Page 280

KAUSALYA SANTHANAM

In concept and grandeur, new Ilangeswaran matched the veteran’s original.

Photo: B. Jothi Ramalingam

SINCERE EFFORT: VNS Manohar Theatre presenting Ilangeswaran.

It was “Ilangeswaran” that changed the fortunes of R.S.Manohar. The portrayal of Ravana transformed the manner in which the villains of myths and legends were depicted. Manohar would have been happy with the enthusiasm of his troupe membe rs in reviving his plays which were marked by grandeur in concept and execution.

V.N.S.Manohar Theatre presented “Ilangeswaran” at the Narada Gana Sabha recently under the auspices of Sri Parthasarathy Swami Sabha and Nataka Academy.

The actor (Shanmugam), in the lead role, had a striking resemblance to the path breaking veteran and played the demon king with conviction and dignity. The theme which projects Ravana in a good light is based on the Ananda Ramayana and depicts Ravana as Sita’s father. It is written by Thuraiyur K. Murthy and this production followed the original

The play begins, as so many mythologicals do, with the scene of Kailas and then moves to Lanka where Ravana is overjoyed to hear that a daughter is born to him and his queen Mandodari. But his joy is shortlived as Brahma informs him that she will prove to be the undoing of his dynasty. The demon king is driven to desperate measures and is persuaded by his sister Surpanaka (Parimala) and brothers Vibhishana (Thirugnanam) and Kumbhakarna (Shankar) to get rid of his baby daughter. Mayavi (Muthukumar), the magician transports her to Mithila.

The play then moves between the repetitive depiction of Ravana pining for his daughter and the events in the life of Sita.

Enormous efforts had been made to create a spectacle and be true to the legacy handed down by the doyen. The sets had been recreated in an authentic way and except for a tree that shakily entered the stage moving on its own like the forests of Dunsinane, the effects had been achieved deftly; silhouettes had been used well. The actors’ enunciation of the dialogue was appreciable. The songs though melodiously rendered by S.N.Surendar gave the feel of a “cine drama.” The portrayal of “Bharata’ (K.R.S.Kumar) appeared to be modelled on that of Sivaji Ganesan in the celluloid epic.

The narration was more in the nature of a telling of the Ramayana. There were hardly any fresh glimpses into the psyche of Ravana or incidents that shaped his character.

The entrances and exits of Mayavi were both amusing and effective — it was hilarious when he once rushed on to the stage with his spectacles on despite being clad in his demoniac outfit complete with horns! One could not fathom the significance of the reminder by a disembodied voice to Sita that all the misfortune in her life had been caused by a woman!
Highly melodramatic

“Vibhishana” was fine but “Kumbhakarna” was highly melodramatic. The aging Surpanaka was most incongruous when she tries to seduce the brothers with her “allure.” Considerable effort had been bestowed on the lights, make up and sets by Nagarajan. But the tinsel costumes smote the eye.

The comic sub-plot featuring two guards and inspired by Shakespearean plays was another relic of the celluloid and stage historicals of the past. The play was too long. Nothing remains static in life and ‘Ilankeswaran’ with meticulous attention paid to sets and production values notwithstanding, was fare to be relished by the viewer who likes a trip in nostalgia, to a time of singing heroes and much sound and thunder.