A REPORT OF THE ASIAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE
AND EDUCATION FUND
THE ASIAN AMERICAN VOTE
IN THE 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
By Harish Trivedi
Here is a brief summary of the survey of exit polls conducted by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) that was published last week
The states that were surveyed included NY, NJ, MA, PA, VA, MD, DC, MI, IL, LA, TX, NV
Ohio was not among the states that were survey.
On Election Day, November 4, 2008, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) dispatched 1,500 attorneys, law students and community volunteers to poll sites in 11 states and conducted a nonpartisan multilingual exit poll of 16,665 Asian American voters.
AALDEF’s exit poll was the nation’s largest survey of Asian American voters and covered 113 poll sites in 39 cities. The exit poll was conducted in English and twelve Asian languages. Asian American voters often are overlooked by the mainstream media and by candidates for political office. When the media neglect the Asian American vote, candidates often follow suit. When they do report on the Asian American vote, the data may be skewed because respondents were surveyed only in English.
Multilingual exit polls give a fuller and more accurate portrait of Asian American voters than polls conducted only in English. AALDEF’s exit poll reveals details about the Asian American community including voter preferences on candidates, political parties, language needs, and other issues of vital importance to our community.
Profile of Respondents
The six largest Asian ethnic groups polled in 2008 were Chinese (32%), South Asian (32%), Korean (14%), Southeast Asian (9%), and Filipino (5%). South Asian includes Asian Indians, Bangladeshis, Indo- Caribbeans, Pakistanis, and Sri Lankans. Southeast Asian includes Cambodians, Indonesians, Laotians, Thais, and Vietnamese. Democratic Majority
A clear majority (58%) of Asian Americans were registered Democrats, 26% were not enrolled in any political party, and 13% of Asian Americans were registered Republicans. Party crossover voting heavily favored Democrats. A larger proportion of Asian American Republicans crossed party lines to vote for Obama than did Asian American Democrats voting for McCain. Moreover, the vast majority of Asian Americans not enrolled in a party voted for Obama.
During the presidential election, Asian Americans voted as a bloc for the same candidates and identified common reasons for their votes. Economy/Jobs was the dominant issue influencing the Asian American vote for President (66%) followed by Health Care (40%), Foreign Policy/War in Iraq (31%), Education (27%), and Civil Rights/Immigration Rights (23%).
AALDEF’s exit poll revealed that many Asian Americans, especially those who were limited English proficient, were concerned with losing their homes because of foreclosure.
Language Access
One in five (20%) voters identified English as their native language. In the 2008 elections, 43% of respondents who were limited English proficient preferred to use some form of language assistance to vote.
Voting Barriers
AALDEF poll monitors received more than 800 complaints of voting problems. Asian American voters also faced long lines, a lack of Asian-language assistance, poll books with missing voter names, and machine breakdowns.
On November 4, 2008, AALDEF surveyed 16,665 Asian American voters at 113 poll sites in 39 cities across eleven states - New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, Michigan, Illinois, Louisiana, Texas, and Nevada - and Washington, D.C.
Poll sites with large concentrations of Asian American voters were selected using voter registration files, census data, and interviews with local elections officials and community leaders. Poll sites with a history of voting problems were also selected. Volunteer exit pollsters were stationed at poll sites.
Survey questionnaires were written in twelve Asian languages: Arabic, Bengali, Chinese, Gujarati, Hindi, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Punjabi, Tagalog, Urdu, and Vietnamese, in addition to English. One in four respondents (25%) completed Asian language questionnaires, while 75% completed the English version.
PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
Ethnicity
Survey respondents were Chinese (32%), Asian Indian (15%), Korean (14%), Bangladeshi (8%); the remaining respondents were of other Asian ethnicities and were multiracial or multiethnic Asians.
Language
While 20% of respondents identified English as their native language, 27% identified one or more Chinese dialects as their native language (including Cantonese, Mandarin), 24% spoke one or more South Asian languages (including Hindi, Gujarati, Bengali, Punjabi, Urdu), 12% spoke Korean, 8% spoke one or more Southeast Asian languages (including Vietnamese, Khmer, Lao), 4% spoke Tagalog, 3% spoke Arabic, and 2% identified another Asian language as their native language. Fifteen percent (15%) identified English as their native language. Among Korean voters, 81% selected Korean as their native language, while 18% identified English as their native language. Among South Asian voters, 27% selected Bengali as their native language, 11% selected Gujarati, 11% selected Urdu, 7% selected Hindi, and 5% selected Punjabi. Thirteen percent (13%) of South Asian voters spoke multiple South Asian languages or other South Asian languages, including Tamil, Telegu, Malayalam, and Marathi. Twenty-four percent (24%) identified English as their native language.
Limited English Proficiency
Thirty-five percent (35%) of Asian voters surveyed said they read English less than “very well.” Of all language groups, native Korean-speaking voters exhibited the highest rate of limited English proficiency, with 66% indicating that they have at least some difficulty reading English. In Chicago, Illinois, 81% of native Korean-speaking respondents were limited English proficient. In Boston, Massachusetts, 70% of native Chinese speakers and 54% of native Vietnamese speakers were limited English proficient. In Queens, New York, 58% of native Chinese speakers and 75% of native Korean speakers were limited
English proficient.
Forty-three percent (43%) of all respondents who were limited English proficient reported that they preferred voting with the help of an interpreter or translated voting materials. Groups with significant rates of limited English proficiency also exhibited a high propensity towards the use of an interpreter or translated voting
Thirty-one percent (31%) of native Chinese speakers, 28% of native Khmer speakers, and 27% of native Vietnamese speakers preferred to use some form of language assistance while voting.
Foreign Born
The groups with the highest rates of foreign-born, naturalized citizens were South Asians (87%), Koreans (83%), and Southeast Asians (83%). respondents at 55%, 57%, and 54% respectively.
Korean respondents, had no formal education in the U.S., the highest rate among all Asian ethnic groups surveyed.
First-Time Voting
Thirty-one percent (31%) of all Asian American voters surveyed stated that they voted for the first time in the November 2008 Presidential Elections. Ethnicity %
Indo-Caribbean 90%
Pakistani 88%
Vietnamese 86%
Korean 83%
Asian Indian 82%
All Asian Americans 79%
Chinese 74%
Filipino 74%
Party Affiliation
The majority of Asian Americans surveyed (58%) were registered Democrats, 13% were registered Republicans, and 3% were enrolled in other parties. Twenty-six percent (26%) of all Asian American respondents were not enrolled in any political party. South Asian voters were enrolled in the Democratic Party at higher rates than all other Asian ethnic groups.
Vote for President
THE ASIAN AMERICAN VOTE
AALDEF’s multilingual exit poll revealed that Asian Americans favored Barack Obama over John McCain, 76% to 23%, in the historic election of the nation’s first African American President. First-time voters and South Asian Americans demonstrated even stronger support for Obama. Vote for President by Ethnicity
Generally, Asian Americans demonstrated political unity, even across ethnic lines. With only one exception - Vietnamese American voters - each Asian ethnic group voted as a bloc for Obama. Ninety-three percent (93%) of South Asian American voters supported Barack Obama. In contrast, Vietnamese American voters gave McCain the strongest support of all Asian ethnic groups at 67%. 18-29 years old voted for Obama. In previous presidential elections, South Asian voters have supported the Democratic presidential candidates most strongly of all Asian ethnic groups. In the 2000 presidential elections, 80% of South Asians voted for the Democratic candidate Al Gore.6 In 2004, 90% voted for Democratic candidate Senator John Kerry. With 73% of Chinese Americans and 64% of Korean Americans supporting Obama in 2008, 72% of Chinese voters and 66% of Korean voters supported Senator Kerry in the 2004 elections. In 2000, the majority of Chinese and Korean Americans voted for Al Gore at 79% and 80% respectively.
Vote for President by State
Asian Americans in Michigan, Massachusetts, and New York were among the strongest supporters for Obama, whereas Asian Americans in Louisiana and Texas strongly supported McCain, largely because of the high number of Vietnamese voters surveyed. In states where Asian American voters supported Obama over McCain, Obama led with double-digit margins.
In comparison to the 2004 presidential elections, Asian Americans voted for the Democratic presidential candidate over the Republican candidate at nearly identical rates. For example, in New York, 74% of Asian Americans voted for Senator Kerry and 23% voted for President Bush in the 2004 Elections. Four years earlier, 68% of Asian Americans voted for Kerry and 30% voted for Bush.
First-Time Voting
First-time voters favored Barack Obama by a significant margin. Eighty-one percent of first-time Asian American voters supported Obama and 18% voted for McCain. In contrast, 69% of first-time voters voted for Obama, and 30% voted for McCain in the overall electorate.8 Similarly, in the 2004 Presidential Elections, 78% of Asian Americans who were voting for the first time supported Senator Kerry compared to 53% of all first-time voters.
Asian American Vote for President
Seventeen percent (17%) of Asian Americans registered as Republicans voted for Barack Obama, whereas only 7% of Asian Americans registered as Democrats voted for John McCain.
Asian Americans crossed over and voted at similar rates in 2004. Seven percent (7%) of Asian Democrats voted for George Bush and 18% of Asian Republicans for John Kerry.
The Vote by Age
Younger Asian Americans voted for Barack Obama by much greater margins than older Asian Americans. Among 18-29 year olds, 88% voted for Obama and 11% for McCain. Obama’s support was greatest among native-born Asian American voters, with 87% voting for Obama. Native-born Asian Americans were only 21% of all respondents, while foreign-born Asian Americans were 79% of those polled. Seventy-three percent (73%) of foreign-born Asian Americans supported Obama. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of Asian American respondents who voted for McCain were naturalized in the U.S. Over half (54%) of McCain’s supporters immigrated to the U.S. more than ten years ago.
As voters’ citizenship tenure lengthened, support for Obama decreased. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of Asian American respondents who voted for McCain were
Asian American
Limited English Proficiency
Obama’s support was greatest among fully English proficient Asian American voters, with 82% of voters who read English “very well” voting for Obama and 17% for McCain. Among Asian Americans who voted for Obama, 72% read English very well, whereas just over a quarter
(28%) of his supporters were limited English proficient. In contrast, over half (51%) of Asian Americans who supported McCain were limited English proficient.
Vote for Congress
AALDEF’s exit poll was conducted in 45 congressional districts. Overall, Asian Americans overwhelmingly voted for Democratic congressional candidates over Republican candidates in the November 2008 General Elections. Thirty of the 45 congressional districts surveyed showed the majority of Asian Americans supporting Democratic congressional candidates. Of the congressional races covered, 21 candidates were elected with the majority support of Asian Americans. Summary of the Asian American Vote
AALDEF’s exit poll data shows that younger, U.S.-born, more recently naturalized, and English proficient Asian American citizens voted for Barack Obama for President by wide margins. The three most important issues influencing Asian Americans in their vote for President were Economy/Jobs (66%), Health Care (40%), and Foreign Policy/War in Iraq (31%). Economy/Jobs was the top choice for all Asian ethnic groups surveyed. Most Asian ethnic groups identified Health Care as the second most important factor influencing their vote for President.
Health Care
Overall, Asian American respondents who were limited English proficient were more worried about foreclosure than those who were not limited English proficient.
Language Assistance
Asian Americans identified English as their native language; 35% said that they were limited English proficient.
Over a quarter (26%) of Chinese and Southeast Asian respondents and 21% of Korean respondents prefer voting with an interpreter or translated materials. Certain jurisdictions in AALDEF’s exit poll are required by Section 203 to provide Asian language assistance - such as translated ballots, instructions, and other voting materials as well as interpreters - at poll sites. Other jurisdictions in Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania voluntarily provide language assistance, most often in the form of interpreters at selected poll sites for particular Asian language minority voters. Furthermore, 43% of native Chinese speakers in Brooklyn preferred to vote with language assistance. In Boston, Massachusetts, almost half (49%) of native Chinese speakers surveyed preferred voting with language assistance. In Philadelphia, almost two-thirds (63%) of native Chinese speakers are LEP with 41% preferring to vote with language assistance. In Annandale, Virginia, Korean Americans exhibited the highest level of LEP voters (78%) based on native language and surveyed locality. In Cook County Illinois, 43% of voters whose native language was Korean preferred voting with language assistance. The Asian American population has surged throughout the United States. Greater outreach is needed, especially to limited English proficient and older Asian American voters. Moreover, Asian Americans have encountered many voting barriers. AALDEF’s exit poll shows that Asian Americans strongly supported President Obama in the 2008 Elections. Moreover, Asian Americans expect the new administration to address issues regarding Economy/Jobs, Health Care, and Foreign Policy/War in Iraq, which Asian Americans overall agree are the most significant issues. It is also clear from AALDEF’s exit poll that many congressional representatives received strong support from their Asian American constituents.
(Source: Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund Report of the exit poll survey)
Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund99 Hudson Street • 12th floor • New York • New York 10013-2815
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Statehood for Palestine, Israel and pro Paliestine U.S. Lobby
I received the following appeal by email and am sharing with you all for your information. I will be happy to post other views on the subject too.
- Harish Trivedi
_______________________________________________________
Take Action to Free the Spirit of Humanity's Passengers and Crew AND
Important July 9th Anniversaries
Today we planned to tell you about the upcoming July 9th anniversaries of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling against Israel's apartheid wall and the Unified Palestinian Call for boycott, divestment and sanctions and how we plan to mark these anniversaries, but we want to draw your attention to an important development in Israel/Palestine. Today the Israeli navy attacked and kidnapped the passengers and crew of the Free Gaza boat, The Spirit of Humanity, including US Campaign Advisory Board member Huwaida Arraf.
The Free Gaza Movement, which has organized several humanitarian deliveries to the Port of Gaza via their fleet of Cypriot boats, had one ship, the Dignity, rammed by the Israeli navy in December. Now, the Spirit of Humanity is being towed to Israel, where the crew and passengers expect to be handed over to the Israeli border patrol. Take action to have these humanitarian aid workers released.
The July 9th anniversaries are even more important in light of the capture of the Spirit of Humanity. The ICJ ruling makes clear that Palestinians do have rights to their land and to freedom from life in the sort of open-air prison that the Gaza strip has become. While Free Gaza boats represent a form of direct engagement to support human rights in Palestinian territory, boycott and divestment act as the other side of the coin, nonviolently pressuring Israel to live up to its responsibilities under international law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Action
Click here to send an email to the Israeli Prime Minister's office, the Israeli Defense Ministry, the Israeli Ambassador to the United States, and your Members of Congress demanding that The Spirit of Humanity's passengers and crew are released!
You can also use our website to find out how to get involved in July 9th activities in your area. Click here to take action for boycott and divestment online. Click here to learn more about how you can get the global boycott and divestment movement into the media. Click here to find out about July 9th events in your area or click here to find out how to join the US Campaign at our two Washington, D.C. anniversary events.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn More
You can learn more about the Spirit of Humanity's saga by following the Free Gaza Movement on Twitter or by visiting their website, here.
Israel's kidnapping of international humanitarian workers in international waters is exactly the kind of state failure to abide by international law that the Palestinian Unified Call intends to end. Boycott and divestment actions offer a nonviolent, direct tactic for citizens to pressure offensive governments and stand in solidarity with those whose rights are being violated.
We urge all of our member groups and individual supporters to plan or participate in a local action marking the July 9th anniversaries. Click here to find out about events in your area. For more information on the anniversaries of the ICJ ruling against Israel's apartheid wall and the Unified Palestinian Call for boycott and divestment please visit our July 9th Day of Action web section by clicking here. Start following us on Twitter or join our Facebook group now to take part in our July 9th online actions! Our Twitter and Facebook actions are both part of a campaign to educate the public about boycott and divestment and to call Caterpillar and Motorola to account for their support of Israel's military occupation and apartheid practices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support Ongoing Work to End the Occupation
Please support our ongoing work to end U.S. support for Israel's siege of Gaza and occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem! Our boycott and divestment programs are a direct response to the Palestinian Unified Call and offer a nonviolent solution for advocates around the world to end Israel's unjust military occupation and apartheid practices targeting Palestinians. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation in support of our boycott and divestment work today.
US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation
- Harish Trivedi
_______________________________________________________
Take Action to Free the Spirit of Humanity's Passengers and Crew AND
Important July 9th Anniversaries
Today we planned to tell you about the upcoming July 9th anniversaries of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling against Israel's apartheid wall and the Unified Palestinian Call for boycott, divestment and sanctions and how we plan to mark these anniversaries, but we want to draw your attention to an important development in Israel/Palestine. Today the Israeli navy attacked and kidnapped the passengers and crew of the Free Gaza boat, The Spirit of Humanity, including US Campaign Advisory Board member Huwaida Arraf.
The Free Gaza Movement, which has organized several humanitarian deliveries to the Port of Gaza via their fleet of Cypriot boats, had one ship, the Dignity, rammed by the Israeli navy in December. Now, the Spirit of Humanity is being towed to Israel, where the crew and passengers expect to be handed over to the Israeli border patrol. Take action to have these humanitarian aid workers released.
The July 9th anniversaries are even more important in light of the capture of the Spirit of Humanity. The ICJ ruling makes clear that Palestinians do have rights to their land and to freedom from life in the sort of open-air prison that the Gaza strip has become. While Free Gaza boats represent a form of direct engagement to support human rights in Palestinian territory, boycott and divestment act as the other side of the coin, nonviolently pressuring Israel to live up to its responsibilities under international law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Action
Click here to send an email to the Israeli Prime Minister's office, the Israeli Defense Ministry, the Israeli Ambassador to the United States, and your Members of Congress demanding that The Spirit of Humanity's passengers and crew are released!
You can also use our website to find out how to get involved in July 9th activities in your area. Click here to take action for boycott and divestment online. Click here to learn more about how you can get the global boycott and divestment movement into the media. Click here to find out about July 9th events in your area or click here to find out how to join the US Campaign at our two Washington, D.C. anniversary events.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn More
You can learn more about the Spirit of Humanity's saga by following the Free Gaza Movement on Twitter or by visiting their website, here.
Israel's kidnapping of international humanitarian workers in international waters is exactly the kind of state failure to abide by international law that the Palestinian Unified Call intends to end. Boycott and divestment actions offer a nonviolent, direct tactic for citizens to pressure offensive governments and stand in solidarity with those whose rights are being violated.
We urge all of our member groups and individual supporters to plan or participate in a local action marking the July 9th anniversaries. Click here to find out about events in your area. For more information on the anniversaries of the ICJ ruling against Israel's apartheid wall and the Unified Palestinian Call for boycott and divestment please visit our July 9th Day of Action web section by clicking here. Start following us on Twitter or join our Facebook group now to take part in our July 9th online actions! Our Twitter and Facebook actions are both part of a campaign to educate the public about boycott and divestment and to call Caterpillar and Motorola to account for their support of Israel's military occupation and apartheid practices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support Ongoing Work to End the Occupation
Please support our ongoing work to end U.S. support for Israel's siege of Gaza and occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem! Our boycott and divestment programs are a direct response to the Palestinian Unified Call and offer a nonviolent solution for advocates around the world to end Israel's unjust military occupation and apartheid practices targeting Palestinians. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation in support of our boycott and divestment work today.
US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation
Comments and Feed-back from friends and visitors, June 30, 2009
Responses and comments:
Harish:
I visited your blog! It is good! It is difficult to read all articles with black backdrop! Otherwise, this can be a better vehicle (than email) for broadcasting your creativity!
On a personal note, you are too tough on Mr. Baradi (or for that matter his translator)! Fewer examples of errors give a gist of what you are conveying! Not that what you are saying is wrong!
- Gaurang
___________________________
Harishbhai,
Your blog is just amazing... and it is exhaustively detailed. Excellent!
I am proud to have you has a friend and a well-wisher.
God Bless you!
Soli Kapadia
(Mumbai,India)
_____________________________
Harishbhai
Your review of Baradi's book is as detailed and powerful as our Ghanshyambhai's review of Jagdish Dave's book - it appeared in one of the recent issues of the ‘Opinion’, which you might have read.
The trouble with our writers is that many get away with gross errors as no one else is prepared to expose them. It's too much work to check the accuracy of someone else's work. And most people believe what they see in print.
Has your review gone anywhere else?
I have been brought up in East Africa and have no idea of the Gujarati theatre world mentioned in your review. But I can see how much your blood is boiling with such mediocre production of a topic much close to your heart.
Regards.
Bhadra (Vadgama)
___________________________________________
I think it's great because you do not need to depend on anyone to update info, etc. on a site.
Great job.
Jän (Ostondorf, Dayton, Ohio
_____________________________________________
Fabulous concept, great design. Writing is a bit heavy I feel...
Good job. I hope they take notice.
Regards
Madhu Rye Thaker
(New Jersey)
__________
HI Harish,
Your blog is very impressive. I like the colour scheme that is eye-catching. You have included comments/reviews related to Exi-stance and also your review the book on Gujarati Theatre. As a former theatre activist, I found both pieces extremely informative and useful. In fact I remember having read them both thru your e-mail.
I will interested in response or feedback you receive from others. Blogging is becoming an important medium of communication and I always wonder whether it serves the purpose.
Cheers!
Navin (Parekh), Bangalore, India.
Harish:
I visited your blog! It is good! It is difficult to read all articles with black backdrop! Otherwise, this can be a better vehicle (than email) for broadcasting your creativity!
On a personal note, you are too tough on Mr. Baradi (or for that matter his translator)! Fewer examples of errors give a gist of what you are conveying! Not that what you are saying is wrong!
- Gaurang
___________________________
Harishbhai,
Your blog is just amazing... and it is exhaustively detailed. Excellent!
I am proud to have you has a friend and a well-wisher.
God Bless you!
Soli Kapadia
(Mumbai,India)
_____________________________
Harishbhai
Your review of Baradi's book is as detailed and powerful as our Ghanshyambhai's review of Jagdish Dave's book - it appeared in one of the recent issues of the ‘Opinion’, which you might have read.
The trouble with our writers is that many get away with gross errors as no one else is prepared to expose them. It's too much work to check the accuracy of someone else's work. And most people believe what they see in print.
Has your review gone anywhere else?
I have been brought up in East Africa and have no idea of the Gujarati theatre world mentioned in your review. But I can see how much your blood is boiling with such mediocre production of a topic much close to your heart.
Regards.
Bhadra (Vadgama)
___________________________________________
I think it's great because you do not need to depend on anyone to update info, etc. on a site.
Great job.
Jän (Ostondorf, Dayton, Ohio
_____________________________________________
Fabulous concept, great design. Writing is a bit heavy I feel...
Good job. I hope they take notice.
Regards
Madhu Rye Thaker
(New Jersey)
__________
HI Harish,
Your blog is very impressive. I like the colour scheme that is eye-catching. You have included comments/reviews related to Exi-stance and also your review the book on Gujarati Theatre. As a former theatre activist, I found both pieces extremely informative and useful. In fact I remember having read them both thru your e-mail.
I will interested in response or feedback you receive from others. Blogging is becoming an important medium of communication and I always wonder whether it serves the purpose.
Cheers!
Navin (Parekh), Bangalore, India.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Respect for Copyrights or intellectual property
Here's a note from a newsletter I received from my friend Garry Garrison of Dramatists Guild of America:
'Please keep in mind that one person may not publish another person’s material, whether in print, on the web, or in any other format, without the author’s permission. Simply put, the publication of any part of an author’s work is among the “bundle of rights” enjoyed by authors as owners of their copyright. Such infringements—irrespective of advertising—are punishable by up to $150,000 in statutory damages per infringement. In our view, arguments about “educational use” or “fair use” are misapplied, in this context'.
When will some of our writers, editors, actors, producers, instructors who teach theatre arts, the so called runners of various academies, self-styled historians and other kinds of specialists - learn to honor copyrighted work and respect intellectual copyrights? Why has it become such a common practice of translating American or Western plays, novels, short stories, poems without any compunction? Why the Gujarati literary establishment ignores such travesty? Sure, this is a rhetorical question. We all know why this is happening. One reason is the fact that no one cares and no one has any respect for authours or poets rights.
A balnkate roon-swikar of my predecessors is a disingeneous way to justify plagiarism.
May be this is one of the issues that needs to be raised or heard at various diasporic and non-diasporic Gujarati Sammelans, Adhiveshans, Parisamvads and Parishads frequently hosted in big cities like New York, Philadelphia and Washington DC or in London or in Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Mumbai and other enclaves in India.
'Please keep in mind that one person may not publish another person’s material, whether in print, on the web, or in any other format, without the author’s permission. Simply put, the publication of any part of an author’s work is among the “bundle of rights” enjoyed by authors as owners of their copyright. Such infringements—irrespective of advertising—are punishable by up to $150,000 in statutory damages per infringement. In our view, arguments about “educational use” or “fair use” are misapplied, in this context'.
When will some of our writers, editors, actors, producers, instructors who teach theatre arts, the so called runners of various academies, self-styled historians and other kinds of specialists - learn to honor copyrighted work and respect intellectual copyrights? Why has it become such a common practice of translating American or Western plays, novels, short stories, poems without any compunction? Why the Gujarati literary establishment ignores such travesty? Sure, this is a rhetorical question. We all know why this is happening. One reason is the fact that no one cares and no one has any respect for authours or poets rights.
A balnkate roon-swikar of my predecessors is a disingeneous way to justify plagiarism.
May be this is one of the issues that needs to be raised or heard at various diasporic and non-diasporic Gujarati Sammelans, Adhiveshans, Parisamvads and Parishads frequently hosted in big cities like New York, Philadelphia and Washington DC or in London or in Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Mumbai and other enclaves in India.
Profile
Harish Trivedi, - a naturlazed U.S. Citizen - immigrated to the United States in mid 1960s to work on his doctorate in Theatre and Communication with minors in Public Broadcasting, Television and Films. Harish holds master’s degree in Economics and Political Science. He has academic qualifications, degrees and diplomas in Law, Library Science, Management, Information Management. Harish got his training in theatre at the Institute of Dramatic Arts (affiliated with theatre group Rangabhoomi) in Bombay.
Journalism & Theatre:
Harish started his careere in journalism and worked at Janmbabhoomi publications and later at the Times of India in Bombay prior to his departure to the United States.
In Dayton, Ohio, for over twenty-years Harish worked first at the Journal Herald and later at the Dayton Daily News.
His articles and book reviews have appeared in the Times of India, the Journal Herald and Dayton Daily News. His writings in Gujrati have also appeared in magazines and newspapers in India and in the United States.
He has written about theatre, films and humor articles for Sandesh and other Gujrati publications. His most controversial effort was a parody of the much reveared and iconic magazine KUMAR in the annual publication AAVAZ that was Edited by Jayanti Patel. The parody was called KUMBHAR (meaning - a potter.
While in India Harish wrote plays that were produced by Rangbhoomi in Bombay. Two of the most memorable, note worthy and successful plays were Kanchan Bhayo Katheer (with Prof. Vishnukumar Vyas, Upendra Trivedi, Jayanti Patel and Tarla Mehta and directed by Prof. Vyas) and Darpan(with Krishnakant Vasavda, Surendra Shah, Veena Prabhu and Leelaben Jariwala. It was directed by Honey Chhaya) –both the plays were free adaptations from an Amercan and a British play respectively.
During his college years in Bombay (now Mumbai) he participated in inter-collegiate drama competetion along with Navin Parekh, Varsha Acharya (now Adalja), Meghnad Desai (Now Lord Meghnad), Madhukar Shah, Ramesh Shah and many other talented artists and stage managers. He adapted Ibsen’s Dolls House in Gujarati with Meghnad Desai. The Gujarati version Dhingali Ghar was staged at the centennial of the Bombay University as well as at the Indian National Theatre sponsored full-length play competition. In that play he also played the part of Dr. Atul (Dr. Rank in the original). The play was directed by Tarak Mehta. Legendary actor Herbert Marshall who was then with the Natya Sangha, Bombay (a purcursor of the National School of Drama) was one of the distinguished members of the audience and after the play came backstage and complemented the artists.
While in college, Harish also hosted Drama Festivals for over five years for the Dadar Gujarati Seva Samaj. Jayanti Patel, Upendra Trivedi, Kishore Bhatt, Surendra Shah, Arvind Joshi, Shailesh Dave, Varsha Acharya, Tarla Mehta, Vishnukumar Vyas, Lilabahen Jariwala and many prominent stage actors of the time participated in those drama festivals.
Between 1955 and 1967 Harish also directed and acted in many one-act plays that were staged all around Bombay.
Harish Trivedi’s throughly revised and re-written version of Vajubhai Tank’s literal translation of Pirandello’s Six Characters In Search of An Author titled Takhto Bolechhe (in Gujrati) won prizes for production, acting and set-design at the Maharashtra State Drama competition. Lead roles were played by Krishnakant Vasavda, Veena Prabhu (daughter of Dr. D. G. Vyas), Maneesha Patel, Vinod Vora, Niranjan Shah and then very young Darshan Jariwala. The play was directed by Honey Chhaya and the set design was by Chhel Vaida and Paresh Daru.
During early 1960s he wrote a monthly feature for the All India Radio, Bombay.
In the United States –
While at Michigan State University working on his doctorate in Theatre and Communication, Harish translated five Gujarati folk plays called Bhavai Veshas scenes. The translation was later published with the title Five Indian Folk Plays by the Michigan State University and Writers’ Workshop. The plays were edited by Dr. Farley Richmond and Dr. Tevia Abrams. One play or Vesha – Vaniano Vesh was produced for the local educational television – with all non-Indian student cast from the Department of Theatre at the university.
Harish established the India Foundation to promote India and Indian culture in the United States in 1986. He has been the Chairman and Founder Trustee of that organization for nearly a quarter of a century. During this time he has curated ten festivals of films from India, presented many plays, Indian classical dance and music festival and exhibition of photographs and paintings by Indian artists as well as eminent photographers from the United States. The State govenors, senators, congressmen and Consul Generals and Ambassadors of India to the United States have graced many a events sponsored by the India Foundation.
World renown artists, actors, directors, musicians and dancers such as Mohan Agashe, Satish Alekar, Dilip Chitre, Ismail Merchant, Mallika Sarabhai, the Jhaveri Sisters, Rabindra Atibudhi, Veena Devi, Sonal Mansingh, Pandit V. G. Jog, Shaffatullah Khan, Pandit Vijay Kichalu, Ajoy Chakrobaty, Zakir Hussai, Allah Rakha, Sultan Khan and the list could go on and on…
Scholars on India and from India and journalists such as Dr. Ram Joshi, Harindra Dave, Umashankar Joshi, Dr. Ramesh Shukla, Kumar Ketkar, Jayraj Salgaonkar, Dr. Maneesha Tikekar, Dr. Pramod K. Nayar, Niranjan Bhagat, Surendra Sharma and many more also visited Dayton and shared their knowledge and expertise with the community members as well as with college and university students and faculty members.
In 1988 in collaboration with Middfest International and the India Foundation Harish published the very first anthology of poems by expat Indians from the U.S.A and Canada titled Poetry:India. It was the very first anthology that included poems in multiple languages of India. The poems in this anthology were printed in the original Indian language with an English translation of the same along side of it. Poetry:India included Gujrati poems by Adil Mansuri, Indra Shah, Preeti Sen Gupta, Chandrakant Shah and many others as well as poems in Marathi, Bengali, Telugu and other languages.
His recent theatre work includes the memorable biopic Narmad – Maari Hakikat and its English version Narmad – My Life, Hindi version of Pirandelo’s Six Characters In Search of An Author with Dr. Shail Gowda, Mark Twain In India, An Evening with Mary Carpenter, Echoes, Exit-stance, An Evening with Dorothy Parker and Bharati. Echoes, Bharati and the Dorothy Parker are awaiting production. His Amrit Keshav Nayak – a long one-act play in Gujarti was published early in 2007 by the Asait Sahitya Sabha, Mehsana, (Gujrat) India. Narmad – Maari Hakikat (the production script) has been published by Kala Gurjari, Mumbai. Harish also published (with the permission of Mr. Gulabdas Broker) a re-edited and expanded version of Narmad’s biography in English that was originally written by Gulabdas Broker and was published by Sahitya Academi, India in the early 1960s and now out of print. The publication was made possible by the India Foundation in Dayton, Ohio with a grant from the local arts funding agency.
Exit-stance was selected for performances during the Cincinnati Fringe Festival between May 28th and June 8th 2008.
Harish is a member of the Dramatists Guild of America. The Dramatists Guild is the professional association of American playwrights.
Awards and Honors:
Recipient of two Community Service Awards presented by the India Club of Greater Dayton,
Two awards by Special Libraries Association, News Division,
Honored twice by Ohio Civil Rights Commission and Civil Rights Commission, Dayton, Ohio.
Racial Rainbow ‘Yes We Can Spirit’ Award, May 7, 2009
Talks and Workshops:
Harish has talked extensively about India, Indian Literature, Hinduism – a hisotric perspective, Indian Theatre, Gujarati Theatre, India – yesterday, today and tomorrow, Asian Indians in the United States, India – Information for Coroporate Chiefs and those working with their Indian couterparts in India, and staged reading of his play Exit-stance.
Harish is a naturalized citizen of United States and has been resident of the United States for over four- decades. He lives with his wife Sharonjee and two cats – Baboo and Raja - in Dayton, Ohio.
Contact: The India Foundation, 895 Kentshire Dr. Dayton, Ohio 45459-2327 U.S.A. email: harisht895@sbcglobal.net).
Journalism & Theatre:
Harish started his careere in journalism and worked at Janmbabhoomi publications and later at the Times of India in Bombay prior to his departure to the United States.
In Dayton, Ohio, for over twenty-years Harish worked first at the Journal Herald and later at the Dayton Daily News.
His articles and book reviews have appeared in the Times of India, the Journal Herald and Dayton Daily News. His writings in Gujrati have also appeared in magazines and newspapers in India and in the United States.
He has written about theatre, films and humor articles for Sandesh and other Gujrati publications. His most controversial effort was a parody of the much reveared and iconic magazine KUMAR in the annual publication AAVAZ that was Edited by Jayanti Patel. The parody was called KUMBHAR (meaning - a potter.
While in India Harish wrote plays that were produced by Rangbhoomi in Bombay. Two of the most memorable, note worthy and successful plays were Kanchan Bhayo Katheer (with Prof. Vishnukumar Vyas, Upendra Trivedi, Jayanti Patel and Tarla Mehta and directed by Prof. Vyas) and Darpan(with Krishnakant Vasavda, Surendra Shah, Veena Prabhu and Leelaben Jariwala. It was directed by Honey Chhaya) –both the plays were free adaptations from an Amercan and a British play respectively.
During his college years in Bombay (now Mumbai) he participated in inter-collegiate drama competetion along with Navin Parekh, Varsha Acharya (now Adalja), Meghnad Desai (Now Lord Meghnad), Madhukar Shah, Ramesh Shah and many other talented artists and stage managers. He adapted Ibsen’s Dolls House in Gujarati with Meghnad Desai. The Gujarati version Dhingali Ghar was staged at the centennial of the Bombay University as well as at the Indian National Theatre sponsored full-length play competition. In that play he also played the part of Dr. Atul (Dr. Rank in the original). The play was directed by Tarak Mehta. Legendary actor Herbert Marshall who was then with the Natya Sangha, Bombay (a purcursor of the National School of Drama) was one of the distinguished members of the audience and after the play came backstage and complemented the artists.
While in college, Harish also hosted Drama Festivals for over five years for the Dadar Gujarati Seva Samaj. Jayanti Patel, Upendra Trivedi, Kishore Bhatt, Surendra Shah, Arvind Joshi, Shailesh Dave, Varsha Acharya, Tarla Mehta, Vishnukumar Vyas, Lilabahen Jariwala and many prominent stage actors of the time participated in those drama festivals.
Between 1955 and 1967 Harish also directed and acted in many one-act plays that were staged all around Bombay.
Harish Trivedi’s throughly revised and re-written version of Vajubhai Tank’s literal translation of Pirandello’s Six Characters In Search of An Author titled Takhto Bolechhe (in Gujrati) won prizes for production, acting and set-design at the Maharashtra State Drama competition. Lead roles were played by Krishnakant Vasavda, Veena Prabhu (daughter of Dr. D. G. Vyas), Maneesha Patel, Vinod Vora, Niranjan Shah and then very young Darshan Jariwala. The play was directed by Honey Chhaya and the set design was by Chhel Vaida and Paresh Daru.
During early 1960s he wrote a monthly feature for the All India Radio, Bombay.
In the United States –
While at Michigan State University working on his doctorate in Theatre and Communication, Harish translated five Gujarati folk plays called Bhavai Veshas scenes. The translation was later published with the title Five Indian Folk Plays by the Michigan State University and Writers’ Workshop. The plays were edited by Dr. Farley Richmond and Dr. Tevia Abrams. One play or Vesha – Vaniano Vesh was produced for the local educational television – with all non-Indian student cast from the Department of Theatre at the university.
Harish established the India Foundation to promote India and Indian culture in the United States in 1986. He has been the Chairman and Founder Trustee of that organization for nearly a quarter of a century. During this time he has curated ten festivals of films from India, presented many plays, Indian classical dance and music festival and exhibition of photographs and paintings by Indian artists as well as eminent photographers from the United States. The State govenors, senators, congressmen and Consul Generals and Ambassadors of India to the United States have graced many a events sponsored by the India Foundation.
World renown artists, actors, directors, musicians and dancers such as Mohan Agashe, Satish Alekar, Dilip Chitre, Ismail Merchant, Mallika Sarabhai, the Jhaveri Sisters, Rabindra Atibudhi, Veena Devi, Sonal Mansingh, Pandit V. G. Jog, Shaffatullah Khan, Pandit Vijay Kichalu, Ajoy Chakrobaty, Zakir Hussai, Allah Rakha, Sultan Khan and the list could go on and on…
Scholars on India and from India and journalists such as Dr. Ram Joshi, Harindra Dave, Umashankar Joshi, Dr. Ramesh Shukla, Kumar Ketkar, Jayraj Salgaonkar, Dr. Maneesha Tikekar, Dr. Pramod K. Nayar, Niranjan Bhagat, Surendra Sharma and many more also visited Dayton and shared their knowledge and expertise with the community members as well as with college and university students and faculty members.
In 1988 in collaboration with Middfest International and the India Foundation Harish published the very first anthology of poems by expat Indians from the U.S.A and Canada titled Poetry:India. It was the very first anthology that included poems in multiple languages of India. The poems in this anthology were printed in the original Indian language with an English translation of the same along side of it. Poetry:India included Gujrati poems by Adil Mansuri, Indra Shah, Preeti Sen Gupta, Chandrakant Shah and many others as well as poems in Marathi, Bengali, Telugu and other languages.
His recent theatre work includes the memorable biopic Narmad – Maari Hakikat and its English version Narmad – My Life, Hindi version of Pirandelo’s Six Characters In Search of An Author with Dr. Shail Gowda, Mark Twain In India, An Evening with Mary Carpenter, Echoes, Exit-stance, An Evening with Dorothy Parker and Bharati. Echoes, Bharati and the Dorothy Parker are awaiting production. His Amrit Keshav Nayak – a long one-act play in Gujarti was published early in 2007 by the Asait Sahitya Sabha, Mehsana, (Gujrat) India. Narmad – Maari Hakikat (the production script) has been published by Kala Gurjari, Mumbai. Harish also published (with the permission of Mr. Gulabdas Broker) a re-edited and expanded version of Narmad’s biography in English that was originally written by Gulabdas Broker and was published by Sahitya Academi, India in the early 1960s and now out of print. The publication was made possible by the India Foundation in Dayton, Ohio with a grant from the local arts funding agency.
Exit-stance was selected for performances during the Cincinnati Fringe Festival between May 28th and June 8th 2008.
Harish is a member of the Dramatists Guild of America. The Dramatists Guild is the professional association of American playwrights.
Awards and Honors:
Recipient of two Community Service Awards presented by the India Club of Greater Dayton,
Two awards by Special Libraries Association, News Division,
Honored twice by Ohio Civil Rights Commission and Civil Rights Commission, Dayton, Ohio.
Racial Rainbow ‘Yes We Can Spirit’ Award, May 7, 2009
Talks and Workshops:
Harish has talked extensively about India, Indian Literature, Hinduism – a hisotric perspective, Indian Theatre, Gujarati Theatre, India – yesterday, today and tomorrow, Asian Indians in the United States, India – Information for Coroporate Chiefs and those working with their Indian couterparts in India, and staged reading of his play Exit-stance.
Harish is a naturalized citizen of United States and has been resident of the United States for over four- decades. He lives with his wife Sharonjee and two cats – Baboo and Raja - in Dayton, Ohio.
Contact: The India Foundation, 895 Kentshire Dr. Dayton, Ohio 45459-2327 U.S.A. email: harisht895@sbcglobal.net).
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Exit-stance: Observations and Comments
Excerpts from comments …
"Exit Stance" is a remarkable play about aging. An old man, called only OM, born in India, who has lived most of his life in the US, now spends his final days in a nursing home that provides him with assisted living that dehumanizes him as it prolongs his life. The play is a one-man tour de force of anger and frustration relieved by passages of poetic beauty. Important is the OM’s universality… He is a kind of everyman ranting about the injustices of life, His ethnic identity fixes the play in reality, but the specific Indian identification of OM transcends mere individual concerns. His sense of rootlessness, his living between languages, his sense of belonging to no land and to no culture, his loneliness relieved only by a few memories and snippets of poetry recalled from the classical literature of his youth place OM in one of the grand traditions of literature represented best by Beckett. OM maintains his dignity with irony and humor as he confronts his end. His disquieted suffering and his methods of coping provide a bitter hope to all who face the last stage of existence.
Bob
(Dr. Robert Conrad, Professor of German language and literature, University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio)
*****
The staging was effective the actor (Mohan Dali) did a wonderful characterization of Old Man.
I loved the shadow of light from the mirror on the floor. That had the touch of genius in the staging. Also I loved the screen effects and especially the large wide screen and the smoke.
...This play is complex, but it does grow on you and the play does have direction, ... It becomes more and more intimate, and then finally explodes in OM's going totally zonko and imagining that they are coming for him (death?) and then his cat (his Deva? God) comes to him and he throws him away and then finally gets into his bed terrified, only to wake up, (where?) Back here or in "heaven?"
My colleague Robert Conard, who came with me, thoroughly enjoyed the play, as you can figure out from his participation in the dialogue of the discussion session.
I believe this would do better in NYC or Chicago where the F and P and SH words and other four-letter words are common occurrence in their daily life.
From another note from Prof. Enrique Romaguera…
(In retrospect) the F word and others vulgarities are not bad, for they become a statement of who the character is and how frustrated he is to be losing his abilities.
...In my French-training mentality this is a comedy. A darkish comedy but still a comedy with a fanciful tweak. …I loved the ending with the Voices and the Cat. And the constant irruption of Indian melodies from films and of American voices also. This accents the fact that this play really takes place more in his mind than in this senior-care home.
There are very tender moments and some horribly frightening (to him) moments.
Again, I think that your staging of the production was very effective!
I sincerely hope that some time in the future Mohan (Dali) can do this play, or if not him, some other actor.
Again, I think that your staging of the production was very effective!
Jai Bhagwan! (Glory to the God )!
Narad, (Enrique Romaguera)
Professor Emeritus of Languages, University of Dayton
*****
I was able to visualize the production but the main impact was what the lead character says …his feelings and deterioration are powerful.
(The) quote "a crude, depressing and dark comedy-an existential angst form a foul-mouthed frustrated curmudgeon," certainly covers the play. But the actual content seems of a higher nature than the description. The (Old Man) is wrestling with significant issues and raging about them in intellectual and angry ways that I think will hit many people in audience right between the eyes...
Ralph
(Ralph Langer, former Editor/Publisher Dallas Morning News)
*****
The Old Man is caught in an endless loop of figuring out the ultimate questions about life and death.... I also enjoyed the sampling of songs and the deft mingling of Indian and American viewpoints...
Alpana Sharma, Associate Professor, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio
*****
I found the recreation of the claustrophobic conditions very good. I (found Exit-stance) as a series of spaces - the space of the (quoted) poetry, the space of literature, of the self and finally of the home all turned in on them.
The neurosis-paranoia was indeed frightening …
… I see the point of this 'unreal' setting as being the character's very real reality (if I am making sense at all). I enjoyed … it for the extreme claustrophobia, which I mentioned above - powerful and scary, redeeming (he has not lost his humor or his literature)…
Pramod
(Dr. Pramod K. Nayar, Dept. of English, University of Hydrabad, Hyderabad, India)
*****
… I so enjoyed working with you and want to thank you for
giving my students a chance to experience some theatre of a different
variety than they are used to. I really thought the play was challenging,
thought provoking, and honest. The show's existential nature is certainly
a clear tribute to Beckett. Great work!
I hope we can work together again in the near future!
Margie Strader,
Drama teacher and Theatre Manager, Northmont High School, Clayton, Ohio
*****
It was my pleasure! My wife and I enjoyed it (Exit-stance) very much, and we spent much of the rest of the day talking about it. Certainly, parts of the story are hard for us to imagine, having both been born and raised in the US. Important, though, for us to consider those issues. And the universality of the story struck me, too, and I thought you conveyed that extremely well. We all sometimes feel removed from our environment and we're always struggling to understand why.
(People who could not attend the opening of the play) …missed a fascinating program.
Again, congratulations!
John (Harris) Executive Director, Cityfolk – a reputed cultural organization in Dayton.
*****
The community is very proud of the fact that the India Foundation has enriched our lives ever since its inception many years ago. You have done a tremendous job in bringing to Dayton a variety of plays, dances and the music concerts for our enjoyment. It takes a tremendous amount of time and effort to organize these events and you have done this for many---many years. The Exit-stance was such an effort and you have again done a great job in writing, producing and presenting the play on Saturday.
Congratulation!!!
Kailash Mehta
(Trustee, the India Foundation, and a former President, the India Club of Dayton)
*****
…Our community is enriched because of the programs
like "Exit-stance". Alok
(Alok Khare, a Trustee of the India Foundation, former President of the India Club of Greater Dayton)
*****
Congratulations on the successful opening of your play. Chand and I want to express our appreciation for your and Sharon's efforts to bring quality "events" to our lives. The community is indeed the beneficiary of the hard work and efforts of you two.
We enjoyed getting to know Mohan Dali (the lead actor in the play).
Rajiv & Chand
(Rajiv and Chand Verma, a long time patrons of the India Foundation).
*****
Great show. It was clear you put much of your time and heart into the production of Exit-stance and it showed. Very well done!
Mark
(Mark Taylor is a Chairman of the Centerville Arts Commission and is in real estate business…)
*****
The show was very insightful, and well produced. I'm glad I was there to see it.
AUTHOR! AUTHOR!Congrats on a wonderful production.
Suzi
(Suzi Fischer is a member of the Centerville Arts Commission and is a voice and piano teacher)
*****
You have done excellent job, it takes lot of efforts and courage and just and immense zeal to work,
I think response was good. Everybody who attended enjoyed the play.
Keep it up.
Chaitanya & Purnima
(Chaitanya Kadakia is one of the permanent Trustees of the India Foundation, former President of the Gujarati Samaj and former Trustee of the Hindu Community Organization.)
*****
"Exit Stance" is a remarkable play about aging. An old man, called only OM, born in India, who has lived most of his life in the US, now spends his final days in a nursing home that provides him with assisted living that dehumanizes him as it prolongs his life. The play is a one-man tour de force of anger and frustration relieved by passages of poetic beauty. Important is the OM’s universality… He is a kind of everyman ranting about the injustices of life, His ethnic identity fixes the play in reality, but the specific Indian identification of OM transcends mere individual concerns. His sense of rootlessness, his living between languages, his sense of belonging to no land and to no culture, his loneliness relieved only by a few memories and snippets of poetry recalled from the classical literature of his youth place OM in one of the grand traditions of literature represented best by Beckett. OM maintains his dignity with irony and humor as he confronts his end. His disquieted suffering and his methods of coping provide a bitter hope to all who face the last stage of existence.
Bob
(Dr. Robert Conrad, Professor of German language and literature, University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio)
*****
The staging was effective the actor (Mohan Dali) did a wonderful characterization of Old Man.
I loved the shadow of light from the mirror on the floor. That had the touch of genius in the staging. Also I loved the screen effects and especially the large wide screen and the smoke.
...This play is complex, but it does grow on you and the play does have direction, ... It becomes more and more intimate, and then finally explodes in OM's going totally zonko and imagining that they are coming for him (death?) and then his cat (his Deva? God) comes to him and he throws him away and then finally gets into his bed terrified, only to wake up, (where?) Back here or in "heaven?"
My colleague Robert Conard, who came with me, thoroughly enjoyed the play, as you can figure out from his participation in the dialogue of the discussion session.
I believe this would do better in NYC or Chicago where the F and P and SH words and other four-letter words are common occurrence in their daily life.
From another note from Prof. Enrique Romaguera…
(In retrospect) the F word and others vulgarities are not bad, for they become a statement of who the character is and how frustrated he is to be losing his abilities.
...In my French-training mentality this is a comedy. A darkish comedy but still a comedy with a fanciful tweak. …I loved the ending with the Voices and the Cat. And the constant irruption of Indian melodies from films and of American voices also. This accents the fact that this play really takes place more in his mind than in this senior-care home.
There are very tender moments and some horribly frightening (to him) moments.
Again, I think that your staging of the production was very effective!
I sincerely hope that some time in the future Mohan (Dali) can do this play, or if not him, some other actor.
Again, I think that your staging of the production was very effective!
Jai Bhagwan! (Glory to the God )!
Narad, (Enrique Romaguera)
Professor Emeritus of Languages, University of Dayton
*****
I was able to visualize the production but the main impact was what the lead character says …his feelings and deterioration are powerful.
(The) quote "a crude, depressing and dark comedy-an existential angst form a foul-mouthed frustrated curmudgeon," certainly covers the play. But the actual content seems of a higher nature than the description. The (Old Man) is wrestling with significant issues and raging about them in intellectual and angry ways that I think will hit many people in audience right between the eyes...
Ralph
(Ralph Langer, former Editor/Publisher Dallas Morning News)
*****
The Old Man is caught in an endless loop of figuring out the ultimate questions about life and death.... I also enjoyed the sampling of songs and the deft mingling of Indian and American viewpoints...
Alpana Sharma, Associate Professor, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio
*****
I found the recreation of the claustrophobic conditions very good. I (found Exit-stance) as a series of spaces - the space of the (quoted) poetry, the space of literature, of the self and finally of the home all turned in on them.
The neurosis-paranoia was indeed frightening …
… I see the point of this 'unreal' setting as being the character's very real reality (if I am making sense at all). I enjoyed … it for the extreme claustrophobia, which I mentioned above - powerful and scary, redeeming (he has not lost his humor or his literature)…
Pramod
(Dr. Pramod K. Nayar, Dept. of English, University of Hydrabad, Hyderabad, India)
*****
… I so enjoyed working with you and want to thank you for
giving my students a chance to experience some theatre of a different
variety than they are used to. I really thought the play was challenging,
thought provoking, and honest. The show's existential nature is certainly
a clear tribute to Beckett. Great work!
I hope we can work together again in the near future!
Margie Strader,
Drama teacher and Theatre Manager, Northmont High School, Clayton, Ohio
*****
It was my pleasure! My wife and I enjoyed it (Exit-stance) very much, and we spent much of the rest of the day talking about it. Certainly, parts of the story are hard for us to imagine, having both been born and raised in the US. Important, though, for us to consider those issues. And the universality of the story struck me, too, and I thought you conveyed that extremely well. We all sometimes feel removed from our environment and we're always struggling to understand why.
(People who could not attend the opening of the play) …missed a fascinating program.
Again, congratulations!
John (Harris) Executive Director, Cityfolk – a reputed cultural organization in Dayton.
*****
The community is very proud of the fact that the India Foundation has enriched our lives ever since its inception many years ago. You have done a tremendous job in bringing to Dayton a variety of plays, dances and the music concerts for our enjoyment. It takes a tremendous amount of time and effort to organize these events and you have done this for many---many years. The Exit-stance was such an effort and you have again done a great job in writing, producing and presenting the play on Saturday.
Congratulation!!!
Kailash Mehta
(Trustee, the India Foundation, and a former President, the India Club of Dayton)
*****
…Our community is enriched because of the programs
like "Exit-stance". Alok
(Alok Khare, a Trustee of the India Foundation, former President of the India Club of Greater Dayton)
*****
Congratulations on the successful opening of your play. Chand and I want to express our appreciation for your and Sharon's efforts to bring quality "events" to our lives. The community is indeed the beneficiary of the hard work and efforts of you two.
We enjoyed getting to know Mohan Dali (the lead actor in the play).
Rajiv & Chand
(Rajiv and Chand Verma, a long time patrons of the India Foundation).
*****
Great show. It was clear you put much of your time and heart into the production of Exit-stance and it showed. Very well done!
Mark
(Mark Taylor is a Chairman of the Centerville Arts Commission and is in real estate business…)
*****
The show was very insightful, and well produced. I'm glad I was there to see it.
AUTHOR! AUTHOR!Congrats on a wonderful production.
Suzi
(Suzi Fischer is a member of the Centerville Arts Commission and is a voice and piano teacher)
*****
You have done excellent job, it takes lot of efforts and courage and just and immense zeal to work,
I think response was good. Everybody who attended enjoyed the play.
Keep it up.
Chaitanya & Purnima
(Chaitanya Kadakia is one of the permanent Trustees of the India Foundation, former President of the Gujarati Samaj and former Trustee of the Hindu Community Organization.)
*****
Exit-stance: A one-character play about an immigrant Indian living in the United States
Exit-stance is a story of an Indian immigrant who is in his 90s and living in a nursing home in this country. He has not visited India in some six-decades. He rambles on about his living in a nursing home, life, death, identity, loneliness, his many phobias and pet peeves. “A dark... comedy of existential angst about a crude, foulmouthed and frustrated curmudgeon. Profane, profound, poetic, humorous and heartbreaking and most importantly provocative!”
It is a remarkable play about aging. An old man, born in India, who has lived most of his life in the US, now spends his final days in a nursing home that provides him with assisted living that dehumanizes him as it prolongs his life. Important is the central character's universality. His sense of rootlessness...his loneliness relieved only by a few memories and snippets of poetry recalled from the classical literature of his youth places him in one of the grand traditions of literature represented best by Beckett.
The central character’s reflection on immigrants in the U.S. and how they carry their past with them and the issue of the two cultures is very insightful...The character is wrestling with significant issues and raging about them in intellectual and angry ways that …will hit many people in audience right between the eyes... The play is complex, but it does grow and as it progresses it becomes more and more intimate, and then finally explodes.
It is humorous and heartbreaking. It is a one-man tour de force of anger and frustration relieved by passages of poetic beauty and humor. One can call it a darkish comedy but still a comedy with a fanciful tweak.
First performed on April 14, 2007 at Northmont High School Auditorium, Clayton, Ohio with Mohan Dali in the lead role.
Exit-stance was selected for performances during the Cincinnati Fringe Festival between May 28th and June 8th 2008. The lead role was performed by Dr. Raghawa Gowda.
It is a remarkable play about aging. An old man, born in India, who has lived most of his life in the US, now spends his final days in a nursing home that provides him with assisted living that dehumanizes him as it prolongs his life. Important is the central character's universality. His sense of rootlessness...his loneliness relieved only by a few memories and snippets of poetry recalled from the classical literature of his youth places him in one of the grand traditions of literature represented best by Beckett.
The central character’s reflection on immigrants in the U.S. and how they carry their past with them and the issue of the two cultures is very insightful...The character is wrestling with significant issues and raging about them in intellectual and angry ways that …will hit many people in audience right between the eyes... The play is complex, but it does grow and as it progresses it becomes more and more intimate, and then finally explodes.
It is humorous and heartbreaking. It is a one-man tour de force of anger and frustration relieved by passages of poetic beauty and humor. One can call it a darkish comedy but still a comedy with a fanciful tweak.
First performed on April 14, 2007 at Northmont High School Auditorium, Clayton, Ohio with Mohan Dali in the lead role.
Exit-stance was selected for performances during the Cincinnati Fringe Festival between May 28th and June 8th 2008. The lead role was performed by Dr. Raghawa Gowda.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
History of Gujarati Theatre by Hasmukh Baradi and Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre, Editor, Dr. Ananda Lal - A Critical Review
Critical review of Gujarati Thiyetarano Itihasa (in Gujarati language) or the History of Gujarati Theatre by Hasmukh Baradi and Oxford Companion to India Theatre, Edited by Ananda Lal, Oxford University Press, India.
By Harish Trivedi
© 2008.
All Rights Reserved
(Reproduction or storage or copying in any form in whole or any part of these reviews without written permission of the writer is prohibited).
Gujarati Thiyetarano Itihasa
By Hasamukha Baradi
Published: Navi Dilli, Nesanala Buka Trasta, 1997.
ISBN: 8123719957,
English translation: Vinod Meghani
History of Gujarati Theatre
By Hasmukh Baradi
Published: 2002 (Paperback - April 2004)
Published by National Book Trust, New Delhi,
And
Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre
Editor: Ananda Lal
Oxford University Press, Printed in India 2004
One of the contributors on Gujarati Theatre in this Oxord Companion … is Mr. Hasmukh Baradi. His contributions bear his initials HB.
Out of sheer curiosity I read through Mr. Baradi’s work on the history of Gujarati theatre and found there to my surprise similar mistakes that I have enumerated in my observations about his articles in the Natak Budreti (Special Issue, that I now call Part I)
I am much troubled by the errors of fact, incomplete information and blatant omissions in the English and Gujarati versions of Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre.
Mr. Hasmukh Baradi’s contributions to the most reputable, no - venerable work such as the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre too is replete with incomplete information and omissions.
First about the History of Gujarati Theatre:
Mr. Baradi’s distaste or aversion for providing sources or citations for information he presents as history is evident in his History of Gujarati Theatre. (The original Gujarati version of the same appeared in 1997).
Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre does not include any specific citations about the sources for the information gathered by him except a general statement, ‘…I express my sincere thanks to…my predecessors of being helpful in providing matter for this compilation… ‘
Well, this history is indeed a compilation and like the Natak Budreti issue (March 2007), this History of Gujarati Theatre is full of errors and questionable English translation.
Although Mr. Baradi has provided a general list of sources and reference books at the end of his version of history. But no specific source is given for his assertions.
My concern about the lack of sourcing or citation is related to the issue of scholarship, particularly for the benefit of present and future students of the history of Gujarati drama and scholars who may want to conduct further research on the subject.
According to various guide lines on the subject of research and writing and writing styles, citations and sourcing are essential in order to 1) provide useful information and to avoid the claims of plagiarism, 2) to show that a particular portion or whole writing is not original research, 3) to ensure that the content of articles is credible and can be checked by any reader or editor, 4) to help the readers find additional reliable information on the topic, and 5) to improve the overall credibility and authoritative character of the work – a magazine article or a book of history or for that matter a book on any subject. And finally citations and sourcing is necessary to reduce the likelihood of editorial disputes or to resolve any that arise.
As the sourcing or citation for information presented in the History of Gujarati Theatre is completely absent there is no way for a reader to verify any statement in this history for its accuracy. In other words there is no way to know what is fact, opinion or mere conjecture presented as fact by our historian Mr. Hasmukh Baradi.
In-text citations that refer readers to a list of works cited. (For example the list of reference books at the end of the above named history book). There are no in-text citations in Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre.
Mr. Baradi’s listing of reference books at the end of the history of Gujarati theatre is meaningless.
(Please refer to a detailed note about citations, sourcing and plagiarism at the end of this review on page 55)*
Here are a few and randomly selected examples of errors, misstatements, erroneous headings or questionable English translation:
Note: All page numbers below refer to History of Gujarati Theatre by Hasmukh Baradi, English Translation by Vinod Meghani.
In this history on – page 20 - Mr. Baradi has described Mr. Jaggannath Shankar Sheth as a Gujarati entrepreneur.
He (Mr. Baradi) has made a similar conjecture about Anil Mehta - page 214 - as he has done in that Special Issue of Natak Budreti (March 2007).
This is Mr. Baradi’s version of History of Gujarati Theatre! Some book of history of Gujarati theatre indeed!
Greenroom Techniques (on page 176). Mr. Baradi describes production techniques as Greenroom Techniques.
Any one with a rudimentary knowledge of theatre terms would know that, a greenroom is a place where an actor or actress rests, changes costumes or waits for his/her next entry. There are no production techniques inside the greenrooms across India or around the world.
Creation of an illusion of an aerodrome or showing of sailing ships (the translator has used the term enactment) and other such stage effects cannot be and should not be called greenroom techniques.
B) On page 167 this gem appears:
In 1963 Pravin Joshi ‘produced the first play, Mogra-na Sap. For acting as well as direction, in Mogra-na Sap inclusive, he claimed four awards. Also in 1963, he begged six awards in the (Mumbai) State Drama Competition for a play Shyam Gulal.
Pravin Joshi’s first directorial venture after joining INT was Kumar Asambhavam, a Gujarati version of Ravindranath Tagore’s Chirkumar Sabha.
A young actress named Varsha Acharya had a leading role in that play. For novices, Varsha Acharya is none other than Varsha Adalja a respected novelist and a winner of Ranjitram Suvarna Chandrak and many other awards and honors.
Secondly, Pravin Joshi did not beg for six awards. I am sure the translator meant bagged.
C) On the same page (167) we come across another nugget –
‘He (meaning Pravin Joshi) rendered for Gujarati theatre the adaptation of Pygmalion by Bernard Shaw’. This is only partially true, INT’s Santu Rangilee was based more on My Fair Lady – a musical version of Shaw’s Pygmalion. The credit for the Gujarati version/adaptation goes to Madhu Rye, one of the mold-breaking writers in Gujarati theatre during the last five decades and who has been recipient of many accolades, awards and honors for his contribution to the Gujarati theatre and literature...(shockingly this does not find room in Mr. Baradi's so-called History of Gujarati Theatre)
D) On page 168 we come across this paragraph:
Under the stewardship of Damu Jhaveri, who provided actor-director Pravin Joshi with all that absolute freedom and encouraged his experimental plays like Bharelo Agni (Ramanlal Desai), Sona Vatakadi (Chandravadan Mehta) and Jesal Toral (Jitubhai Mehta)…
Nothing can be farther from truth. Mansukh Joshi directed Jesal Toral and it starred Urmila Bhatt and Pratap Oza among many others. Bharelo Agni was adapted for stage by Madhukar Randeria and was directed by Ramesh Jamindar and Madhukar Randeria.
Pravin Joshi was in no way near when Sona Vatakadi was staged by the INT at Ranga Bhavan and Pravin Joshi did not direct it as Mr. Baradi has asserted in his History of Gujarati Theatre.
The lighting for all these productions was designed by Ramesh Jamindar and was marvelously executed by Gautam Joshi while Mansukh Joshi and Vijay Kapadia designed the sets. In Jesal Toral Mansukh Joshi most effectively and imaginatively used two revolving stages. And one more thing: Naran Mistry DID NOT design sets for Bharelo Agni as claimed by Mr. Hasmukh Baradi.
The story about how Mr. Damu Jhaveri recruited Pravin Joshi for INT as narrated by our historian Mr. Hasmukh Baradi is wrong too.
Here is what happened:
Krishnakant Shah, during the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan sponsored inter-collegiate one-act play competitions proved himself as an actor with great potential, particularly through his performances in the play Bhagna Mandir and Station Master.
Krishnakant was invited by Damu Jhaveri to direct and act in Prabodh Joshi’s full-length play Kadam Milake Chalo under the INT banner. The play was very successful. But after its good run when Mr. Krishnakant Shah decided to move to the United States for studies and pursue his dramatic interests, Damubhai (Mr. Damu Jhaveri) invited Pravin Joshi to take up the role in Kadam Milake Chalo. This was an entry point for Pravin Joshi and a beginning of his long, historic and very rewarding theatre career.
During the years 1954, 1955 and 1956, (the same decade of 1950s of the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan’s inter-collegiate drama competitions) Pravin Joshi acted in three plays starting with Number 209 (in 1954). Prabodh Joshi wrote it and if I am not mistaken Kanti Madia had directed it.
It is worth noting that the decade of 1950s with the start of the Bhavan’s Inter-collegiate one-act play competitions is also the decade when Krishnakant Shah, Pravin Joshi, Kanti Madia, Kishore Bhatt, Jayant Vyas, D. S. Mehta – Dhirubhai, Navin Parekh, Vijay Bhatt, Satyadev Dubey, Varsha Acharya (Adalja), Chitra Bhatt, Bharati Sheth, Panna Modi, Amrit Patel, Upendra Trivedi, Pradyumna Badheka (now a political activist and a lawyer) appeared on stage and later emerged as notable theatre personalities, some theatre careers lasting as long as five decades or more. – And the above list is not all-inclusive.
Back to Pravin Joshi:
In 1955 Pravin performed in Vandrano Panjo – a Gujarati version of W. W. Jacob’s short story and later a play titled Monkey’s Paw and in 1956 Pravin performed in Najuk Sawari, which was written by Tarak Mehta.
The Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan’s very demanding and tough audience stopped the performance of No. 209 within the first ten minutes of its start. Pravin’s performance in Vandrano Panjo was a moderate success. Vandrano Panjo was performed at least two or three other times during the decade of 1950s. But it was the fast paced comedy called Najuk Sawari (with Ashwin Jani) that helped Pravin Joshi to fully exploit his comedic talent. The rest is history as they say.
Some may question the labeling of Vandrano Panjo or Monkey’s Paw as a comedy. Curious or purists should read the published script of either versions of the play. Mr. Baradi has described Pravin Joshi’s performance in Vandrano Panjo as a comedic performance. (Although Mr. Baradi has not provided any source for this piece of information)
Prabodh Joshi has written in detail about the inter-collegiate competitions and Amar Jariwala and Prof. Vishnukumar Vyas have written a series of articles on their respective associations with the theatre group Rangabhoomi. The back issues of Mumbai Samachar and other contemporary papers’ archives would be a valuable source for further research on this subject.
Many of the veterans of that era are leaving us one by one and it is a matter of time when no one with memories of that period of theatre history would be available for historic research and nostalgic conversation. Mr. Nirjanjan Mehta, a journalist, writer and a public relations expert is still around and active in Mumbai. He has recently started a series in a leading Gujarati journal where in he reminisces about that era.
E) Mr. Baradi has named various actors who worked with Pravin Joshi but he has completely ignored the names of stalwarts of his ensemble cast such as D. S. Mehta or Dhirubhai as he was popularly known, the great comic talent Kishore Bhatt and Hansu Mehta. Hari Jariwala (With screen name Sanjeev Kumar he appeared in many movies). Hari Jariwala had a lead role in INT’s Koino Ladakvayo a Gujarati version of Arthur Miller’s All My Sons. This Gujarati version was based on a Hindustani version of the same and Pravin Joshi had directed Koino Ladakvayo.
A young actress by the name of Varsha Acharya (now Adalja – a successful novelist, a playwright and winner of various literary awards and honors including the coveted Ranjitram Suvarna Chandrak) had also acted in many memorable plays and won numerous acting honors, including at the inter-collegiate full-length drama competition that was sponsored by the INT. She had also acted in the Maharshtra and Gujarat State Drama Competition (not Mumbai State or Bombay State as Mr. Baradi refers to these competitions in his history) for her acting in Allabeli (written by her father Shri Gunvantrai Acharya) and Purnima (a stage adaptation of R. V. Desai’s novel by the same name by Prof. Vishnukumar Vyas). She won acting honors for her acting in Panchme Pagathiye – the original Gujarati version of Frederick Knot’s Dial M for Murder.
It is worth noting that the script of Panchme Pagathiye was with INT as it was the sponsor of the competition. Meghnad Desai, now Lord Desai, had done the skillful Gujarati adaptation of that play. It is easy to guess as to where the inspiration for Mograna Sap came from. Incidentally Dhirubhai or Mr. D. S. Mehta was given credit for the adaptation of Mograna Sap from the Frederick Knot’s play. Varsha Adalja’s last major theatrical role was in Rangabhoomi’s Jehr To Pidha Che Jani Jani with Upendra Trivedi. In later shows, Surendra Shah performed Upendra Trivedi’s role.
The name of Varsha Acharya or Varsha Adalja and her luminescent theatre career does not find any space in Mr. Baradi’s history. For that matter the Dave brothers from Bombay - Bharat Dave, Sailesh Dave and Hari Jariwala (prior to his transition in to films with a screen name Sanjeev Kumar) and contributions of such pioneering writers/translators as Babubhai Bukhanwala and Dhansukhlal Mehta too are absent or have been dismissed with a cursory note or two by our historian Hamukh Baradi.
Just for comparison it should be noted that there are over twenty entries under the name Baradi, Hasmukh in the index to the History of Gujarati Theatre.
Incidentally, when Mr. K. M. Munshi wrote Gujarat and Its Literature he had asked Mr. L. J. S. Taraporevala to write about him (K. M. Munshi). Commenting about this Mr. Taraporevala noted, “ It was an unexpected honor to be asked to write about Munshi in the present work. Obviously it would have been bad taste for a writer- anybody except, perhaps, Bernard Shaw – to write at length about himself…. And when he asked me to write about him, I undertook to do so with great pleasure…’- (Chapter V, page 324, Gujarat And Its Literature, First Edition 1935).
F) On page 169 there is a paragraph devoted to Nila Theatres and its founder Jagdish Shah where Mr. Baradi states that ‘ in Pattani Jod by Prabodh Joshi, Jagdish Shah, ‘…then only eighteen, had played the role of the aged grandfather’. Let’s just say that Jagdish Shah was not eighteen at that time (ask Mr. Niranjan Mehta or Tarak Mehta who were involved in many of the productions of the Nila Theatres and were associates of Mr. Jagdish Shah at his newspaper…The name of Jagdish Shah’s theatre group was Show People before it became Nila Theatres.
Another sentence on the same page 169, ‘With Tarak actress wife Gira then founded Nila Theatres’. What should a reader who is not familiar with Gujarati theatre make of this line? Was Gira, Tarak Mehta’s wife? No she was not… she was married to Jagdish Shah. This kind of carelessness and ignorance should not be accepted in any writing and certainly not in the History of Gujarati Theatre.
Adi Marzban:
Mr. Adi Marzban, the icon of Parsi/Gujarati and English theatre in the post independent India is very tardily described in this book of history.
A well-known and well-publicized joke narrated by Adi Marzban is presented as a true story by Mr. Baradi and the joke has been terribly mangled (page 173).
The fact that the Marzban family was for generations involved with theatre and journalism is also missing from Mr. Baradi’s history.
(The Parsi newspaper Jam-e-Jamshed was taken over by the Marzban family in 1870s. The founder of the family was Fardoonji Marzban according to The Parsis of India: Preservation of Identity in Bombay City By Jesse S. Palsetia)
Many of Mr. Marzban Parsi/Gujarati plays are based on the plays by Moss Hart & George S. Kaufman. This is a very important fact that is igonred by Mr. Baradi.
One of the most memorable plays, a Gujarati adaptation of J. B. Pristly’s An Inspector Calls by C. C. Mehta. It was called Gunghat and was directed by Adi Marzban. The impressive cast included Champshibhai Nagada, Chandrika Shah, and the role of the Inspector was played by Amir Merchant. This could arguably be called a most definitive Gujarati production of the Prestly play. There is no mention of this in Mr. Baradi’s History.
Mr. Baradi states that Mr. Adi Marzban attended the Pasadena Drama School. Mr. Marzban, during his trip to the United States visited Pasadena Playhouse and some Hollywood studios before he left for Hawaii.
The fact that Mr. C. C. Mehta, Mr. Adi Marzban and Mr. Upendra Trivedi were honored with a Padma Shree for their contribution to theatre cannot be found in this History of Gujarati Theatre! Adi Marzban was also honored by the Sangeet Natak Academy with its special honor.
Absent or Missing In Action:
Among other MIA or those missing in action in this History of Gujarati Theatre are such luminaries as Damu Jhaveri, Dhansukhlal Mehta, Tarak Mehta’s major contribution to the Gujarati theatre at the Inter-Collegiate level as well as the mainstream Bombay theatre in the 70s, directors, actors and actresses such as Honey Chhaya – a great director of prize winning plays such as Gujarati adaptation of Sharad Babu’s Parineeta, where Chel Vaida and Paresh Daru got their major break as scenic designers and also a prize for their scenic design for that production – the Gujarati version of Pirandello’s Six Characters In Search Of An Author – (Takhto Bole Chhe in Gujarati. The original literal Gujarati translation was done by Vajubhai Tank that was re-written and edited for production by Harish Trivedi). The play won multiple awards at the Maharashtra State Drama competition.
The following are ignored in the History of Gujarati Theatre -
1) Among the actors and actresses who got acting honors at these competitions were Usha Santheria (for Parneeta), Veena Prabhu and Krishnakant Vasavda (for Takhto Bole Chhe) and Chel-Paresh (for set design for Parneeta) Manisha Patel. Pratap Popat got acting honors for Duniyane Undha Chashma and Kaanchan Ranga. – …
2) Landmark productions like Dayaram written and directed by Prof. Vishnukumar Vyas. Prof. Vyas was honored with a writing award for this play.
3) Rangabhoomi’s other stunning productions such as Allabeli, Mrichhakatik, Shah Jehan, Pallavi Parni Gai, Aapghat, Ame Idario Ghad Jitya Re (based on Goldsmith’s She Stoops to Conquer), Narabanka (based on Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People), Kanchan Bhayo Katheer, Darpan…
4) Among the missing should be included - Rang Manch a very active theatre group from Ghatkopar, Bombay. Ranjit Atha, Gunvantrai Acharya, Vishnukumar Vyas - all were associated with this group too… all of the above and other pertinent information about the Gujarati Theatre activities in post independent India, particularly in Bombay is missing in Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre.
It is safe to say that our historian Mr. Hasmukh Baradi does not seem to know the full length and breath of the contributions of Ramesh Jamindar, Vishnukumar Vyas, Honey Chhaya, Madhukar Jhaveri (theatre critic, the Times of India for over a decade), Dr. D. G. Vyas and Damu Jhaveri.
Ramesh Jamindar or Boss as he was known among the young at that time could be considered a mentor or a teacher for young theatre enthusiasts at that time that included Kanti Madia, Pravin Joshi, Krishnakant Shah, Bhart Dave, Amrit Patel, Jayant Vyas, Kishore Bhatt… and the list could go on… There was a time when every one-act play written by Prabodh Joshi was directed by Ramesh Jamindar.
The Indian National Theatre as we all know it today and fondly remember would not have been what it was without the stewardship of Damubhai Jhaveri. He was associated with Sangeet Natak Academy for a long time and was considered a major voice in the theatre world of that time.
Nritya Natika or Dance Dramas:
Avinash Vyas and Yogendra Desai who pioneered and fully exploited this form of theatre for over two-decades from around 1950s have been ignored by our self-styled historian Mr. Baradi. People used to line up at the Birla Matushri Sabha Griha in Bombay on Sunday mornings to see these fabulous shows. During the heydays of the presentations of dance dramas. Mr. Pratap Oza had provided narration to many of these dance dramas.
Avinash Vyas was a gifted and blessed soul. Sheer volume of his music compositions and writing of lyrics for geet and garba still remains unparalleled. He not only composed music and lyrics for his dance dramas but also wrote melodious music for many a memorable Gujarati and Hindi films.
Yogendra Desai would always be remembered a great choreographer who contributed much to the evolution of dance dramas. In addition he was an excellent dance teacher. A young dancer and a budding movie star of the time - Asha Parekh had also appeared in one of the Nritya Natikas presented by this duo.
Sadly this theatre genre does not find a spot in Mr. Baradi’s history of Gujarati theatre.
While a passing reference to the Manbhatt tradition is made the name of Dharmiklal Pandya, one of the most knowledgeable
exponent of the Maan Bhatt and the Aakhyan tradition too cannot be found in this history.
Radio Plays:
The unsurpassed king of the radio-play, Barkat Virani does not find even a mention in this so-called history of Gujarati theatre. For over a quarter of century, late Barkat Virani (Befam) wrote and acted in the radio plays that were presented by the All India Radio’s Bombay station. He has over a hundred radio-plays to his credit. In addition to radio plays, Befam also wrote Gazals and appeared at various Mushairas during the 50s and 60s of the last century. He would always be remembered for his radio plays as well as for his velvety voice.
Gulabdas Broker, Tarak Mehta, Pratap Sangani and many others also wrote numerous radio plays that were broadcast from the AIR (All India Radio), Bombay. Tarak Mehta was awarded first prize for writing the radio-play Dayaram in an AIR sponsored competition. This was a different play than the one later written by Prof. Vishnukumar Vyas and for that he got writing prize at the State Drama Competition as mentioned above.
One could easily conclude that Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has not bothered to undertake any serious research about the theatre activities in Bombay or has intentionally ignored it.
Gujarati theatre activity in Bombay, during the post independence years - from 1947 through early 1970s - is sorely missing and the history Gujarati theatre in Mumbai for the last three decades of 20th century is very sparse and anecdotal at best.
Spelling:
Mr. Baradi separates the words in the title of the play Mograna Sap in to Mogra na Sap and he spells Gunvantrai and other Rais as Ray and that too with hyphen. In Mr. Baradi’s history the names of Ranchodrai appear as Ranchod Ray, the Parsi actor/director and one of the owners of the New Alfred Theatre company Kekhashru Kabraji appears as K. Khushru Kabraji.
Mr. Vinod Meghani has provided some explanation about the spellings in English translation of the History but he says nothing about the use of Ray. Mr. Meghani further compounds the spelling problem when he states that the spelling style adapted by him is not uniformally followed in the translation.
Our historian Mr. Baradi does not seem to know the last names of Chel Paresh. Probably he thinks Chel Paresh is one person. The names of Chel Vaida and Paresh Daru appear as Chel Paresh in Mr. Baradi’s history (page 214) book, including the index at the end of the book.
Naran Mistry (pages 143,168, 176 and 214) was associated with Rangabhoomi, Bombay and not with INT as our historian Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has repeatedly asserted in his version of history of Gujarati theatre!
Mr. Baradi calls Franz Kafka a German author (page 238). Kafka was from the country previously known as Czechoslovakia. Kafka never left his hometown Prague except once when he visited Vienna.
Our historian describes Frederich Durrenmatt as a German writer (page 34) But Friedrich Dürrenmatt was a Swiss author and dramatist.
Under ‘A brief chronology of theatre criticism follows…’ page 235 Mr. Baradi provides a list of varous theatre critics but again no specifics. For example. ‘A number of reviews of the plays of Dahya-bhai (his spelling) Dholshaji are on the record.’ But no information as to what ‘record’, in what publication the reviews appeared and or who wrote those reviews.
In the list of various theatre critics or reviewers, writers/critics from Bombay is missing. Shantikumar Dani (Janmabhoomi and Mumbai Samachar), Shakunt Raval (Janashakti), Burjor Pawri and K. K. Lala (Mumbai Samachar) and Madhukar Jhaveri (the Times of India) are totally ignored. Mr. Madhukar Jhaveir established very high standards for theatre criticism, starting in early 1960s till his retirement in early 1970s. Johnny-come-lately or wanna be theatre critics could learn a thing or two from his reviews.
An Index to the History of Gujarati Theatre that starts on page 247 is divided in to two categories. On page 247 one can find index for – what is described as Concepts & Processes.
Here are some samples of entries under this category - Balcony 48, misunderstanding about 14, British rule 109, …
I must confess that I do not know if the term British rule or the word Balcony is a concept or a process …
The other category in Index is Nouns, under this category the names of two scenic designers Chel and Paresh appears as a single entry – Chel Paresh – as has been noted above.
Thankfully the historian Mr. Baradi has stopped after providing an index for nouns, concepts and processes. One can only imagine an index for pro-nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.
Some other intriguing facts from the History of Gujarati Theatre:
a) The names of Alfred Company (page 67), Alfred Natak Company (page 88), and Alfred Natak Mandali (pages 21, 58 and 63) without any explanation about these groups being one and the same or entirely different entities.
b) Mr. Baradi equates the length of time spent for rehearsing a particular play with the quality of production of that play (page 177).
Mr. Baradi does not seem to know that the time devoted or allotted for rehearsals varies from a theatre group to a theatre group. Under such circumstances, sweeping generalization that Mr. Baradi provides is of dubious value to the reader. Is this what history of Gujarati theatre is all about?
c) Young Amrit did not go on his own to Lucknow as Mr. Baradi states on page 58.
Young Amrit Keshav Nayak was sent to Lucknow by Kabaraji and Sorabji Ogra to study Abhinaya, Kathak and Urdu language under various experts and Munshees.
Mr. Baradi also states that young Amrit, a young boy of eleven was offered a salary of rupees forty per month. This too is untrue. But since Mr. Baradi does not provide any sources for his information, it is difficult to verify the accuracy of his statement.
d) Describing Mr. Kanti Madia’s productions, Mr. Baradi writes about Sytlization – a whole page is devoted to this aspect of acting. It seems to me that Mr. Baradi has misused or mis-applied or misunderstood the term Stylization.
What Mr. Baradi describes as stylization in Kanti Madia’s productions should more appropriately be called Realistic style
"Realism" when used in context of acting, should be understood as a particular style that seeks to convince viewers that they are watching events unfold in the real world.
Realism as a genre derives much of its power from the illusion that occurs on stage as if the action is occurring here and now - say an illusion of a sailing ship in an ocean, or thunderstorm and rain or an airport or the landing of a helicopter on stage as was seen in the production of Miss Saigon.
Between the two poles of realism and stylization are genres such as the period or historic costume dramas. This is because these plays provide a realistic illusion of a particular period that is by definition different from contemporary reality, and therefore it becomes a form of stylization.
Use of the term stylization (By Mr. Baradi) without context or proper understanding, at best is likely to confuse the reader or at worst misinform the reader.
After reading his Special Issue on the history of the Gujarati Theatre (Natak Budreti, March 27, 2007), his History of Gujarati Theatre and his numerous contributions to the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre, it is fair to conclude that Mr. Baradi seems to have no knowledge or very little knowledge of theatre activities in Bombay during the post-independence period. What little information that appears in his works mentioned above, seems to have been derived from anecdotal sources. Mr. Baradi’s parochial vision or bias may also have affected his objectivity.
The National Book Trust has made the English translation History of Gujarati Theatre to many libraries in the Unites States as well as across the world. Now all the readers across the globe of this questionable history of Gujarati theatre would unknowingly learn only half-truths and omissions from Mr. Baradi! What a shame and what an embarrassment! It is clear that the Emperor has no clothes!
Mr. Baradi owes an apology to the National Book Trust and to his numerous readers in India and across the world.
•
* Here are some random notes about citations and plagiarism compiled from the web pages. These are not in any particular order.
Whenever quoting, paraphrasing, summarizing, or otherwise referring to the work of another, it is only proper to cite its source, either by way of parenthetical citation or by means of a footnote.
Otherwise the writing could end up being characterized as plagiarized writing.
An in-text citation names the author of the source, often in a signal phrase, and gives the page number in parentheses. At the end of the work, a list of books and works cited provides publication information about the source; the list is alphabetized by authors’ last names (or by titles for works without authors) and appears in the same sequence as the reference provided in a particular chapter or on a particular page of the main text. There are no in-text citations in Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre.
Plagiarism:
Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary defines Plagiarism means using another's words and ideas and passing them on as your own. Words, ideas, or knowledge are considered the Intellectual Property of the original author. U.S. Copyright Law and laws of many nations protects the author.
When others, including students, or (self-styled historians) use an author's work and present it as their own without giving proper credit, they are dishonest, and this leads to plagiarism.
Plagiarism means representing the words or ideas of another as one's own in any writing…
Most educational institutions in the United States have codes of conduct that are in place to deal with academic honesty. Plagiarism is usually included in these policies.
Following are the various policies currently in effect at the C.W. Post Campus of Long Island University (as it appears on the web):
(From the Undergraduate Bulletin - 2002-2004, p. 13, "Academic Dishonesty")
"Academic dishonesty is unacceptable, and condemned in the strongest possible terms. It undermines the bonds of trust and honesty between members of the community and defrauds those who may eventually depend upon our knowledge and integrity. Such dishonesty consists of any of the following:
"Cheating - using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, ...
"Fabrication - unauthorized falsification or invention of any information or citation...
(Pravin Joshi’s first directorial venture was Mograna Saap or Jagganath Shankarsheth was a Gujarati businessman fall under fabrication category)
From the College of Management, Long Island University:
"Not only is plagiarism a practice that is unacceptable, but also it is condemned in the strongest terms possible on the basis of moral, educational and legal grounds...(Undergraduate Bulletin 2004-2006, p.147)
The proper use citation and sourcing can protect writers from accusations of plagiarism, which is the purposeful or accidental uncredited use of source material by other writers. Some writers and publishers do prohibit extensive quoting or paraphrasing of copyrighted work without written permission either from the author or the agent of the author or the publisher.
How can one avoid charge of plagiarizing?
Acknowledge sources by giving credit. If you don't, intentionally or not, it is plagiarism.
•
•
The Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre
The Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre,
Edited by Ananda Lal,
Published by Oxford University Press, New Delhi 2004.
(Nearly 600 pages including the introduction and Credits for Illustrations)
Contributors to the section on Gujarati Theatre among many others is Hasmukh Baradi. His contributions appear with initials HB at the end of each entry in this prestigious volume. All the other contributors’ names appear with their initials. Mr. Baradi, as he has done in his other writings on Gujarati theatre shows his lack of knowledge about Gujarati theatre activities in Mumbai. And because of such ommissions, as far as Gujarati theatre is concerned the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre remains incomplete and poorer in its content.
Other contributors to the section on Gujarati theatre are Mr. Dinkar J. Bhojak, Govardhan Panchal. Mr Panchal’s contribution seems to be posthmusoully submitted by some one else.
It would have been better and more balanced coverage of Gujarati language theatre if knowledgeable theatre experts such as Utpal Bhayani (theatre critic), Niranjan Mehta (Theatre Historian), Honey Chhaya (Writer, Director, Actor, Acting Coach) from Mumbai were invited to write about theatre activities in Mumbai.
The names of many a great writers and actors of the Gujarati Theatre do not appear in this mamoth work. Writers such as Prof. Vishnukumar Vyas (who has won many awards and accolades including honors and awards from the Gujarat and Maharashtra state) does not have an entry under his name.
Among those missing include Mr. Damu Jhaveri, founder and general secreatry of the Indian National Theatre for over half-a-century, a producer and an impressario of note…
Dhansukhlal Mehta whoes play Rangilo Rajja was the very first play of the modern Gujarati theatre to have more than one-hundred performances to its credit.
Mr. Dhansukhlal Mehta wrote such memorable plays as Mamajino Morcho, , Sarijatu Surat, Garibni Jhupadi, Dhumraser (with Gulabdas Broker, Bicharo, Bhulno Bhog, Arvachina with Avinash Vyas, Manuni Mashi, Snehna Jher, Vavazodu (with Bachubhai Shukla, Pankhino Malo (with Dhiruben Patel).
Also missing are plays like Anantne Aare by Madhukar Randeria (based on Ibsen’s Master Builder) or Babubhai Bhukhanwala’s memorable plays like Jama Udhar, Gunegar, Rajnu Gaj, Varasdaar and Vijetani Haar…
Two of the leading actors, Jayanti Patel and Prof. Madhukar Randeria
who also wrote numerous one-act and full-length plays are absent in
this Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre.
Among other theatre personalities that do not find a spot in this important book mention must be made of Babubhai Bhukhanwala, Bharat and Shailesh Dave, Arvind Joshi, Upendra and Arvind Trivedi.
Upendra Trivedi is responsible for reviving the dormant Gujarati movie industry during the 70s, he also presented some ground breading adaptations from critically acclaimed Gujarati novels such as Jher to Pidha Che Jani Jani and Vevishal. Upendra also acted in some of the most memorable plays produced by Rangabhoomi, Bombay that included Shah Jehan and Kanchan Bhayo Katheer. Upendra Trivedi is also recipient of the Padma Shree honor.
Bharat Dave wrote numerous one-act plays for the inter-collegiate drama competitons, wrote full-length plays and also acted and directed plays. He collaborated with Kanti Madia and formed a short-lived theatre group called Bohemians. Bhart Dave passed away at a very young age. Kanti Madia later formed his own theatre group Natya Sampada where he produced, directed and acted in series of very successful plays.
Shailesh Dave presented some of the most challenging and successful plays from 1970s onwards till his death at a young age. Among his notable plays were Karma Kshetra, Sahebjee based on Kiss Me Good-bye, Khel, Kachna Sambandh, Aol Khan and many other…
Arvind Joshi’s Aeni Sughandhno Dariyo (based on Bernard Slade’s Tribute), Vrashcheek (based on Simon Grey’s Stage Struck). During the two decades, starting from early 70s, Arvind Joshi won numerous awards for his productions and his acting. In addition to Pravin Joshi, the two remaining Joshi brothers, Arvind and
Original Plays in Gujarati:
Prabodh Joshi has enumerated over seven-hundred plays that were staged in Bombay from 1930 thru 1979. Among the plays were such original works as Gharno Divo, Snehna Jher, Varasdar, Kadam Milake Chalo, Pattani Jod, Anahat Naad, Aapghaat, Sanskar Murtee, Putra Samovadi, Suvarna Rekha, Parneeta, Chheeye Tej Theek, Veni Sanhaar, Duniyane Undha Chashma, Ramni Sumati, Rajane Gaami Te Raani, Swayam Siddha, Mangal Murti, Meenal Devi, Sheni Vijananda, Jaya Jayant, Ramde Peer, Lopa Mudra, Geet Govind, Kunvarbainu Mameroo, Peelu Gulab ane Hun, Sunanda, Devdas and the list could go on and on… (from Gujarati Rangbhoomi, 1853 –1978, Sava Shatabdi Smarak Granth, Pareeshisht - Appendix 3, pages 191-202). Most of these plays were produced and presented only in Bombay.
Nearly three-hundred and fifty Gujarati plays are listed in the Bibliography of Stageable Plays in Indian Languages – Edited by C. C. Mehta (1963, pages 3 to 30)
Mr. Baradi’s sweeping generalizations not withstanding, not all the plays listed in above two lists - over one thousand plays -are based on translations from English or any other languages
Other than Jayshankar ‘Sundari’, Mr. Baradi does not mention any of the male actors who successfully played female roles.
Among those were Chand Meeya (Pingala), Suraj Ram –Special Sundari, Chhana Lal – Surya Kumari, Nanjee Shivlal – Hothal, Master Bhogilal – Malti, Master Ghordhan - Bhavana B. A. and so on. (Names of the male actors are followed by the name of the female characters they played). And for the rest of their lives, these actors became associated with the names of the female characters they played and got attached to their names.
Parsi actors such as Shyavaksh Rustamjee Master who was called Parsi Bal Gandharva and who played in Indrasabha the role of a fairy – Paree, sang in his beautiful baritone voice many songs in classical melodies.
Female stars of yester-years or Jooni Rangbhoomi included such effervecent personalities as Ranee Premlata, Kamaalbai, Shyama, Moheeni, Saraswati, Chandreeka, Ram Pyari, Dullari, Munniba – who played memorable roles in Rati Madam and Khavindane Khatar and Mumbaini Badi; other actresses of the time include Roop Kamal, Sharda, Miss Gohar and Gauhar Jaan…to name just a few.
Notable actresses of Parsi/Gujarati/Urdu stage such as Miss Amelia Joan Bristo, a British actress who had campainged for female roles to be played by female actresses and British actresses such as Mary Fenton, Miss Grace Darling – who not only played female roles in Parsi/Gujarati plays but also sang in the play Rati Madan… do not even get a mention in this book.
Notable writers or Munshis of the Parsi/Urdu stage such as
Munshi Aahesan, Moonsi Agahashr Kashmiri, Munshi Latif Shad, Munishi Murad Ali, Munshi Anwaruddin (Mukhalis), Narayan Prasad ‘Betab’. These pioneers contributed a great deal in introducing and popularizing Shakespearean plays and actors/writers/directors like Sorabjee Ogra, Kekashru Kabrajee, Amrit Keshav Nayak do not get the recognition they deserve in the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre or in Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre.
Bapulal Nayk about whom Mr Baradi raves about – and deservedly so - was brought to Mumbai by Amrit Keshav Nayak and so were many others from the Nayak and Bhojak community of north Gujarat who followed in the foot steps of the famous son of the soil - Amrit Keshav Nayak. One can add names of such notable actor/directors as Vallabh Keshav Nayak or Vallo (Amrit’s younger brother ) who later established his own company – the Shakespear Natak Mandali, directed plays and made a name for himself as a great comedy actor by playing the role of Gulfaam in Fankado Fitoori
Kawasjee Palanjee Khatau who played the role of Jehangir – Hemlate in the Urdu version Khune-Nahak, Jehangir Khambata who played a memorable role in Dharatikump.
Seems like Mr. Baradi does not consider Parsi actors and actresses contributions to the theatre just because they were Parsis, even though they spoke and acted in Parsi Gujarati, English and Urdu plays. According to Parsi Natak Takhta Ni Tawarikh one of the early Gujarati play Karan Ghelo was produced and staged by a Parsi theatre enthusiast Koonvarji Nazar. It was also Konwarjee Nazar who commissioned the play Karan Ghelo. Faramjee Appu played the role of Karan Ghelo. While the role of Roopsundari was played by Kawasjee Manekjee Contractor. Koonwarjee Nazar also wrote Kadak Kanya in Parsi Gujarai. He was also one of the founders of the Natak Uttejak Mandali.
Similarly one of the earliest Gujarati play Gulab by Nagindas Marfatia and plays by poet Narmad were commissioned by Kekhashru Kabrajee.
Bahmanjee Navrojee Kabrajee – a great Parsi writer of the time wrote such successful plays as Joogar, Bahera Bahel Kaka, Bholi Gool, Bhoolo Padelo Bhoolbhai, Baapna Shraap… yes, all the plays in Parsi Gujarati. But the Parsi dialect of Gujarati language is not recognzied by Mr. Hasmukh Baradi. The play Rustom Sohrab was also writeen in Parsi Gujarati. (All the references to Parsi actor, actresses and plays can be found in Parsee Natak Takhto written by Firozgar).
About the influence of the west or colonialism that Mr. Baradi laments about –
The famous Parsi play Bholi Gool was based on Eastlyne by Henri Hood. Ninda Khanu based on Sheridan’s School for Scandal,
Bholi Jaan was based on Collin Dawn, Jugari Bholanath Yane Veenash Kale Viparitta Buddhi was based on the Red Hut of the Old Mountain, Kekhashru Kabarajee’s Soodi Vachhe Sopari was based on Wives as they are, Maids as they are… Over ninty per cent of plays of the Parsi Gujarati theatre were either direct translations or adaptations of Shakespearean plays or based on Persian mythology and history. The Oza brothers and others of that era also mined the rich stories from Mahabharat and Ramayan. Even Dalpatram’s Laxmi was based on a Greek play.
So Mr. Baradi’s concerns about contemporary playwrights borrowing from the west seem to be ignoring history when he implies that only the playwrights in Mumbai are borrowing from the West. He even overlooks the fact that he - Mr. Baradi himself has borrowed from the West and the then Soviet Union, now Russia, Germany and France – particularly the plays of Bercht, Chekhov, Jean Genet etc. So Mr. Baradi’s gratutious comments about borrowing from the West seems hypocritical.
What is more troublesome is a practice of free-wheeling translations and adaptations without any acknowledgment about the source from which such plays have been written in Gujarati. Writers and critics – including Mr. Hasmukh Baradi do not even raise an eye-brow or have questioned such contemporary practices.
What happened after the copy of these reviews were sent to Mr. Hasmukh Baradi and the National Book Trust – the publisher of the History of Gujarati Theatre?
Mr. Baradi sent an e-mail to Harish Trivedi that said - Thanks, Really.
The National Book Trust’s Chief Editor Dr. Baldve Singh ‘Badhan’CHIEF EDITOR and Director Ms. Nuzhat Hassan, IPS have received the copies of the review of History of Gujarati Theatre. Dr. Baldev Singh has acknowledged the receipt of the review by email and also by regular mail.
The review was mailed by email and also by regular mail on December 15, 2008. Since then I have talked with Dr. Baldev Singh many times. Each time he has said that ‘we are investigating’ and they will let me know when the investigation is over.
After over six months the Nationla Book Trust is still investigating while Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has failed to acknowledge the errors and omissions in his History of Gujarati Theatre either on his Blog or his web page (now infected with viruses) or in his magazine NATAK Budreti.
So Mr. Baradi’s readers in the print media are still unaware of the errors in his writings.
Dr. Ananda Lal, the Editor of the Oxford Companion to Indian Theare has informed me - by email and personal conversations - that due to limitations on space a lot of information could not be included but had he received my note sooner he might have tried to correct or rectify the missing elements in the section on Gujarati Theatre.
Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has now described Nana Shankar Sheth as Shankar Sheth and has decided not to call him a Gujarati Businessman as his has done many times in his previous articles in various books and magazines.
Has mentioned the names of Dhansukhlal Mehta and Madhukar Randeria, Vanlata Mehta and others in his blog (possibly inspired by my review). Mr. Baradi seems to be still reluctant to admit his errors.
His blog is nothing but a revision of his chapter from the History of Gujarati Theatre and his other writings. He seems to regurgitate or seems to be reproducing ideas or facts without understanding them.
In other words Mr. Baradi seems to be vomiting partly digested ideas and facts.
It is also clear from reading his writings that he hardly verifies what he writes as fact and because of his aversion to in-text citation or indicating the source of his ‘facts’, it is difficult to judge the source of his various statements in his History of Gujarati Theatre.
Next:
About Mr. Hasmukh Baradi’s blog
Hasmukh Baradi: Torrent of Images
Part II - The Editors Respond - NATAK Budreti Special Issue: World Theatre Day, Some Observations and Reflections
Part II
The Editors Respond to Some Observations and Reflections
NATAK Budreti
Special Issue: World Theatre Day, *
March 27, 2007
Introspecting: 150 years of Gujarati Theatre
Editor: Hasmukh Baradi,
Guest Editor: S. D. Desai
Published by Budreti Theatre and Media Center,
New Ranip, GST-Chenpur Road, P.O. Digvijay Nagar,
Ahmedabad – 382470
*Published with a support grant from
Sangeet Natak Academy, New Delhi, India
By Harish Trivedi © 2008
(Reproduction or storage in any form of all or part of this article or translation in any language without a written permission from the writer is strictly prohibited)
Natak Budreti Quarterly is also called ‘An on-going dialogue on theatre’…
But now the Editors have abruptly discontinued that dialogue as they have moved on…
In the April-June 2008 issue of Natak Budreti (Quarterly) the Guest Editor and Editor has responded to my observations and reflections on the Special Issue - Introspecting 150 Years of the Gujarati Theatre.
I am dismayed and surprised by their response.
Instead of admitting their fault or pleading Mea culpa –the Editors maintain that apart from the odd slip-up or two, they (the Editors) performed their duties brilliantly.
None of the arguments put forward by the editors stands up to even casual scrutiny. Unwittingly, they show us an astonishing degree of hubris or naivet. Their defense or rationalization amounts to nothing but a lie concocted to camouflage their flawed editorial policy…
So let me review the Editors’ response.
(Note: I have underlined words or sentences where they have appeared in bold face in the original response of the Editors. Rest of what follows is an exact copy of the original that appears on page 38 and 39 of the above issue. The editors’ response is printed in italics to make it easy for the readers to comprehend and separate the same from this writer’s response. Editors response appears below as Editors: and H.T. or Harish Trivedi precedes my observation on the same).
In their own words –
Here is the response from the Guest Editor Dr. S. D. Desai and Editor Shri Hasmukh Baradi.
Response to Harish Trivedi (US) from Guest Editor/Editor
Editors: We have received 20 pages (around 6,000 words) of ‘Observations and Reflections’ on our Special Issue from Shri Harish Trivedi (US). Their length does not permit us to reproduce them here. A short response was sent to him. However, since he keeps writing to us with uncommon assertions we briefly respond to him below:
H. T. (Harish Trivedi): First the word count in that article was a little over 9,500.
The readers of Natak Budreti would have been better served if the Editors had taken time to provide pertinent quote from my criticism before commenting on the same. The Editors have not quoted even one of my assertions that they have called uncommon.
Editors: 1 (a) Passing out, in the sense it is used in Hiren Gandhi’s article, is acceptable in British/American English.
H.T.: The Editors fail to give us any information as to which British/American English dictionaries or other source books they are referring to substantiate their claim. As has been previously noted the Editors seem to be averse to provide sources for their assertions.
Here is the relevant portion from my article ‘In an article by Hiren Gandhi titled Theatre as a Means (page 146, second paragraph) what Mr. Gandhi intended to say was what he did after he passed or got through his final exams etc. This has been translated as After passing out some more time…etc.
Pass out or passed out or passing out means to lose consciousness due to a sudden trauma. I do not think that’s what Hiren Gandhi intended to say.
Here is, for the benefit of the Editors as well as for the readers, what the term passing out really means –
Passed: means to undergo an examination or a trial with favorable results…
To be approved or adopted: The motion to adjourn passed.
The Verb: pass out
Pass out from weakness, physical or emotional distress due to a loss of blood supply to the brain- faint, conk, swoon
Lose consciousness due to a sudden trauma, for example
- zonk out, black out, …
Pass out: To lose consciousness. Keel over (informal), pass out (Informal) FAINT, drop, black out (informal) swoon (literary) lose consciousness, flake out (informal) become unconscious
Derived forms: passes out, passing out, passed out
5. Pass out (= faint)
Source: Collins Essential Thesaurus 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2005, 2006
I hope this settles the issue of passing out.
Editors: 1 (b) There is uniform method in the notes on stage productions in Intrinsically Lively Theatre. ‘Madeera (1980. Greek Euripides, Adapt C. C. Mehta, Dir. Bharat Dave)’ means the play originally written in Greek by Euripides, was adapted by C. C. Mehta and directed by Bharat Dave.
H.T.: What is uniform in that article is absence of punctuation marks plain and simple. I have no idea as to why the Editors are even trying to defend Mr. S. D. Desai’s obvious error. Perhaps the Editors did not want the readers to know that they have erred. Here is my original statement:
Under the category Modern Theatre (Page 93), in an article by S. D. Desai (Intrisically Lively Theatre) punctuation marks are missing and hence reads like Madeera (1980), Greek Euripides…, Bakri (1978) Hindi Sarweshawar Dayal…Saari Raat (1987. Bengali Badal Sirkar…Galileo (1988). German Bertolt Brecht… All the plays enumerated in this article lack proper punctuation marks.
Editors: 1 (c) We accept there are a couple of ‘typographical’/’proofting’ errors like Kalia instead of Kalidas.
H. T.: The editors have conceded at least one error.
Editors: 1 (d) The title of an article in Hindi suggests the playwright ‘orchestrates action’. That’s not unacceptable. It means he ‘carefully organizes’ action.
H.T.: In music, the composer composes or writes the music (like a playwright writing a play) and the conductor of an orchestra (like the director of a play) orchestrates the music composed by the composer.
When writing a play the playwright imagines or conceives the plot, visualizes the action, imagines the characters, situation, locale, time of action etc.
The director then has the responsibility to give life to or to bring to life what the playwright has visualized or imagined. That is done in collaboration with the actor and actresses, scenic designers and so forth.
Over the centuries thousands of directors have presented and or have interpreted and an equal number of actors have acted in the plays written by Shakespeare. All brought in their own sensibility and insight in to what the writer –Shakespeare - had intended to convey in a particular play. The director with the help of actors and scenic designers, musicians etc does the orchestration of the action in any play including Shakespearean plays or Hasmukh Baradi’s plays.
Let’s take a look at Kanti Madia’s version of Rashomon and Akira Kurosawa’s Rashomon. Or Kanti Madia’s version of Death of a Salesman and the various productions of the same in America and world over and see who does the orchestration of action in the above two versions of the same play. In all such productions the play essentially remains the same while the productions and interpretations differ… and that is because the DIRECTOR in each case orchestrated the production of the play as seen by the audiences and that too according to his own – director’s - vision.
The writers - Arthur Miller or Shakespeare - wrote the plays and created the characters. The directors did all the interpretation or orchestration and with the help of the actors and actresses they brought the vision of the writer to life – regardless of what Mr. Hasmukh Baradi claims or thinks.
But if Mr. Baradi wants to compare himself with a conductor of an orchestra who am I to question him? But the music analogy is wrong regardless of the fact that Mr. Baradi and Mr. Desai – the two Editors find it acceptable. But then they are the Editors and they are not answerable to any one.
Editors: 1. (e) Propriety prevent us from claiming that S. D. Desai is known outside Ahmedabad/Gujarat, but aren’t Adi Marzban and Pravin Joshi?
H.T.: I had suggested for the editors to consider providing brief information about the writer of a particular article and the subject of the article at the beginning of each article.
This is a prevailing tradition in magazine and newspaper editing; it is not a question of propriety.
Of course the question of propriety does come in picture when the editors say that It is not an author’s fault if he happens to have published more than one book in either or both of the two languages! (This statement has been made by the Editors when commenting about inclusion of all their books in the list of reference books). See (e) below.
Mr. Baradi, for the sake of propriety should leave out statements such as the one quoted above and also the use of over the top adjective orchestrates when describing his own writings. He should allow his critics or readers to comment on his work.
Editors: 2 (a) We are aware of ‘omissions’ of personalities like Damu Jhaveri, Upendra Trivedi, Jayanti Patel as also forms like Nritya Natika besides a few other aspects Mr. Trivedi has not noticed. The two preambles reflect this awareness.
H. T.: The Editors claim, ‘…besides a few other aspects Mr. Trivedi has not noticed…’ is very presumptuous.
What I may or may not have noticed is not some thing that the editors should be chortling about. Here the subject is their Editorial policy or lack of it and not how much I know or do not know about theatre.
(The personalities – Damu Jhaveri, Upendra Trivedi, Jayanti Patel and many more as well as Nritya Natika - Dance Dramas – are also ignored by Mr. Baradi in his History of Gujarati Theatre, English translation by Mr. Vinod Meghani, National Book Trust, 2003 and the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre, published in 2004.
The abovementioned works of Mr. Baradi are also full of similar errors and omissions. But more about it later)
The simple fact is - The Special Issue has not covered all aspects of Gujarati theatre in the last 150 years as it claims to have done, it has only covered the last seventy years of Gujarati theatre and that too barely...
The term – introspecting in the title or sub-heading of the special issue is misleading. There is no introspection of any kind in that Special Issue - only reminiscences!
Editors: 2. (b) There is no separate article on ‘one character plays’, but aren’t Shekhar Suman’s Kabir and other plays in Hindi?
H. T.: Since the magazine is published in English and Hindi languages, it would have been more than appropriate if the editors had provided a reference to the critically acclaimed one-character Hindi plays of Shekhar Sen (not Shekhar Suman as the Editors have claimed. This too is must be what the editors have called one of those nasty slip-ups). What this illustrates is the fact that even in a simple rebuttal of my criticism, the Editors have not cared about accuracy of their statements!
The editors have also over looked other more important Gujarati one-character plays that have been staged since the staging of Narmad: Maari Hakikat over a decade back. One-character play based on Mahadevbhai’s (Mahadevbhai Desai) diary or Kavi Kant’s autobiography and few other plays deserved at least a mention in this introspecting.
Editors: 2 (c) The suggestion regarding what Mr. Trivedi calls ‘citations or sourcing’ is welcome, but we would like to point out that leading journals do not necessarily carry them and they aren’t any the less dependable.
H. T.: This is very true in case of what the editors have called the leading journals, but after looking at the last two issues of Natak Budreti, in my humble opinion the Editors’ claim to call the magazine a leading journal is hollow. This is because of its flawed and at times questionable editorial policy, frequent factual and typographical errors, it’s reprinting of articles without the writers’ permission etc. would make it difficult for any one to call this magazine a leading journal. Even a simple rebuttal by the editors that is under discussion has wrong names of the people mentioned. So much about the credibility or dependability!
Credibility is not a label that these editors (Mr. S. D. Desai and Mr. Hasmukh Baradi) can slap on their backs when they feel like doing so. Credibility has to be earned!
A leading journal or a magazine should be a marvel of style and wit, it should arouse curiosity of its readers regarding its contents and coverage with each succeeding issue, it should offer its readers opportunities to find small or large discoveries in the area of research and scholarship and finally it should stress importance of scholarship and relevance in its editorial policy.
My concern about the lack of sourcing or citation is related to the issue of scholarship, particularly for the benefit of present and future students of the history of Gujarati drama and scholars who may want to conduct further research on the subject.
Citations and source notes are necessary in order to avoid any charges of plagiarism. But more importantly, citations and source notes are necessary for nothing else but for the sheer regard for intellectual honesty and preserving copyrights of the publishers and the writers.
Various guide lines on the subject of research, writing and writing styles suggest that citations and sourcing are essential in order to 1) provide useful information and to avoid the claims of plagiarism, 2) to show that a particular portion or whole writing is not original research, 3) to ensure that the content of articles is credible and can be checked by any reader or editor, 4) to help the readers find additional reliable information on the topic, and 5) to improve the overall credibility and authoritative character of the work. – a magazine article or a book of history or for that matter a book on any subject.
And finally citations and sourcing is necessary to reduce the likelihood of editorial disputes or to resolve any that arise. (Dear Editors, please note).
As the sourcing or citation for the information presented in articles is considered unimportant by our Editor duo - Mr. S. D. Desai and Mr. Hasmukh Baradi -there is no way for a reader to verify any statement in the magazine for its accuracy. In other words there is no way to know what is fact, opinion or mere conjecture presented as fact by a particular writer in Natak Budreti and particularly articles written by Mr. Baradi, who is one of the editors.
Editors: 2 (d) A writer makes his choice to omit details he considers less important in a context within the space available. A reader can draw his conclusions but need not question the choice.
H.T.: In case of Natak Budreti issue under review, at least one writer was not offered such a choice and his article was arbitrarily shortened. Further more, one articles that appears in the Special Issue of Natak Budreti has not even been written by the writer whose name appears as a writer of that article.
There is an article supposed to be written by Narendra Shrimali on the subject of theatre music and recordings. Mr. Shrimali has, very clearly and in no uncertain terms informed me that he did not write that article. Mr. Baradi chose not to respond to this questionable editorial policy when I inquired about it. So much about credibility!
Mr. Shrimali’s article was excerpted (in that special issue of NATAK Budreti) from his copyrighted book – (Narendra Shrimali’s) Music of Theatre and Hindi Cinema (1900-1950), A Discographical Study with
, according to Mr. Narendra Shrimali was excerpted from his book without his permission or knowledge and seems to have been written by some one working at Natak Budreti or perhaps even by Mr. Baradi himself. The Editors, Mr. S. D. Desai and Mr. Hasmukh Baradi owe an explanation to their readers regarding Mr. Narendra Shrimali’s claim.
There another article in the magazine that too has been published without the knowledge of its original writer. I am sure the editors are aware of the source from which they have appropriated that article…
But according to the editors’ dicta (see above 2 d) - A reader can draw his conclusions but need not question the choice. (One has to assume that the editors are talking about their own - the Editors’ choices)
Interestingly, the editorial policy about the length of a particular article according to available space does not seem to apply to the articles written by the editors! (Readers can take a look at numerous articles written by the Editors and the length of the same in that Special Issue of Natak Budreti)
Editors: 2 (e) Books on Gujarati Theatre, needless to say, includes books in English and Hindi only. It is not an author’s fault if he happens to have published more than one book in either or both of the two languages!
H. T.: Nowhere in the magazine the editors have indicated that only books published in Hindi and English are included in the reference list of the books. So why the editors think it was needless to say…?
More importantly one of the books included in the list, the History of Gujarati Theatre by Hasmumkh Baradi, is also full of similar errors (and many more, as mentioned earlier).
More to the point, if the author of multiple books on the history of Gujarati theatre has committed errors of facts, incomplete facts and blatant omissions of events and people, than it is more than a mere fault of the author, it is reprehensible and scandalous!
Even the selection of Hindi and English language reference books on Gujarati theatre, two very important books (in Hindi and English) on Parsi theatre by Somnath Gupt and Kathryn Hanson are missing.
The learned editors of NATAK Budreti seem to be either unaware of these books or were probably too busy enumerating and including their own books about Gujarati theatre.
Editors: 3. There seem to be a few factual errors concerning persons and dates (Anil Mehta, Upendra Trivedi, Ashraf Khan…) They have been referred to writers concerned. (Underlined by H.T. for emphasize)
H.T.: Without responding to the point I had made in my criticism, the editors say that they have referred the question to writers concerned.
What the editors fail to say is the fact that the writer of the articles (whom they have referred the errors) is no one other than Mr. Hamsukh Baradi himself! The errors have appeared in the article written by Mr. Hasmukh Baradi himself - page 84, Natak Budreti special issue.
What the Editors’ response amounts to is nothing but a simple and absurd evasion.
The readers should ask Mr. Baradi as to how he questioned himself about his own errors! Let’s hope he illuminates us with an answer in the next issue of Natak Budreti.
Here is some context:
In an article One-act Plays – Origin and Growth Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has claimed that Anil Mehta and Arvind Trivedi were products of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan’s inter-collegiate competitions (page 84). In their response Mr. Baradi erroneously mentions Upendra Trivedi (see 3 above).
How can one verify Mr. Baradi’s statement when Mr. Baradi does not provide his readers with the source of his information?
I had stated that Anil Mehta and Arvind Trivedi had not appeared in any inter- collegiate competitions that Mr. Baradi talks about in his article.
My earlier statement, as far as Mr. Arvind Trivedi is concerned was WRONG and I apologize for that erroneous statement.
Arvind Trivedi did participate in the inter-collegiate one-act play competitions that were sponsored by the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. While this is true, a little clarification is needed.
It should be noted that Arvind Trivedi did not participate in the above competitions during its first decade when Pravin Joshi, Krishnakant Shah, Upendra Trivedi, Kanti Madia and others were participating – the one that Mr. Baradi has alluded to in that article. But my unqualified observation was wrong and I have said so above.
Anil Mehta and I were friends; schoolmates and we were also in the same college (though during different years and studied different subjects).
I was actively involved in the inter-collegiate drama competitions during the decade of 1950s when Upendra Trivedi, Kanti Madia, Pravin Joshi et al were participating in the competitions. Anil Mehta did not participate or even auditioned for any of the plays that were presented at those competitions during the 50s.
Anil Mehta’s contribution to the Gujarati theatre is restricted or limited to his translations of Marathi plays from early 1970s till the time of his death at a young age.
Anil Mehta and his wife Indira did act in many successful one-act plays of that era. Those plays were staged for the benefit of community organizations –Gujarati Samaj or Gnati Mandals and Navratri festivals … to tell you the truth, I had acted in few of those productions with Anil Mehta too.
Now about Mr. Ashraf Khan:
Ashraf Khan was born in 1893 and not 1853 as stated in Natak Budreti Special Issue (page 215). If Mr. Ashraf Khan was indeed born in 1853 he would have been 109 at the time of his death in 1962. Why are the editors so hesitant to admit what is obviously a typographical error?
Editors: 4. Preety Sengupta has not criticized Gujarati theatre activity in Canada and the US. She is critical of ‘The same stupid, slapstick plays making their way abroad’.
H.T.: The issue here is not Preety Sengupta commenting on the visiting Gujarati theatre groups. The editors have labeled the section where Miss Sengupta’s article appears in NATAK Budreti as ‘Theatre Activity Abroad’. Miss Sengupta’s article cannot be honestly described as theatre activity abroad. Her article is about the touring Gujarati theatre companies, companies that have been invited to perform in the U.S. by the fans of such plays. There is much more to theatre activity abroad (at least in the U.S) then the touring slapstick plays. And when we consider the fact that this is the only article under the category Theatre Activity Abroad, the absurdity of the editorial policy becomes more glaring!
Such slapstick comedies full of sexual innuendos and double entendres, and cheap knock-offs of British and American comedies do not even get a mention in the purported Introspecting of 150-years of Gujarati Theatre or Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre. But then the editors consider it worthy of being called Theatre Activity Abroad.
Editors: 5. With reference to Sorabjee Dhondi’s recordings in Narendra Shrimali’s article in Hindi, Mr. Trivedi adds what ‘is unstated’ and goes on to mention other recordings. A lot more can be added. Our objective, as in other areas, here was giving a glimpse of the work done.
H.T.: Here the editors presume that their readers know what exactly I had written in my comments. Here is what I said, “What is unstated is the fact that Sorabjee had recorded some of the most memorable songs of the Parsi Gujarati plays including Bammanji Kabraji’s Gamre Nee Gori and many of the popular plays of that time. Sorab Rustamji Dhondi has cut over 100 songs on 78-rpm discs and on number of labels”.
A detail such as this probably would have lengthened the size of the article that the editors claim to have been written by Narendra Shrimali but the readers would have been better informed. The Editors have not commented as to why they published that article that was excerpted from Mr. Shrimali’s book and without Mr. Shrimali’s knowledge or permission.
My comments were only meant to indicate the fact that the article was sketchy and did not provide sufficient information about the theatre music. Perhaps if it were really written by Narendra Shrimali such lapse could have been avoided.
If the Editors wanted to provide only glimpse then they should have labeled the special issue Glimpses of 150 years of Gujarati Theatre!
Editors: 6. The graphic design, we believe, is good enough. The pictures have not come out very clearly. We would not have afforded a better alternative.
H.T.: This was only meant as a suggestion If the editors have consciously decided to accept mediocrity and bad reproduction of the photos then the reader has no choice but to accept it.
It would have been nice to see the editors setting the bar of quality printing and graphic design a little higher…but it is their choice and the readers should respect that, I do.
Editors: 7. There are comments on our editorial policy/practice concerning ‘multiple articles’ by a writer, articles previously published, grouping of the articles, (‘sadly’) failing to dedicate the issue to Amrit Keshav Nayak, etc. We need not be defensive of our policy/practice.
H.T.: …need not be defensive?
Really?
So the arguments put forward by the editors (Numbers 1 to 6 above) were a mere can’t, only insincere or hypocritical statements?
Editors: 8. Many of the (highly judgmental) observations are prompted by vastly different perceptions and perspective. There are hasty assumptions, digressions and conclusions. In a response purported to be studied and research-based, it is interesting to find comments like ‘Not surprisingly (the section lists four books by HB and three books by SDD); ‘ By this omission … the issue seems to have shortchanged its readers’; and ‘… deserved a place in ‘this sweeping introspection’. The Indian tradition associates humility with learnedness.
H.T.: I merely pointed out what was missing in the list of the reference books and my sentiments about such omissions. If the Editors find my comments judgmental, so be it.
Further more, my comments about factual and typographical errors, the need for a better graphic design, more clear reproductions of photographs, sourcing or citations etc. is not matter of perceptions or hasty conclusions… as the Editors have characterized. They are statements of FACT.
I have never claimed (or in the Editors’ words purported) that my observations were studied and research-based. Research-based or research-oriented and other such pabulums seem to be favorite terms of Mr. Baradi as they frequently appear in his writings. By its very nature and as the title of my article very clearly says – Some observations and reflections by Harish Trivedi. Yes, they are my personal observations because I care and am concerned about presentation of facts in any book or a magazine that claims to be devoted to the history of Gujarati theatre.
The Editors say, ‘The Indian tradition associates humility with learnedness’ but that does not seem to bother them when they write about their own books on theatre proclaiming ‘It is not an author’s fault if he happens to have published more than one book in either or both of the two languages… or when Mr. Baradi describes his playwriting process as I orchestrate the action… Some humility indeed!
The Editors are hardly in a position to preach about propriety (see 1 e above), …or the Indian tradition… of humility (and) learnedness....
Editors: 9. The Special Issue by any standard a modest effort. Neither the editors nor the contributors have an illusion of being infallible and of having the Issue encyclopedic.
H.T.: Then that’s what it is…and that’s what I have tried to point out to the Editors.
The above eight-point response as well as the sub-title of the special issue –Introspecting 150-years of Gujarati Theatre amply speak about the illusions of the editors. My comments pertain to the Editors and the editorial process, not to the writers. As a matter of fact I have pointed out a number of articles and writers who did a commendable job in writing those pieces. I wish the editors had shared my positive comments with the readers.
Editors: 9 (last part)
Guest Editor, Editor
(There is no need to continue the so-called ‘dialogue’ now. We have moved on.
H.T.: Does this mean the motto on the cover of the Natak Budreti…An on-going dialogue on theatre is no more relevant?
Reviewing and re-viewing the editors’ response, their claim We have moved on seems to be hollow. The Editors have moved on in the same sense as a horse or a bull goes around a stone mill (Ghani in Gujarati) with blinders and thinks all the time that it is going some where…The Editors have not moved any where from where they were prior to my comments.
Here are some other errors in that issue of Natak Budreti that has escaped the Editors’ attention in their nine-point response.
a) Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has described Mr. Jagannath Shankarsheth as a Gujarati entrepreneur (An Entertainment Industry, page 21, Natak Budreti Special Issue). Mr. Shanker Sheth was a Maharastrian businessman, a social activist and a great patron of poet Narmad.
The error has been repeated and there by perpetuated as fact in Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre as well as in his note about the Gujarati theatre in the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre.
b) On the same page there is a reference to Elphantine Natak Mandali that should have been Elphinston Natak Mandali. The group was known as the Elphinston Dramatic Club.
c) The editors are entitled to their opinions but they have no right to concoct their own facts. We, the readers of the Natak Budreti deserve better!
I would like to suggest that the editors should consider publishing corrections and clarifications when they are done with questioning themselves about the errors in the Natak Budreti. That would be considered moving ahead in the right direction!
And finally, unanswered in Editors’ response is the question I had raised about the causes of the demise or waning of popular interest in Bhavai.
Mr. Baradi has maintained in his article in Natak Budreti under review and in his other writings that the popular interest in Bhavai was caused by advent of Muslim rule in Gujarat. Mr. Baradi also scoffs at Ranchodrai Udairam for having provided another perspective on the causes of the downfall of Bhavai.
The advent of Islam or the Muslim rule in Gujarat may be instrumental or may have contributed to the lack of popular interest in Bhavai, but the major cause of the demise of Bhavai was the use of graphic, objectionable and obscene language in Bhavai.
Sudha Desai has gently referred to this fact in her dissertation on Bhavai. (Bhavai: A medieval form of ancient Indian dramatic art (natya) as prevalent in Gujarat (Thesis publication series - Gujarat University).
Sahajanda Swami or Swaminarayan (1781 –1830) in his injunctions on the practical life of a devotee found in the Shikshapatri, and his teachings in the Vachanamritam has specifically proscribed visiting or attending or patronizing performances of Bhavai. Swaminarayan’s views on Bhavai seem to be based on the prevalence of obscene gestures in acting and graphic language in the dialogues.
Considering the above it is fair to conclude that the editors’ response is nothing but an exercise in self-exculpation and obfuscation. While they pretend to explain, their actual purpose seems to be to deflect any responsibility. The disingenuous way in which they have tried to distance themselves from their errors is pathetic, sad and laughable.
Their response is nothing but a careful fusion of convenient and inconvenient facts that could enable them to craft their ‘acceptable’ version and justification of their flawed editorial policies.
None of the arguments put forward by the editors stand up to even casual scrutiny. Unwittingly, they have shown us an astonishing degree of hubris or naivet …
When the editors of NATAK Budreti compare the magazine with other learned journals they need to be reminded of a few guiding principles that help make a journal a leading journal:
1) Quality in-depth articles are essential for informing present and future readers and scholars.
2) Citations and sources are necessary in order to enhance the credibility of the writer, the editor as well as the publication itself,
3) A good graphic design should be the norm of publications in 21st century and all the publications should at least strive for excellence in printing rather than to sit back and say ‘it is acceptable’,
4) The editors should refrain from reproducing photos in their magazine if they are unable control the quality of printing and reproduction of the same,
5) The editors should make sure that the chapter titles and sub sections truly reflect the contents of those chapters or sections.
6) It is the responsibility of the editors and publishers to make sure that the articles in the publication are checked and rechecked for the accuracy of facts, spellings and grammar.
To err is human, but to print, reprint, and re-reprint error-mad speculations (see Shankar Sheth was a Gujarati businessman) and previously printed articles (on Bhavai by late Goverdhan Panchal) provokes people like me to a screaming frenzy, but more importantly it is a criminally moronic editorial policy that has to be stopped.
Unfortunately the editors of NATAK Budreti seem to have decided to ignore these accepted journalistic policies and instead chosen to be content by saying ‘it is acceptable’.
The Editors Respond to Some Observations and Reflections
NATAK Budreti
Special Issue: World Theatre Day, *
March 27, 2007
Introspecting: 150 years of Gujarati Theatre
Editor: Hasmukh Baradi,
Guest Editor: S. D. Desai
Published by Budreti Theatre and Media Center,
New Ranip, GST-Chenpur Road, P.O. Digvijay Nagar,
Ahmedabad – 382470
*Published with a support grant from
Sangeet Natak Academy, New Delhi, India
By Harish Trivedi © 2008
(Reproduction or storage in any form of all or part of this article or translation in any language without a written permission from the writer is strictly prohibited)
Natak Budreti Quarterly is also called ‘An on-going dialogue on theatre’…
But now the Editors have abruptly discontinued that dialogue as they have moved on…
In the April-June 2008 issue of Natak Budreti (Quarterly) the Guest Editor and Editor has responded to my observations and reflections on the Special Issue - Introspecting 150 Years of the Gujarati Theatre.
I am dismayed and surprised by their response.
Instead of admitting their fault or pleading Mea culpa –the Editors maintain that apart from the odd slip-up or two, they (the Editors) performed their duties brilliantly.
None of the arguments put forward by the editors stands up to even casual scrutiny. Unwittingly, they show us an astonishing degree of hubris or naivet. Their defense or rationalization amounts to nothing but a lie concocted to camouflage their flawed editorial policy…
So let me review the Editors’ response.
(Note: I have underlined words or sentences where they have appeared in bold face in the original response of the Editors. Rest of what follows is an exact copy of the original that appears on page 38 and 39 of the above issue. The editors’ response is printed in italics to make it easy for the readers to comprehend and separate the same from this writer’s response. Editors response appears below as Editors: and H.T. or Harish Trivedi precedes my observation on the same).
In their own words –
Here is the response from the Guest Editor Dr. S. D. Desai and Editor Shri Hasmukh Baradi.
Response to Harish Trivedi (US) from Guest Editor/Editor
Editors: We have received 20 pages (around 6,000 words) of ‘Observations and Reflections’ on our Special Issue from Shri Harish Trivedi (US). Their length does not permit us to reproduce them here. A short response was sent to him. However, since he keeps writing to us with uncommon assertions we briefly respond to him below:
H. T. (Harish Trivedi): First the word count in that article was a little over 9,500.
The readers of Natak Budreti would have been better served if the Editors had taken time to provide pertinent quote from my criticism before commenting on the same. The Editors have not quoted even one of my assertions that they have called uncommon.
Editors: 1 (a) Passing out, in the sense it is used in Hiren Gandhi’s article, is acceptable in British/American English.
H.T.: The Editors fail to give us any information as to which British/American English dictionaries or other source books they are referring to substantiate their claim. As has been previously noted the Editors seem to be averse to provide sources for their assertions.
Here is the relevant portion from my article ‘In an article by Hiren Gandhi titled Theatre as a Means (page 146, second paragraph) what Mr. Gandhi intended to say was what he did after he passed or got through his final exams etc. This has been translated as After passing out some more time…etc.
Pass out or passed out or passing out means to lose consciousness due to a sudden trauma. I do not think that’s what Hiren Gandhi intended to say.
Here is, for the benefit of the Editors as well as for the readers, what the term passing out really means –
Passed: means to undergo an examination or a trial with favorable results…
To be approved or adopted: The motion to adjourn passed.
The Verb: pass out
Pass out from weakness, physical or emotional distress due to a loss of blood supply to the brain- faint, conk, swoon
Lose consciousness due to a sudden trauma, for example
- zonk out, black out, …
Pass out: To lose consciousness. Keel over (informal), pass out (Informal) FAINT, drop, black out (informal) swoon (literary) lose consciousness, flake out (informal) become unconscious
Derived forms: passes out, passing out, passed out
5. Pass out (= faint)
Source: Collins Essential Thesaurus 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2005, 2006
I hope this settles the issue of passing out.
Editors: 1 (b) There is uniform method in the notes on stage productions in Intrinsically Lively Theatre. ‘Madeera (1980. Greek Euripides, Adapt C. C. Mehta, Dir. Bharat Dave)’ means the play originally written in Greek by Euripides, was adapted by C. C. Mehta and directed by Bharat Dave.
H.T.: What is uniform in that article is absence of punctuation marks plain and simple. I have no idea as to why the Editors are even trying to defend Mr. S. D. Desai’s obvious error. Perhaps the Editors did not want the readers to know that they have erred. Here is my original statement:
Under the category Modern Theatre (Page 93), in an article by S. D. Desai (Intrisically Lively Theatre) punctuation marks are missing and hence reads like Madeera (1980), Greek Euripides…, Bakri (1978) Hindi Sarweshawar Dayal…Saari Raat (1987. Bengali Badal Sirkar…Galileo (1988). German Bertolt Brecht… All the plays enumerated in this article lack proper punctuation marks.
Editors: 1 (c) We accept there are a couple of ‘typographical’/’proofting’ errors like Kalia instead of Kalidas.
H. T.: The editors have conceded at least one error.
Editors: 1 (d) The title of an article in Hindi suggests the playwright ‘orchestrates action’. That’s not unacceptable. It means he ‘carefully organizes’ action.
H.T.: In music, the composer composes or writes the music (like a playwright writing a play) and the conductor of an orchestra (like the director of a play) orchestrates the music composed by the composer.
When writing a play the playwright imagines or conceives the plot, visualizes the action, imagines the characters, situation, locale, time of action etc.
The director then has the responsibility to give life to or to bring to life what the playwright has visualized or imagined. That is done in collaboration with the actor and actresses, scenic designers and so forth.
Over the centuries thousands of directors have presented and or have interpreted and an equal number of actors have acted in the plays written by Shakespeare. All brought in their own sensibility and insight in to what the writer –Shakespeare - had intended to convey in a particular play. The director with the help of actors and scenic designers, musicians etc does the orchestration of the action in any play including Shakespearean plays or Hasmukh Baradi’s plays.
Let’s take a look at Kanti Madia’s version of Rashomon and Akira Kurosawa’s Rashomon. Or Kanti Madia’s version of Death of a Salesman and the various productions of the same in America and world over and see who does the orchestration of action in the above two versions of the same play. In all such productions the play essentially remains the same while the productions and interpretations differ… and that is because the DIRECTOR in each case orchestrated the production of the play as seen by the audiences and that too according to his own – director’s - vision.
The writers - Arthur Miller or Shakespeare - wrote the plays and created the characters. The directors did all the interpretation or orchestration and with the help of the actors and actresses they brought the vision of the writer to life – regardless of what Mr. Hasmukh Baradi claims or thinks.
But if Mr. Baradi wants to compare himself with a conductor of an orchestra who am I to question him? But the music analogy is wrong regardless of the fact that Mr. Baradi and Mr. Desai – the two Editors find it acceptable. But then they are the Editors and they are not answerable to any one.
Editors: 1. (e) Propriety prevent us from claiming that S. D. Desai is known outside Ahmedabad/Gujarat, but aren’t Adi Marzban and Pravin Joshi?
H.T.: I had suggested for the editors to consider providing brief information about the writer of a particular article and the subject of the article at the beginning of each article.
This is a prevailing tradition in magazine and newspaper editing; it is not a question of propriety.
Of course the question of propriety does come in picture when the editors say that It is not an author’s fault if he happens to have published more than one book in either or both of the two languages! (This statement has been made by the Editors when commenting about inclusion of all their books in the list of reference books). See (e) below.
Mr. Baradi, for the sake of propriety should leave out statements such as the one quoted above and also the use of over the top adjective orchestrates when describing his own writings. He should allow his critics or readers to comment on his work.
Editors: 2 (a) We are aware of ‘omissions’ of personalities like Damu Jhaveri, Upendra Trivedi, Jayanti Patel as also forms like Nritya Natika besides a few other aspects Mr. Trivedi has not noticed. The two preambles reflect this awareness.
H. T.: The Editors claim, ‘…besides a few other aspects Mr. Trivedi has not noticed…’ is very presumptuous.
What I may or may not have noticed is not some thing that the editors should be chortling about. Here the subject is their Editorial policy or lack of it and not how much I know or do not know about theatre.
(The personalities – Damu Jhaveri, Upendra Trivedi, Jayanti Patel and many more as well as Nritya Natika - Dance Dramas – are also ignored by Mr. Baradi in his History of Gujarati Theatre, English translation by Mr. Vinod Meghani, National Book Trust, 2003 and the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre, published in 2004.
The abovementioned works of Mr. Baradi are also full of similar errors and omissions. But more about it later)
The simple fact is - The Special Issue has not covered all aspects of Gujarati theatre in the last 150 years as it claims to have done, it has only covered the last seventy years of Gujarati theatre and that too barely...
The term – introspecting in the title or sub-heading of the special issue is misleading. There is no introspection of any kind in that Special Issue - only reminiscences!
Editors: 2. (b) There is no separate article on ‘one character plays’, but aren’t Shekhar Suman’s Kabir and other plays in Hindi?
H. T.: Since the magazine is published in English and Hindi languages, it would have been more than appropriate if the editors had provided a reference to the critically acclaimed one-character Hindi plays of Shekhar Sen (not Shekhar Suman as the Editors have claimed. This too is must be what the editors have called one of those nasty slip-ups). What this illustrates is the fact that even in a simple rebuttal of my criticism, the Editors have not cared about accuracy of their statements!
The editors have also over looked other more important Gujarati one-character plays that have been staged since the staging of Narmad: Maari Hakikat over a decade back. One-character play based on Mahadevbhai’s (Mahadevbhai Desai) diary or Kavi Kant’s autobiography and few other plays deserved at least a mention in this introspecting.
Editors: 2 (c) The suggestion regarding what Mr. Trivedi calls ‘citations or sourcing’ is welcome, but we would like to point out that leading journals do not necessarily carry them and they aren’t any the less dependable.
H. T.: This is very true in case of what the editors have called the leading journals, but after looking at the last two issues of Natak Budreti, in my humble opinion the Editors’ claim to call the magazine a leading journal is hollow. This is because of its flawed and at times questionable editorial policy, frequent factual and typographical errors, it’s reprinting of articles without the writers’ permission etc. would make it difficult for any one to call this magazine a leading journal. Even a simple rebuttal by the editors that is under discussion has wrong names of the people mentioned. So much about the credibility or dependability!
Credibility is not a label that these editors (Mr. S. D. Desai and Mr. Hasmukh Baradi) can slap on their backs when they feel like doing so. Credibility has to be earned!
A leading journal or a magazine should be a marvel of style and wit, it should arouse curiosity of its readers regarding its contents and coverage with each succeeding issue, it should offer its readers opportunities to find small or large discoveries in the area of research and scholarship and finally it should stress importance of scholarship and relevance in its editorial policy.
My concern about the lack of sourcing or citation is related to the issue of scholarship, particularly for the benefit of present and future students of the history of Gujarati drama and scholars who may want to conduct further research on the subject.
Citations and source notes are necessary in order to avoid any charges of plagiarism. But more importantly, citations and source notes are necessary for nothing else but for the sheer regard for intellectual honesty and preserving copyrights of the publishers and the writers.
Various guide lines on the subject of research, writing and writing styles suggest that citations and sourcing are essential in order to 1) provide useful information and to avoid the claims of plagiarism, 2) to show that a particular portion or whole writing is not original research, 3) to ensure that the content of articles is credible and can be checked by any reader or editor, 4) to help the readers find additional reliable information on the topic, and 5) to improve the overall credibility and authoritative character of the work. – a magazine article or a book of history or for that matter a book on any subject.
And finally citations and sourcing is necessary to reduce the likelihood of editorial disputes or to resolve any that arise. (Dear Editors, please note).
As the sourcing or citation for the information presented in articles is considered unimportant by our Editor duo - Mr. S. D. Desai and Mr. Hasmukh Baradi -there is no way for a reader to verify any statement in the magazine for its accuracy. In other words there is no way to know what is fact, opinion or mere conjecture presented as fact by a particular writer in Natak Budreti and particularly articles written by Mr. Baradi, who is one of the editors.
Editors: 2 (d) A writer makes his choice to omit details he considers less important in a context within the space available. A reader can draw his conclusions but need not question the choice.
H.T.: In case of Natak Budreti issue under review, at least one writer was not offered such a choice and his article was arbitrarily shortened. Further more, one articles that appears in the Special Issue of Natak Budreti has not even been written by the writer whose name appears as a writer of that article.
There is an article supposed to be written by Narendra Shrimali on the subject of theatre music and recordings. Mr. Shrimali has, very clearly and in no uncertain terms informed me that he did not write that article. Mr. Baradi chose not to respond to this questionable editorial policy when I inquired about it. So much about credibility!
Mr. Shrimali’s article was excerpted (in that special issue of NATAK Budreti) from his copyrighted book – (Narendra Shrimali’s) Music of Theatre and Hindi Cinema (1900-1950), A Discographical Study with
, according to Mr. Narendra Shrimali was excerpted from his book without his permission or knowledge and seems to have been written by some one working at Natak Budreti or perhaps even by Mr. Baradi himself. The Editors, Mr. S. D. Desai and Mr. Hasmukh Baradi owe an explanation to their readers regarding Mr. Narendra Shrimali’s claim.
There another article in the magazine that too has been published without the knowledge of its original writer. I am sure the editors are aware of the source from which they have appropriated that article…
But according to the editors’ dicta (see above 2 d) - A reader can draw his conclusions but need not question the choice. (One has to assume that the editors are talking about their own - the Editors’ choices)
Interestingly, the editorial policy about the length of a particular article according to available space does not seem to apply to the articles written by the editors! (Readers can take a look at numerous articles written by the Editors and the length of the same in that Special Issue of Natak Budreti)
Editors: 2 (e) Books on Gujarati Theatre, needless to say, includes books in English and Hindi only. It is not an author’s fault if he happens to have published more than one book in either or both of the two languages!
H. T.: Nowhere in the magazine the editors have indicated that only books published in Hindi and English are included in the reference list of the books. So why the editors think it was needless to say…?
More importantly one of the books included in the list, the History of Gujarati Theatre by Hasmumkh Baradi, is also full of similar errors (and many more, as mentioned earlier).
More to the point, if the author of multiple books on the history of Gujarati theatre has committed errors of facts, incomplete facts and blatant omissions of events and people, than it is more than a mere fault of the author, it is reprehensible and scandalous!
Even the selection of Hindi and English language reference books on Gujarati theatre, two very important books (in Hindi and English) on Parsi theatre by Somnath Gupt and Kathryn Hanson are missing.
The learned editors of NATAK Budreti seem to be either unaware of these books or were probably too busy enumerating and including their own books about Gujarati theatre.
Editors: 3. There seem to be a few factual errors concerning persons and dates (Anil Mehta, Upendra Trivedi, Ashraf Khan…) They have been referred to writers concerned. (Underlined by H.T. for emphasize)
H.T.: Without responding to the point I had made in my criticism, the editors say that they have referred the question to writers concerned.
What the editors fail to say is the fact that the writer of the articles (whom they have referred the errors) is no one other than Mr. Hamsukh Baradi himself! The errors have appeared in the article written by Mr. Hasmukh Baradi himself - page 84, Natak Budreti special issue.
What the Editors’ response amounts to is nothing but a simple and absurd evasion.
The readers should ask Mr. Baradi as to how he questioned himself about his own errors! Let’s hope he illuminates us with an answer in the next issue of Natak Budreti.
Here is some context:
In an article One-act Plays – Origin and Growth Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has claimed that Anil Mehta and Arvind Trivedi were products of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan’s inter-collegiate competitions (page 84). In their response Mr. Baradi erroneously mentions Upendra Trivedi (see 3 above).
How can one verify Mr. Baradi’s statement when Mr. Baradi does not provide his readers with the source of his information?
I had stated that Anil Mehta and Arvind Trivedi had not appeared in any inter- collegiate competitions that Mr. Baradi talks about in his article.
My earlier statement, as far as Mr. Arvind Trivedi is concerned was WRONG and I apologize for that erroneous statement.
Arvind Trivedi did participate in the inter-collegiate one-act play competitions that were sponsored by the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. While this is true, a little clarification is needed.
It should be noted that Arvind Trivedi did not participate in the above competitions during its first decade when Pravin Joshi, Krishnakant Shah, Upendra Trivedi, Kanti Madia and others were participating – the one that Mr. Baradi has alluded to in that article. But my unqualified observation was wrong and I have said so above.
Anil Mehta and I were friends; schoolmates and we were also in the same college (though during different years and studied different subjects).
I was actively involved in the inter-collegiate drama competitions during the decade of 1950s when Upendra Trivedi, Kanti Madia, Pravin Joshi et al were participating in the competitions. Anil Mehta did not participate or even auditioned for any of the plays that were presented at those competitions during the 50s.
Anil Mehta’s contribution to the Gujarati theatre is restricted or limited to his translations of Marathi plays from early 1970s till the time of his death at a young age.
Anil Mehta and his wife Indira did act in many successful one-act plays of that era. Those plays were staged for the benefit of community organizations –Gujarati Samaj or Gnati Mandals and Navratri festivals … to tell you the truth, I had acted in few of those productions with Anil Mehta too.
Now about Mr. Ashraf Khan:
Ashraf Khan was born in 1893 and not 1853 as stated in Natak Budreti Special Issue (page 215). If Mr. Ashraf Khan was indeed born in 1853 he would have been 109 at the time of his death in 1962. Why are the editors so hesitant to admit what is obviously a typographical error?
Editors: 4. Preety Sengupta has not criticized Gujarati theatre activity in Canada and the US. She is critical of ‘The same stupid, slapstick plays making their way abroad’.
H.T.: The issue here is not Preety Sengupta commenting on the visiting Gujarati theatre groups. The editors have labeled the section where Miss Sengupta’s article appears in NATAK Budreti as ‘Theatre Activity Abroad’. Miss Sengupta’s article cannot be honestly described as theatre activity abroad. Her article is about the touring Gujarati theatre companies, companies that have been invited to perform in the U.S. by the fans of such plays. There is much more to theatre activity abroad (at least in the U.S) then the touring slapstick plays. And when we consider the fact that this is the only article under the category Theatre Activity Abroad, the absurdity of the editorial policy becomes more glaring!
Such slapstick comedies full of sexual innuendos and double entendres, and cheap knock-offs of British and American comedies do not even get a mention in the purported Introspecting of 150-years of Gujarati Theatre or Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre. But then the editors consider it worthy of being called Theatre Activity Abroad.
Editors: 5. With reference to Sorabjee Dhondi’s recordings in Narendra Shrimali’s article in Hindi, Mr. Trivedi adds what ‘is unstated’ and goes on to mention other recordings. A lot more can be added. Our objective, as in other areas, here was giving a glimpse of the work done.
H.T.: Here the editors presume that their readers know what exactly I had written in my comments. Here is what I said, “What is unstated is the fact that Sorabjee had recorded some of the most memorable songs of the Parsi Gujarati plays including Bammanji Kabraji’s Gamre Nee Gori and many of the popular plays of that time. Sorab Rustamji Dhondi has cut over 100 songs on 78-rpm discs and on number of labels”.
A detail such as this probably would have lengthened the size of the article that the editors claim to have been written by Narendra Shrimali but the readers would have been better informed. The Editors have not commented as to why they published that article that was excerpted from Mr. Shrimali’s book and without Mr. Shrimali’s knowledge or permission.
My comments were only meant to indicate the fact that the article was sketchy and did not provide sufficient information about the theatre music. Perhaps if it were really written by Narendra Shrimali such lapse could have been avoided.
If the Editors wanted to provide only glimpse then they should have labeled the special issue Glimpses of 150 years of Gujarati Theatre!
Editors: 6. The graphic design, we believe, is good enough. The pictures have not come out very clearly. We would not have afforded a better alternative.
H.T.: This was only meant as a suggestion If the editors have consciously decided to accept mediocrity and bad reproduction of the photos then the reader has no choice but to accept it.
It would have been nice to see the editors setting the bar of quality printing and graphic design a little higher…but it is their choice and the readers should respect that, I do.
Editors: 7. There are comments on our editorial policy/practice concerning ‘multiple articles’ by a writer, articles previously published, grouping of the articles, (‘sadly’) failing to dedicate the issue to Amrit Keshav Nayak, etc. We need not be defensive of our policy/practice.
H.T.: …need not be defensive?
Really?
So the arguments put forward by the editors (Numbers 1 to 6 above) were a mere can’t, only insincere or hypocritical statements?
Editors: 8. Many of the (highly judgmental) observations are prompted by vastly different perceptions and perspective. There are hasty assumptions, digressions and conclusions. In a response purported to be studied and research-based, it is interesting to find comments like ‘Not surprisingly (the section lists four books by HB and three books by SDD); ‘ By this omission … the issue seems to have shortchanged its readers’; and ‘… deserved a place in ‘this sweeping introspection’. The Indian tradition associates humility with learnedness.
H.T.: I merely pointed out what was missing in the list of the reference books and my sentiments about such omissions. If the Editors find my comments judgmental, so be it.
Further more, my comments about factual and typographical errors, the need for a better graphic design, more clear reproductions of photographs, sourcing or citations etc. is not matter of perceptions or hasty conclusions… as the Editors have characterized. They are statements of FACT.
I have never claimed (or in the Editors’ words purported) that my observations were studied and research-based. Research-based or research-oriented and other such pabulums seem to be favorite terms of Mr. Baradi as they frequently appear in his writings. By its very nature and as the title of my article very clearly says – Some observations and reflections by Harish Trivedi. Yes, they are my personal observations because I care and am concerned about presentation of facts in any book or a magazine that claims to be devoted to the history of Gujarati theatre.
The Editors say, ‘The Indian tradition associates humility with learnedness’ but that does not seem to bother them when they write about their own books on theatre proclaiming ‘It is not an author’s fault if he happens to have published more than one book in either or both of the two languages… or when Mr. Baradi describes his playwriting process as I orchestrate the action… Some humility indeed!
The Editors are hardly in a position to preach about propriety (see 1 e above), …or the Indian tradition… of humility (and) learnedness....
Editors: 9. The Special Issue by any standard a modest effort. Neither the editors nor the contributors have an illusion of being infallible and of having the Issue encyclopedic.
H.T.: Then that’s what it is…and that’s what I have tried to point out to the Editors.
The above eight-point response as well as the sub-title of the special issue –Introspecting 150-years of Gujarati Theatre amply speak about the illusions of the editors. My comments pertain to the Editors and the editorial process, not to the writers. As a matter of fact I have pointed out a number of articles and writers who did a commendable job in writing those pieces. I wish the editors had shared my positive comments with the readers.
Editors: 9 (last part)
Guest Editor, Editor
(There is no need to continue the so-called ‘dialogue’ now. We have moved on.
H.T.: Does this mean the motto on the cover of the Natak Budreti…An on-going dialogue on theatre is no more relevant?
Reviewing and re-viewing the editors’ response, their claim We have moved on seems to be hollow. The Editors have moved on in the same sense as a horse or a bull goes around a stone mill (Ghani in Gujarati) with blinders and thinks all the time that it is going some where…The Editors have not moved any where from where they were prior to my comments.
Here are some other errors in that issue of Natak Budreti that has escaped the Editors’ attention in their nine-point response.
a) Mr. Hasmukh Baradi has described Mr. Jagannath Shankarsheth as a Gujarati entrepreneur (An Entertainment Industry, page 21, Natak Budreti Special Issue). Mr. Shanker Sheth was a Maharastrian businessman, a social activist and a great patron of poet Narmad.
The error has been repeated and there by perpetuated as fact in Mr. Baradi’s History of Gujarati Theatre as well as in his note about the Gujarati theatre in the Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre.
b) On the same page there is a reference to Elphantine Natak Mandali that should have been Elphinston Natak Mandali. The group was known as the Elphinston Dramatic Club.
c) The editors are entitled to their opinions but they have no right to concoct their own facts. We, the readers of the Natak Budreti deserve better!
I would like to suggest that the editors should consider publishing corrections and clarifications when they are done with questioning themselves about the errors in the Natak Budreti. That would be considered moving ahead in the right direction!
And finally, unanswered in Editors’ response is the question I had raised about the causes of the demise or waning of popular interest in Bhavai.
Mr. Baradi has maintained in his article in Natak Budreti under review and in his other writings that the popular interest in Bhavai was caused by advent of Muslim rule in Gujarat. Mr. Baradi also scoffs at Ranchodrai Udairam for having provided another perspective on the causes of the downfall of Bhavai.
The advent of Islam or the Muslim rule in Gujarat may be instrumental or may have contributed to the lack of popular interest in Bhavai, but the major cause of the demise of Bhavai was the use of graphic, objectionable and obscene language in Bhavai.
Sudha Desai has gently referred to this fact in her dissertation on Bhavai. (Bhavai: A medieval form of ancient Indian dramatic art (natya) as prevalent in Gujarat (Thesis publication series - Gujarat University).
Sahajanda Swami or Swaminarayan (1781 –1830) in his injunctions on the practical life of a devotee found in the Shikshapatri, and his teachings in the Vachanamritam has specifically proscribed visiting or attending or patronizing performances of Bhavai. Swaminarayan’s views on Bhavai seem to be based on the prevalence of obscene gestures in acting and graphic language in the dialogues.
Considering the above it is fair to conclude that the editors’ response is nothing but an exercise in self-exculpation and obfuscation. While they pretend to explain, their actual purpose seems to be to deflect any responsibility. The disingenuous way in which they have tried to distance themselves from their errors is pathetic, sad and laughable.
Their response is nothing but a careful fusion of convenient and inconvenient facts that could enable them to craft their ‘acceptable’ version and justification of their flawed editorial policies.
None of the arguments put forward by the editors stand up to even casual scrutiny. Unwittingly, they have shown us an astonishing degree of hubris or naivet …
When the editors of NATAK Budreti compare the magazine with other learned journals they need to be reminded of a few guiding principles that help make a journal a leading journal:
1) Quality in-depth articles are essential for informing present and future readers and scholars.
2) Citations and sources are necessary in order to enhance the credibility of the writer, the editor as well as the publication itself,
3) A good graphic design should be the norm of publications in 21st century and all the publications should at least strive for excellence in printing rather than to sit back and say ‘it is acceptable’,
4) The editors should refrain from reproducing photos in their magazine if they are unable control the quality of printing and reproduction of the same,
5) The editors should make sure that the chapter titles and sub sections truly reflect the contents of those chapters or sections.
6) It is the responsibility of the editors and publishers to make sure that the articles in the publication are checked and rechecked for the accuracy of facts, spellings and grammar.
To err is human, but to print, reprint, and re-reprint error-mad speculations (see Shankar Sheth was a Gujarati businessman) and previously printed articles (on Bhavai by late Goverdhan Panchal) provokes people like me to a screaming frenzy, but more importantly it is a criminally moronic editorial policy that has to be stopped.
Unfortunately the editors of NATAK Budreti seem to have decided to ignore these accepted journalistic policies and instead chosen to be content by saying ‘it is acceptable’.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)