Humour, Subversion and Voice of a Subaltern: Reading “Truth Vow” as LeitMotif in Habib Tanvir’s Play Charandas Chor

Sweety Ruhel

doi:10.36676/jrps.v15.i2

Authors

Sweety Ruhel Phd. Research Scholar, Department of Indian Theatre Panjab University, Chandigarh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36676/jrps.v15.i2

Keywords:

Humour, Subversion, Truth Vow, Leitmotif, Voice, Indian Theatre

Abstract

In the cultural and sociological context, “Truth” and “Vow” appear as crucial motifs in Indian myths, Vedas, and epics. Truth is believed to be a virtue and a vow is a solemn promise that we make in different social, cultural, political, and religious contexts, and a truth vow combidly becomes a virtuous promise. The most prominent example of a truth vow is used in court cases, where the witness proclaims that “solemnly I vow to speak only and only truth” in Indian law proceedings (no one can assure that it really happens but the court believes it so). Other examples of vowing include marriage communion, religious occasions, and constitutional and self-motivation. One such leitmotif of “Truth Vow” extrapolates the dramatic narrative of the play “Charandas Chor”(1975) written by playwright Habib Tanvir. The truth, as a leitmotif, ferments subversive humour for the spectator and reader of the play. Playwright Tanvir presented truth not only as a virtue but binds it with a vow, thus enlarging it as a characteristic trait of the Protagonist. This leitmotif becomes a subjugating tool and with this, the marginalised character locates his own voice in the end. Therefore, this paper discusses the role of “Truth Vow” as leitmotifs in the play “Charandas Chor” (1975) along with its humour and utterance. The play has previously been read as a social critic, for its folk elements, and its subaltern representation, but here, the aim is to read truth as a voice, which even when suppressed by the hegemonic powers, resists in its disappearance. Here, the method of textual analysis is used to evaluate the play. The text is read to locate instances of the truth and its positioning and to negotiate with masses subverting aspects.

References

Bhatia, N. (Ed.). (2009). Modern Indian Theatre: A Reader. Oxford University Press.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977 (C. Gordon, Ed.; C. Gordon, Trans.). Pantheon Books.

Gray, J. M. (2010). Vows, Oaths, and the Propagation of a Subversive Discourse. The Sixteenth Century Journal, 41(3), 731-756. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/SCJ40997348

Guha, R. (1999). Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India. Duke University Press.

Hansen, K. (1983). Indian Folk Traditions and the Modern Theatre'. Asian Folklore Studies, 42(1), 77-79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1178367

Katyal, A. (2012). Habib Tanvir: Towards an Inclusive Theatre. SAGE Publications.

Malick, J. (2021). Diverse Pursuits: Essays on Drama and Theatre. Taylor & Francis Group. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003191155

Moore, G.E. (1899). The Nature of Judgment. Mind, 8(30), 176-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/VIII.2.176

Paul, J. (Ed.). (September 1989). Contemporay Indian Theatre, Interviews with playwrights and DIrectors (R. Sodhi, Trans.). Sangeet Natak Akademi.

Rusell, B. (1903, 1937). The Principles of Mathematics. Allen and Unwin.

Rusell, B. (1992). Knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description.

Sharma, S. (2023, January 1). Habib Tanvir's theatre — for the people, by the people. The Tribune. https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/features/habib-tanvirs-theatre-%E2%80%94-for-the-people-by-the-people-468437

Tanvīr, H. (2004). Charandas Chor. Vāṇī Prakāśana.

Tell, D., & Agamben, G. (2012). The Sacrament of Language: An Archaeology of the Oath (A. Kotsko, Ed.). Philosophy & Rhetoric, 45(4), 452-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.45.4.0452

To be More Brechtian is to be More Indian. (2008). In Poetics, Plays, and Performances: The Politics of Modern Indian Theatre (pp. 210-228). Oxford University Press.