Hamlet - The Clown Prince

The thought of turning the "tragedy" of Hamlet into the "comedy" of Hamlet seems very ambitious, right? But then theater has always been about pushing boundaries.

'Hamlet- The clown prince' is a comical adaption of  Shakespeare's greatest tragedy - 'Hamlet'.The plot is identical to the original plot.  Hamlet's father is killed by his uncle Claudius surreptitiously. Soon after his father's death, his mother marries Claudius. On one cold winter night, the ghost of Hamlet's father appears and tells him that he was killed by Claudius and that Hamlet must avenge his father's death. And yes, there is the lady love Ophelia, the daughter of Claudius's most trusted aide to complicate matters and relationships even more. In my opinion, the story is an embodiment of subtle and dark humor and that's what this play really dwells on. I think humor in tragedy makes the tragedy all the more tragic. Moreover, it is the complexity of Hamlet's character that makes the play all the more interesting. His choices makes one wonder if it was the love for his father that made him avenge his death? Or was it the love for the throne? Or was it the unnatural love for his mother. Did he order Ophelia to the nunnery to punish her as a consequence of his distrust towards women? Or was he punishing himself for his other crimes by doing so ?

The plot makes me wonder if revenge was the only way through which Hamlet could prove his love and devotion to his father? Is love really that shallow that it seeks someone else's pain to be glorified? Is a murder, no matter how cold-blooded, worthy enough to justify another one? Why are sacrifices celebrated while seeking happiness frowned upon? Why don't stories about forgiveness become literature classics? Why does revenge and betrayal amuse the human mind more? A friend once told me - When animals smell danger they run away from it but when humans smell danger, they walk into it. I guess pain appeases the human mind more than joy and hence, tragedies are celebrated more.

The actors, as expected, are a powerhouse. It is indeed a task to stage this mammoth story in a short span of time and that too in a humorous way. The play succeeds in achieving the former but the latter is what it fails to deliver. The play is in gibberish. And that is great for someone like me who is handicapped at comprehending Victorian English. However, the plays takes its gibberish improvisation a tad too seriously. It became a little too difficult to understand the gibberish words being spoken. I think the play really needs to tone down the proportion of gibberish words.

Mark Twain once said - "Classics are what everyone wants to have read but nobody wants to read". If you want to breeze through one of Shakespeare's greatest classic, give this play a shot. Otherwise, an abridged version of the original work would be a better investment.

Atmakatha

Source: Mid-day

Is our life a collage of events or a mere interpretations of those events by our subconscious self? Can the same life event be factually very differentfor two people who were a part of it ? Though essentially, a biographical take on the well known Marathi playwright Anand Rao's life, the play discovers the perplexing bends of human interpretation.

The play begins with a research student doing a thesis on the celebrated writer Anant Rao's life. In the process of it, the play discovers his relationship with his ex- wife and his affair with his sister-in-law. It also discovers the relationship between the two sisters, years after having shared a man. Despite bitterness for each other in their hearts, the two sisters stand by each other in the later stages of their life. Over the course of the play, each of the characters tell their interpretations of the events which shook their lives forever.

Source: Buzzintown

Anant Rao writes a semi fictional book on his life and his torrid love affair with his own sister-in-law. This book becomes the bone of contention in the life of everyone involved.The sister-in-law is portrayed as a meek, lonely woman while he describes the wife as the proud, dominating woman. A non submissive wife justifies the act of infidelity in a man's world I presume. However,the characters have a problem with their respective portrayals. While the wife's character in the book feels betrayed twice over for being touted as an oppressive older sister. The writer's sister-in-law and the other woman of the relationship refuses to be labelled as the damsel in distress. Her act of adultery is camouflaged under the layers of loneliness and despair and she absolutely detests it. The play has a scene wherein the characters come alive in Anant Rao's dream and dispute their characterization with him. This was probably one of the most profound concepts I have ever come across. That scene actually bought those characters to life and made them question the author about their characterization in the book. It was so fictional and yet so real. The society (like the author of the book) writes a character summary for each one of us but we may not be like how we are perceived to be.  So, we detest it and question the society for labelling us as per their interpretations of us ( just like the characters of the book). What a thought provoking scene.

Coming back , I like how the sister-in-law did not like being depicted as the woman who had no control over her heart and the situation. In one of the scenes, the sister-in law clearly mentions that she lured Anant Rao to teach her haughty sister a lesson and felt a sense of victory over her after having done that. Never did she love Anant Rao. She had to endure a number of hardships in life because of the choice she made but she took full ownership for it. Not that I am justifying the path she chose, but I loved how she takes responsibility for the choices she made rather than seeking sympathy.

Anant Rao's wife, though diametrically opposite of her sister is a very stoic woman who is full of self respect. She leave her husband's house once she gets to know about his philandering ways. Neither does she beg him nor does she threaten him with dire consequences, she just chooses to lead her life without a man like him. However, when Anant Rao humiliates her in public with her portrayal as a shrewd and dominating wife and sister in his semi fictional autobiography, she does not take it lying down. She publishes the letters he wrote to her (without publishing the letters she wrote to him) and exposes the shallow side of him. Try me once I will forgive you, try me twice I will annihilate you.

Source: Mid-day

Though very different from each other, the two sisters are very strong willed individuals . I liked how the play pits their differences against each other without  showcasing  one's character as black and the other one's as white. Both their characters are allowed to tell their side of the story. This is another high point of the play. Each of the important life events in the play are showcased from the perspective of each of the characters. This is something you need to see for yourself. The very same event is interpreted absolutely differently by each one of them. They actually enact the same event twice over to depict how the very same facts can have different fallout for different people.

Overall, the play is a little deep and people who like to be humored in a theatre production should stay away from it. But if you are the kind who likes some fodder to think about after a play, this one is definitely meant for you.

There is  a line in the play - Kya joh satya samjha na jae who asatya ho jata?  This was the best take away from the play. Pretty much sums up how we humans perceive the world around us. Right?