thoughts were on archaic dramatic concepts. I wanted to see the (traditional)

conditions of India”, Sarachchandra (1985) had stated in his autobiography. On his visit, he

ascertained that the genuine Indian theatre had never been a ‘realistic’ one. Bharatha Muni’s

‘Natya Sastra’7 AND OTHER AVAILABLE TEXTS OF Sanskrit drama had testified this conclusion.

Natya Sastra had mentioned of two ‘types’ of drama, ‘Lokadhrami’ – the realistic type and

‘Natyadharmi’ – the stylized type. In the stylized theatre, the place of prose dialogue was taken

over by song or chant. The natural movement was substituted by dance. Instead of facial

expressions, masks or mask-like make-up was employed. The costumes and stage properties

were designed not as in real life but as imaginative creations. According to the descriptions

available in the texts, the Indian theatres had had a protruded portion towards the audience.

There was no evidence to prove of a curtain been used to separate the stage from the

auditorium. A curtain named ‘Janaki’ had been used to separate the ‘green room’8 from the

acting area. The actor showed the change of place either by dancing ambulatorily in a circular

or taking few steps forward. There were no scenic changes to show of the new place arrived. By

way of actor’s speech or gestures, the background was described. The stylized theatre as

described in Natya Sasthra and Sanskrit texts was witnessed by Sarachchandra (1995) when the

Gujarati play ‘Mena Jurjari’ was performed. It was an experimental production based on the

popular folk theatre style ‘Bhavai” in Gujarat. ‘Mena Gurjari’ gave him an insight into how

traditional theatrical devices could be utilized in a modern context.

6 In 1954 he was awarded the Rockerfeller scholarship by Gill Patrick, a representative of the Rockerfeller

foundation. 7 Written in 1 B.C.

8 The place for the performers to change costumes.

5

The subsequent visit to Japan was fruitful for Sarachchandra, as he saw the theater that

Bharatha Muni described, in its living form, through ‘No’ and ‘Kabuki’ drama. Also he had the

opportunity to view some excerpts from Chinese opera, which were staged in Tokyo by a

visiting theatre troupe led by the famous actor Mei Lang Fang. What Sarachchandra observed

from the Chinese Theatre was that the Chinese actors have a specific way of walking according

to the status of the character. There were neither scenic designs nor stage properties in the

acting area. Movements were done gesturally or symbolically. If an actor needed some

property that was provided by a helper, who wore complete black. The No drama too, used

gestures and symbols profusely, as Sarachchandra had noted9. In both Chinese drama and

Japanese ‘No’, the actor comes forward and introduces himself. He explains in detail of what he

is going to do and what direction he takes. The change of place was shown by walking in a

circular or taking few steps forward. In common, these dramas did not use a curtain to separate

the stage from the audience. There was no practice of darkening the stage. Even to show the

time or any other effect, lights were not used. On all three sides of the protruded stage, the

spectators were able to sit. They sat very close to the actors. The Chinese drama used only a

pastoral to depict the background. Instead of a pastoral there was a painted ‘Matsu’ tree as the

background of No stage. These observations made Sarachchandra to develop a notion as to

how the ‘form of Asiatic theatre’ should be.

He then visited United States at a time the scholars in America were searching for a theatre that

could vie with the cinema. Sarachchandra found, the Open stage, Thrust stage, Arena Theatre

and theatre in the Round as some valuable theatrical devices experimented by the American

dramatists. Also he witnessed the subtle manner in which the American dramatists utilize the

techniques of Chinese Opera and Japanese No and Kabuki, in order to recapture the poetry of

the theatre. This kind of theatre was named ‘The Total Theatre’ by the west, which in fact, an

absolute departure from the realistic dialogue play.

Through these experiences Sarachchandra was convinced of the fact that the Asian civilization,

mainly India, China and Japan have a concept of theatre which is completely different to the

9 (1985) pg. 140.

6

concept of theatre in the West. Thus, he states10: “On viewing the Japanese and Chinese drama

I realized that ‘Theatre” should not be imprisoned in the limits of Western proscenium stage.

The Asian theatre’s requirement is an open arena. It is an art of the actor. Therefore between

the actor and audience there need not to have a separation. To generate ‘rasa’ (emotions), not

only dialogues but dramatic songs and music too could be utilized”.

This image of Asiatic theatre, resulted as a global experience, was used in experimenting an

indigenous theatrical tradition in 1956. The only Sinhala dramtic form that Sarachchandra

could compare with Indian, Chinese and Japanese drama was Nadagam, which was stylized and

devoid of Naturalism. For this form he selected the plot of ‘Maname’, a popular tale, the source

of which was a ‘Jathaka Tale’11 named ‘Chulla Danugga Jathaka’. In fact, in Japan

Sarachchandra had viewed the cinematic production of the Japanese tale ‘Roshomon’ by

Riyunosuko Akutagawa, which was more similar to the ‘Maname’ story, and it had inspired him

to transorm ‘Maname’ into a ‘Sindu Nadagam’12.

The traditional tale of ‘Maname’ highlighted the unfaithfulness of the woman and her pathetic

fate due to her erratic behavior. When compared with ‘Rashomon’, the ‘Maname’ story lacked

the complexity needed in characterizing and hence “the incident in the play needed to be built

up in a different manner”13. Therefore, modification to the story was effected to show the

audience of the emotional conflict of the woman who falls into a state of discomfiture in a

patriarchal system, which was, in fact, the universal quality of her. As Mahendra (1973) had

stated, “it was Sarachchandra who firstly experimented and understood that the Sinhala drama

is a subtle medium where traditional tales and folklore could be presented with adaptation and

re-interpretation”. He had further stated14 that “Maname is a reflection of his

(Sarachchandra’s) basic knowledge in tradition and modernity”. Of how Sarachchandra brought

in modernity to ‘Maname’ is still to be discussed.

10 (1985) pg. 142. 11

Jathaka tales are stories of Lord Buddha’s previous births. 12

A nadagam with songs (sindu). 13

(1985) 154. 14 Mahendra, Sunanda (1973).

7

As Subasinghe (1996) had stated, “the dramatic structure of Maname consists of a powerful

text. The introduction of the characters at the beginning, the reasoning from incident to

incident as the story flows, the suspense created to attract the audience and the finale, are all

tied up in one concrete theme”. The arrival of the theme was done through a minor incision in

the original Maname story15. The original tale in the Jathaka story as well as the folk play had

the princess as an unfaithful wife who handed over prince’s sword to the Veddha king to kill her

husband. It brought her own destruction. According to Gunaratne (1999), “Sarachchandra left

matters more complex, obscure and the truth undecided. The queen does not hand over the

sword to the Veddha king in the play. When Maname, having defeated the Veddha king in

combat, asks for the sword to slay him, the queen hesitates for a moment. The prince, shaken

by this hesitation on the part of his wife, loses his grip on the Veddha king who grabs the

opportunity tin turn, snatches the sword from the queen and kills Maname. But after the event,

the queen tells the Veddha king that she saved his life as she fell in love with him when he

fought valorously but the Veddha king shows surprise and says;

“I do not understand you beloved.

I defeated him by my own prowess, not by your aid.

I saw you prepare to give the sword, which he demanded to slay me”.

It is my contention here that, by this one move, Sarachchandra made his play…..modern”. The

psychic condition of princess Maname thus became the crux of the whole play. Firstly, on

seeing the Veddha king she guesses that he may not be frightful even though he looks bold in

appearance. Such manly appearance attracts her very much, since the forest brought fear to

her mind, and “for a moment, (she) feels a sense of security in the Veddha king, which

prompted her hesitation16”. Also Sarachchandra impresses her mind of the greatness of the

Veddha king as a man by getting him to confront Maname alone. Finally, with the death of

Maname, she required protection for which she fell in love with the Veddha king. And she tells

him that she really wanted to give the sword to the Veddha king, which puzzled the Veddha to

15

Gunaratne, Prof. R.D. (1999) pg. 205. 16 ibid.

8

leave her behind in the jungle. By all these psychologizing, Sarachchandra tried to get the

audience to pity the women, who could not arrive at a quick and firm decision with regard to

their love. In fact, “in Maname, the problem is not only that we, the spectators, do not know

the truth. The way Sarachchandra constructs it, the Maname queen herself may not know the

truth…… Her truth could be a truth of contradiction and hence no truth”, says Gunaratne17.

The modernizing was deepened in two levels, should we to clarify, as “modern play revolves

much around psychology. Fear and sex are two of the fundamental forces manipulating the

psyche, and Sarachchandra uses the idea of a woman’s fear and need for security in Maname,

marginally mingling it with the possibility of sexual temptation.

“The story of Maname has compelling room for exploiting contemporary Western psychology

of sex in the development of the character of the queen. The sudctive attraction of robust,

crude, physically powerful breast in the Veddha king, a woman’s yearning for a man who fights

to get her….and so on; but no Lawrencean use of animal prowess for Sarachchandra. The

Jathaka story depicts the infidelity of the queen, and in the circumstances, the suggestion

seems to be the physical attraction the Veddha king had for the queen, so that Sarachchandra

could be have developed that aspect while being faithful to the Jathaka story. But he does not

overplay this aspect, though he does not rule it out for the spectator18.

The language used to present the modified version Maname was poetic and full of imageries,

that relates to the style of language in traditional Nadam. Charles Silva Gunasinghe, who was a

maestro of Nadagam songs and ‘maddal’ playing incessantly worked with Sarachchandra

introducing old Nadagam songs to him that enabled Sarachchandrra to decide on the melodies.

The language selected by him was a mixture of Sinhala, Sanskrit and Pali that reach its height of

poeticism with rhyme and alliteration. The linguistic beauty was enhanced with such techniques

entwining with the heroic sentiment in Nadagam. The singing in Maname was repeated by a

chorus. According to Sarachchandra (1985), “the traditional Nadagam did not contain a well

arranged chorus…. As if in ‘Thovil” ritual, Gurunnanse (Narrator), the drummers and the other

17

ibid. 18 ibid.

9

helpers of Nadagam sat wherever they found space and followed singing”. However, the chorus

in ‘Maname’ sat on either side of the stage to follow singing which reflected a proper organized

form. The crudities of the old traditions were thus removed by Sarachchandra to ensure the

smooth flow of his play.

The ‘natural style’ of make-up for ‘Maname’ was insufficient and therefore to depict the inner

qualities of the characters, make-up styles in the Beijing Opera, Kabuki and Kathakali were

taken as models. The amplification of make-up amounted to ‘Expressionism’ in Sarachchandra’s

theatre. Even the costumes were designed after a study on Indian and Ceylonese sculpture.

Together with these re-structured techniques of old traditions, the style of acting was formed

with rhythmic postures and an ambulatory dance.

The only puzzle left with Sarachchandra in creating the play was, how to form the character of

‘Pothe Guru’ (Narrator), since he had not witnessed any traditional Nadagam. As he19 had

stated, “the knowledge on ‘Pothe Guru’ depended on the descriptions received. It was difficult

to opine that (in traditional Nadagam) the Pothe Guru’s character had an orderly formation….

There was nothing that could be called as ‘acting’ for ‘Pothe Guru’. He had only to come

forward and introduce characters and to present required descriptions as and when needed.

According to the information of old Nadagam, the Pothe Gurunnanse’s duty was confined only

for narration. In Nadagam, he appeared at the beginning of the act and not in between….The

duty fulfilled by the ‘Chorus’ (Narrator) in Greek drama, was what conferred on our ‘Pothe

Guru’. The Narrator in Greek drama detailed the audio-visual action of the play. The ‘Pothe

Gurunnanse’ in Maname accomplished the same duty”. Sarachchandra’s competency in sieving

the important elements of local and foreign folk theatre, as well as of restructuring the

Nadagam theatrical devices, provided the traditional tale of ‘Maname’ with a modern outlook.

When Maname went on board in 1956, the impact of it made both English and Sinhala

newspapers20 to carry ‘rare’ reviews. Especially, Reggie Siriwardane21, who wrote to ‘Daily

News’ gave a superlative praise to the play. He said, “the best thing I had seen on the local

19

(1985) pg. 159. 20

Charles Obesekera, ‘Dinamina’ and Chandraratne Manwasinghe, ‘Lankadeepa’(1956 Nov. 06). 21 An acclaimed theatre critic and writer.

10

stage, and one of the finest things I had seen anywhere”. As had been told by Gunawardane

(1997) who acted as princess ‘Maname’, “the appeal of Manme was not confined to the

sophisticated upper middle class literati of Colombo. It was highly meaningful to the average

person. Everywhere….the response was always warm and enthusiastic. The play cut across

social and cultural barriers”. The modernity that appealed to many in Sarchchandra was his

capability in “the organic expressive fusion of poetry, song, music and dance (Gunawardane

1988)”.

Sarachchandra’s next major Nadagam production was ‘Sinhabahu” (1961), which “made him

the most adequate respondent to the criticism of the inadequacy of the Nadagam form to the

reflection of contemporaneity. ‘Sinhabahu’ was the myth of the origin of the Sinhala race and

was well-known to all classes of Sinhala society. Using it as his medium fused with the

traditional Nadagam style, with, however, a commenting chorus more in the manner of Greek.

Sarachchandra was now speaking of the perennial and universal theme of human relations

bound in the skein of family affections, which shatter inevitably with growth and maturation.

Richly poetic and perceiving complex emotions of his characters with greater depth and

perceptiveness, the play, for a while, silenced the critics by its compelling impact on

audiences”22. ‘Sinhabahu’ was considered as one “of the earliest attempt in modern Asian

theatre to shake off the influence of the Western theatre and to re-discover the theatre of the

roots”23.

A further expedition in the tradition was his highly poetic piece, ‘Pematho Jayathi Soko” (Love

Begets Sorrow – 1961). It is a “complex and subtle dramatic structure, which holds Buddhist

morality and romantic sensibility in delicate tension and exploits the potentialities of an original

dramatic form that may be called ‘geetha natakam’ (lyrical drama), in which melody is

subordinated to meaning, as is done in the Beijing Opera…..”24. Thus, ‘Maname’, ‘Sinhabahu’

and ‘Pematho Jaythi Soko’ revealed “Sarachchandra as the first person to experimentally

understand the Sinhala theatre as a subtle medium, where traditional tales and folklore could

22

Jayawardane, Bandula (1988). 23

Paniker, Ayyappa (1988). 24 Rayan, Krishna (1988).

11

be modified and re-interpreted. He utilized the theatrical devices in traditional folk drama as a

basic strategy. His need was to bestow new interpretations for traditional folk creations.

‘Maname’ expressed his basic knowledge on ‘tradition’ and ‘modernity’. The ‘total theaticla’

presentations, which he was unable to accomplish in ‘Maname’ was achieved in ‘Sinhabahu’.

‘Maname’ was able to add one new meaning to the old tale with dance and music, whereas,

‘Sinhabahu’ generated several meanings and a strong ‘Kavya Rasa’ (poetic sentiment). It was,

not just only a musical play or an opera, but its narration occurred, unlike in a natural play, in a

different expressive manner, creating two levels of presentations”25.

To sum up, the process that Sarchchandra was involved in forming his ‘stylized theater’ as an

‘indigenous theatre tradition’ in Sri Lanka was seen by Gamlath as “the establishment of an

‘intellectual theatre’ in Ceylon, to be noted in the history as a great accomplishment of

Sarachchandra’s odyssey26. Gamlath (1996) uses the word ‘sublation’, for the process that

Sarachchandra was involved, “in sifting the positives from what is extant, dropping the

inappropriate, raising the quality of the selected, also including of new elements that were not

in them and synthesizing them at a higher level”. Such process, for Jayawardane27 was “the

discovery of the essentials of a universal theatre – a multi-diamensional organic form composed

of poetry and music, dance and song and harmony of colour – delving into the depths of basic

human feeling seen with a contemporary eye”. This ‘modernity’ in him had a great impact on

the playwrights during post-Manme period, though none of them could produce a play to the

standards of ‘Maname’ and ‘Sinhabahu’, instead created a great deal of imitations. “…..for most

of these products and their makers seem to have got hardly beyond the surface elements of the

play”28. Even those dramatists29 who understood the Sarachchandra credo of tradition,

experimented in fusing contemporary themes and traditional tales with the ‘Stylized’ mode,

though their plays could not achieve a lasting effect as what ‘Maname’ and ‘Sinhabahu’ have to

the present day.

25 Mahendra, Sunanda (1973). 26

Gamlath, Sucharitha (1989) pg. 26. 27

Jayawardane, Bandula (1988). 28

ibid. 29 Henry Jayasena – ‘Janelaya’ (1961), ‘Kuveni’ (1963) and Dayananda Gunawardane – ‘Pinguttara’ and ‘Nari Bena’.

12

Finally, the immense modifications and restructuring effected to develop an ‘indegenous

theatre tradition’ was the uniqueness of Sarachchandra, of whom Gunawardane (1988) had

said that, “he is ‘eclectic’ in his art and ‘internationalist’ in outlook’ yet his feet are firmly

planted in the rich traditions of his own land. He is a ‘modernist’, who both values and

consistently draws sustenance from the great classical heritage of South Asia”.

The End.

13

Reference List

Sarachchandra, Ediriweera (1995) ‘In search of an indigenous theatrical idiom’ eds.

Galahitiyawa P.B. and Dharmadasa K.N.O. ‘Tradition, Values and Modernization : An Asian

Perspective’, S.Godage & Bros. Col. 10.

Sarachchandra, Ediriweera (1968) ‘Sinhala Gami Narakaya’, Dept. of Cultural Affairs, Colombo.

Sarachchandra, Ediriweera (1958) ‘Maname Natakaya’, Lake House Printers and Publishers Ltd.,

Colombo.

Sarachchandra, Ediriweera (1985) ‘Pin Ethi Sarasavi Varamak Denne’, Sarasavi Book Shop,

Nugegoda.

Gunaratne, Prof.R.D. (1999) ‘Sarachchandra” Philosophy, Perception and Illusion” ed.

Galahitiyawa P.B., ‘The Great Savant of Our Times’, S.Godage & Bros., Colombo 10.

Gamlath, Sucharitha (1989) ‘Sarachchandrabhinandana’ Dayawansa Jayakody & Co., Colombo

10.

Gamlath, Sucharitha (1996) ‘Maname Natya Sevanaya’ S.Godage & Bros., Colombo 10.

Jayawardane, Bandula (1988) ‘Sarachchandra and the contemporary Sinhala Theatre’ eds.

Amarasinghe A.R.B. & Sumanasekara Banda S.J., FESTSCHRIFT 1988, Sri Lanka National

Commission for UNESCO.

Paniker, Ayyappa (1988) ‘Sinhabahu and the theatre of the roots’ eds. Amarasinghe A.R.B. &

Sumanasekara Banda S.J., FESTSCHRIFT 1988, Sri Lanka National Commission for UNESCO.

Rayan, Krishna (1988) ‘The Fruits of Love’, eds. Amarasinghe A.R.B. & Sumanasekara Banda S.J.,

FESTSCHRIFT 1988, Sri Lanka National Commission for UNESCO.

Gunawardana, A.J. (1988) ‘Sinhala Drama & Music’, ed. Sivasambu N., Program for an evening

of music presented in the Nash Room of the Institute of Comtemporary Arts, London, on 8th

October 1988.

Mahendra, Sunanda (1973) A Souvenir for the ‘Sinhabahu’ play.

Sanskruthi – Vol. 2, Wickramasinghe, Martin (1954) ‘Sinahavenma Sinhala Natakaya Diyunu Kala

Heki Nove’.

Dinamina - Subasinghe, Somalatha (1996 Nov. 02) ‘Maname mana ranjitha ve nanditha ve’.

The Island - Gunawardane, Trelicia (1977 Nov. 03) ‘My years with Maname’.

14

Email: ravindraranasinha@yahoo.com

23rd April 2003