தினசெய்தி – 23 7 2023
பக்கம் எண் : 4
அருந்தமிழும் அன்றாட வழக்கும் – 171
சுவாமி விபுலானந்தரின் செம்மாந்தத் தமிழாக்கம் !
முனைவர் ஔவை அருள்
தில்லிப் பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் யான் 28 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பு வழங்கிய
முனைவர் பட்ட ஆய்வின் இருபத்தொன்றாம் பகுதி வருமாறு:
That the actors must identify themselves with the role they play is a sentiment strongly emphasized by Shakespeare and Sastriyar. Shakespeare suggests that the actors must avoid two extremes in acting.
They should neither exceed the limits set for acting, nor should they speak more dialogue than is set for them.
However, in contrast, Sastriyar does not say anything on overstepping the limits.
In fact, these were the major defects of the plays staged in the streets.
They were known in Tamil as ‘Therukkoothu’.
Most of the actors were artisans of different types and they tended to tear a passion to tatters.
Sastriyar may have allowed this transgression of the limits set for dialogue by his silence.
As one, who did not believe in caste differences, Sastriyar said that unfortunately the dramatic art and dramatic sense are the prerogative of the elite communities.
Likewise, he grades the characters on a social basis – the king, the merchant and the weaver.
Art is meant for everybody and artistic talents transcend communal barriers.
In spite of some limitations, the book has a unique place in the history of Tamil drama.
Some of his plays were exemplifications of the principles he propounded and at times, he straightaway translated the Shakesperean dialogue, especially in his play “Kalavathi”.
Where Cleopatra’s first meeting with Antony in Act-I, Scene-I, finds an apt parallel.
When Manamohini meets Sayaathungan, the dialogue between them is a verbatim translation of the dialogue between Cleopatra and Antony.
Cleo: If is be love indeed, tell me how much?
Ant: There is beggary in the love that can be reckon’d
Cleo: I will set a bourn how far to be loved.
Ant: Then must thou needs find out new heaven, new earth.
Sastriar’s was a pioneering and his work redefined Tamil drama that had till then remained frozen.
His “Natakaviyal” infused a new breath of life and was a daring integration of three systems of aesthetics that promoted the translations and adaptations of Shakespeare in Tamil.
In this context, one is reminded of G.U.Pope’s remark that Prof. Sundaram Pillai and V.G.Suryanarayana Sastriar are the veritable and modern descent of Saraswathi.
The third great luminary to make an impact in the field of Shakespearean study was Swami Vibulanandha, who took the playwright for a deep analytical study, in a comparative perspective.
He was not interested in translating the complete text of Shakespeare, but as an admirer of Tholkappiar, the father of Tamil grammar, he applied his aesthetic theory to the plays of Shakespeare.
Swamy Vibulanandha translated twelve plays of Shakespeare using verse and prose in order to illustrate what might be called Tholkappiar’s eight-fold theory of emotion (meyppadu).
According to this ancient grammarian cum aesthetician, human feelings are eight in number corresponding to the navarasas.
They are
Nakai (humour),
Azhukai (weeping/crying),
Illivaral (contempt),
Marutkai (wonder),
Acham (fear),
Perumitam (pride),
Sinam (anger) and
Uvakai (joy).
It is these feelings that the translator attempts to identify in Shakespeare’s plays chosen by him.
Swami Vibulanandha’s approach to Shakespeare was analytical, which was entirely different from the academic and theatrical approaches of other writers/authors on Shakespeare.
His translations of chosen passages from the twelve plays of Shakespeare convey different emotional states.
His articles were first serialized and titled “Mathanga Soolamani”.
As a tribute to the depth and dynamism and creative genius of Shakespeare, Swamiji, felt that it was better to call him by another name ‘Jagachirpiyar’, a sculptor who sculpts the universe.
This term not only acknowledges the universality of Shakespeare, but also elevates him to the level of a creator.
The way Swamyji identifies the dominant sentiments of the plays chosen may be illustrated thus:
Love’s Labour Lost:
(Kathal Kaimikka Kavalan Caritai), (Hilarity);
King Lear
(Akularajan Kathai)
(Pathos and Disgust);
Romeo and Juliet
(Ramyan Suseelai Kathai),
(Delight and pity);
Timon of Athens
(Thee Natpu Anchiya Teemon Caritai),
(Wrath and pathos)
the Tempest
(Perumpuyal Caritai),
(Terror and delight);
Macheth
(Magabathi caritai)
(Fear)
the Merchant of Venice
(Vanika Theya Vartaga Caritai)
(Fortitude & gaiety)
Julius Caesar
(Yooliya Caesar Caritai),
(Fortitude and Pride);
Titus Andronicus
(Senatipati Caritai),
(Wrath);
as you like it
(VenirKatai),
(Mirth and Mischief of the
Season);
the winters Tale
(Kootir Katai)
(Mirth & Mischief of the season)
Twelfth Night
(Karutiya Eitiya Kathaiar Caritai), (Hilarity and delight).
The twelve plays chosen are representative of Shakespeare’s plays – comedies and romances – and Swamiji considered them as representative of illustrating human emotions, even though the choice of the play was entirely his own. In using a mixture of prose and verse as his mode of translation, Swamiji preferred verse in places where the passages are rich in poetic excellence and of striking imagery.
– முனைவர் ஔவை அருள்
தொடர்புக்கு
dr.n.arul@gmail.com
Add a Comment